If you are currently are managing a team think about the below: Most teams don’t have a people problem. They have a system that turns good people into “underperformers.” And it happens so slowly you don’t notice it until you’re frustrated. You see: - missed deadlines - “low ownership” - silence in meetings - sloppy handoffs - constant rework So you label it a motivation issue. Because blaming the person is the fastest story your brain can tell. But here’s the quieter truth: It’s not about “bad attitude.” It’s about bad conditions. A broken system can make an A-player look careless. A few common system failures that create “people problems”: - priorities change daily, so nothing finishes - no clear “definition of done,” so everyone argues at the end - meetings replace decisions, so work stalls - feedback shows up late, so mistakes repeat - incentives reward speed, then leaders punish errors In that environment, even motivated people start protecting themselves. They stop taking risks. They stop speaking up. They stop caring. Not because they’re lazy. Because they’re tired of getting burned. A calm operator doesn’t start with judgment. They start with diagnosis. And they ask a different set of questions (System 2 questions, not reactive ones). Here’s the “fix the system first” checklist I use: 1) What is the goal this week (in plain words)? 2) Who owns the decision, and who owns the work? 3) What does “done” mean (examples help)? 4) What is the one priority we will protect? 5) Where do handoffs break down? 6) What keeps coming back as rework? 7) What does the team need more of: clarity, time, tools, or approvals? 8) What do we reward in practice (not in slides)? 9) Where does the system punish the behavior we say we want? Then you fix the system. And only after that, you judge performance. Because a good leader doesn’t ask, “What’s wrong with these people?” They ask: “What is this setup pulling out of them?” If you lead a team right now: What’s one “people problem” you later realized was really a system problem?
The 'what does done mean' question is underrated. I've seen teams argue for weeks because one person thinks done = shipped, another thinks done = documented, and another thinks done = customer-facing. Then they blame each other for 'not following through.' The system never defined it. Same with 'Who owns the decision vs. who owns the work', when that's unclear, you get 5 people doing 80% of the same task or 0 people doing it because everyone thinks someone else is. To answer your question: Thought we had a communication problem in my former team. Turned out we had 3 different Slack channels, 2 project management tools, and no single source of truth. People weren't bad communicators; they were navigating a fragmented system.
