Leadership Jenga
Why borrowed stability is easy to miss—especially at the top: Part 3 in the Borrowed Stability series
Anybody who plays Jenga knows the risk of having too few blocks in the bottom or middle of the tower. From above, you could add blocks with a steady hand. But unless you got input from an eye-level perspective, you wouldn’t see where missing pieces put stability at risk.
In some organizations, gaps are quietly filled by unofficial “blocks” added to the tower—behaviors by key individuals who lend stability when and where it’s needed.
Common Stabilizing Behaviors
You might recognize common stabilizing behaviors, none of which are inherently problematic. Most of them look like leadership:
Maintaining a positive outlook and not complaining when workarounds require extra time
Rallying to meet a deadline when your team is short-staffed or overwhelmed
Encouraging an introverted team member to share their ideas—and affirming credit to them when they do
Volunteering for a task force outside your department to solve a company-wide problem
Managing up during a season of growth that requires shifts in decision-making and delegation
Championing the organization’s mission and values outside of work hours
We can admire the good intentions here and still be concerned when the same people consistently contribute in these ways. Over time, it becomes easy to assume the system itself is stable—when in fact, stability is being supplied by individuals filling in what the structure does not yet hold.
Most leaders don’t intend to create dependency on borrowed stability. It usually happens one reasonable decision at a time, in response to real needs. Those reasonable decisions may include interventions applied before the system itself is fully understood, adding motion without increasing clarity.
Borrowed stability may reveal itself through hesitation long before the risk of failure. Progress slows because a familiar voice isn’t available. Decisions wait for one person’s reassurance. Momentum depends less on how the work is designed and more on who happens to be present.
For the people providing that extra stability, the strain is rarely obvious at first. It shows up as fatigue that’s hard to name or a concern that stepping back would let others down. What looks like commitment from the outside can feel like pressure from the inside.
Although the tower still stands, the missing blocks are evident at eye level. Seeing the gaps is where leadership discernment begins. Before adding support, process, or structure, leaders often need a clearer picture of whether the issue is capacity, coordination, or something more foundational in how the system is designed.
Context Session
If you’d like to explore patterns, constraints, or options in your leadership context, I offer a brief, no-charge Context Session. This conversation provides a structured way to gain perspective and guide your decision-making.
Previously in the Borrowed Stability series
This is such a sharp reminder that what looks like strong leadership can quietly become structural compensation. When stability depends on a few high-capacity, high-commitment people, we build reliance instead of resilience.
I appreciate the "common stabilizing behaviors." Actually, I'm guilty on almost all counts. You're making me wonder about the wisdom of my own stabilizing behaviors. Yikes.
Also appreciate your even-keeled, wisdom-resonant audio recording. Thanks, Rebecca.