Episodes

  • DA Toolbox Brief 0003:Tactical Resolution

    DA Toolbox Brief 0003:Tactical Resolution
    Jul 26 2026
    Stuck on a leadership, operations, or decision-making challenge? Have feedback, suggestions, or an idea you would like us to cover? Send it in. We may break it down in a future Direct Action Briefing. Submit your question or feedback here: https://podcast.direct-action-system.io/2623617/fan_mailDA Tool Brief 0003: Tactical ResolutionCapability Focus: Navigate Obstacles RapidlyTool Focus: Tactical ResolutionFramework: Decision Execution and Problem NavigationEpisode Focus: Recognizing when an active problem can no longer be postponed and must be stabilized without allowing the temporary response to create a larger system failure.Tactical Resolution is the Direct Action tool applied throughout DA Briefings 0037 through 0041.Across those episodes, the industries, operating environments, and consequences change.The decision pattern does not.A problem becomes active.The objective is being disrupted.Waiting is no longer responsible.The full correction is not immediately available.A temporary action can keep the operation moving.But an uncontrolled workaround can create additional damage, rework, confusion, quality failures, or loss of trust.Leadership must stabilize the interference without allowing the temporary fix to become the next problem.In this Direct Action Tool Brief, Mikey K introduces the operating condition Tactical Resolution is designed to address.This is not about solving the entire problem immediately.It is not about bypassing every control that slows the operation.It is not about allowing each team or department to create its own workaround.Tactical Resolution is used when a problem is actively interfering with the objective, can no longer be postponed, and must be contained or disrupted enough for the operation to continue.The problem remains.The permanent correction may still be underway.The leader controls the interference, limits collateral damage, assigns cleanup, and determines when the temporary action must be reassessed.The episode begins inside a regional hospital during an unplanned electronic health-record outage.The emergency department is full.Morning medication rounds are underway.Operating rooms are scheduled.The laboratory is processing specimens.Pharmacy is verifying orders.Patient transfers and discharges are already moving.Then the electronic system stops responding.Medication records become unavailable.New orders do not transmit normally.Laboratory labels cannot be printed.Imaging results no longer return through the standard workflow.Patient placement information becomes unreliable.The hospital must continue caring for patients, but it can no longer operate through its normal information, verification, and communication structure.Leadership allows departments to keep moving through locally created forms, verbal instructions, handwritten notes, telephone calls, faxes, and independent tracking methods.The decision appears practical.It protects throughput.It prevents an immediate hospital-wide slowdown.But the uncontrolled response creates a second operational problem.Medication orders begin arriving through multiple channels.Laboratory specimens are submitted with inconsistent identifiers.Patient handoffs move faster than the paper record.Discharges slow because staff cannot determine which medication list is authoritative.When the electronic system returns, hundreds of temporary actions must be reconstructed, verified, entered, and reconciled while patient care continues.Leadership must determine whether it is maintaining operations or allowing uncontrolled activity to replace controlled patient care.In this episode:The operating pattern: A problem becomes active, begins interfering with the objective, and can no longer be postponed.The leadership trap: Leaders either wait too long for the full correction or apply a workaround so broadly that the temporary response creates additional failures.The tool or lens: Tactical Resolution.The visible misread: Continued activity is mistaken for controlled operations.The deeper failure point: Leadership focuses on keeping everything moving instead of identifying the minimum effective action needed to stabilize the specific interference.The consequence: Temporary processes spread, communication fragments, verification weakens, cleanup grows, and the workaround becomes a second operational threat.The next move: Stabilize the interference with a narrow, controlled action, define its limits, assign cleanup, communicate the temporary operating rule, and establish a reassessment point.The Tool Brief also applies the recognition pattern to additional operating situations.A manufacturing plant may be completing a customer-critical production run while a failing automated inspection system begins rejecting acceptable assemblies and disrupting release.A county emergency communications center may be handling a severe storm while delayed mapping information interferes with unit assignment, route selection, and emergency response coordination.A ...
    Show More Show Less
    25 mins
  • DA Mailbag 0006: When Leadership Ignores the Warning and Blames the Team

    DA Mailbag 0006: When Leadership Ignores the Warning and Blames the Team
    Jul 25 2026
    Stuck on a leadership, operations, or decision-making challenge? Have feedback, suggestions, or an idea you would like us to cover? Send it in. We may break it down in a future Direct Action Briefing. Submit your question or feedback here: https://podcast.direct-action-system.io/2623617/fan_mailCapability Focus: Execute with ControlIndustry Focus: Software Development, Cybersecurity, and Technical OperationsTool Focus: PROEpisode Focus: Determining where accountability belongs when a technical team identifies known vulnerabilities, leadership chooses not to act, and a later red-team assessment confirms the same exposure.In this Direct Action Mailbag, Mikey K works through what happens when a technical team raises a credible security warning during software development.The team identifies the vulnerabilities.It explains the consequences.It documents the concerns.It recommends corrective action.It elevates the issue to the leaders controlling priority, funding, schedule, scope, and release.Leadership decides the vulnerabilities are not important enough to address.The capability keeps moving.Two months later, the company funds a surprise red-team assessment.The assessment exposes the same weaknesses the technical team already raised.Now leadership asks why the system was not built to industry standard, why the vulnerabilities were not caught, and why management was not informed.The visible problem is the failed security assessment.The deeper operating problem is that leadership dismissed the warning when correction required time and money, then blamed the team when the consequence became visible.In this Mailbag:What the situation shows: A technical team can fulfill its responsibility and still become the target when leadership refuses to own the decision made after receiving the warning.What leadership may be claiming: The red team discovered a technical failure the development team should have prevented.What may actually be driving the failure: Weak risk ownership, schedule protection, under-resourced corrective work, undocumented exceptions, unclear release authority, and leadership unwillingness to own an inconvenient tradeoff.The leadership trap: Executives exercise authority when setting the priority, but distance themselves from responsibility when the result is bad.The industry-standard problem: Leadership cannot refuse the time, funding, scope control, or operating restrictions required to meet a standard, then use that same standard against the team after failure.The rush-to-failure pattern: The organization protects visible progress while delaying the controls, testing, and decisions required to determine whether the capability is actually ready.The consequence: Technical debt becomes operational debt, planned work is displaced, junior staff reconstruct the decision history, emergency remediation consumes the team, and customer confidence declines.The cultural damage: Employees begin documenting defensively, withholding early judgment, avoiding ownership, and questioning whether speaking honestly creates more risk than remaining silent.The three accountability questions are direct:What did you know?What did you do?Who did you tell?The technical team can answer all three.The pressure then moves upward.What did leadership do after receiving the warning?Who owned the unresolved risk?Who controlled the resources?Who protected the schedule?Who authorized continued development?PRO provides the central risk read.The decision created personal risk for the employees being blamed, role-related risk through rework and disrupted execution, and organizational risk through customer distrust, financial exposure, talent loss, and a culture where people stop raising concerns early.The Direct Action read is straightforward.The red team did not create the vulnerability.It made leadership’s unresolved decision visible.The recommended next move is to reconstruct the decision timeline, identify the governing standard, map the red-team findings to what was previously known, assign accountability according to authority and action, fund the corrective work, and protect the employees who raised the warning.Leadership may accept risk.Leadership may defer correction.Leadership may choose a restricted prototype, limited deployment, staged release, temporary mitigation, or formal exception.What leadership cannot do is control the decision, deny the resources, accept the benefit of moving forward, and then hand the consequence back to the technical team.Direct Action develops leaders to assess accurately, navigate obstacles rapidly, choose deliberately, and execute with control.Read the companion article:https://www.direct-action-system.io/blog/when-leadership-ignores-the-warning-and-blames-the-teamGet the Direct Action Starter Sheet:https://www.direct-action-system.io/general-starterRead practical leadership and operations articles on the Direct Action Blog:https://www.direct-action-system.io/blogThis briefing is part of ...
    Show More Show Less
    46 mins
  • DA Briefing 0036: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly in Public Sector

    DA Briefing 0036: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly in Public Sector
    Jul 24 2026

    Stuck on a leadership, operations, or decision-making challenge? Have feedback, suggestions, or an idea you would like us to cover? Send it in. We may break it down in a future Direct Action Briefing. Submit your question or feedback here: https://podcast.direct-action-system.io/2623617/fan_mail

    Capability Focus: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly

    Industry Focus: Public Sector Operations

    Tool Focus: Identify and Postpone

    Episode Focus: Controlling a real training gap during a live 9-1-1 storm call surge without losing the emergency call flow objective.

    In this Direct Action Briefing, Mikey K breaks down what happens when a public-sector leader identifies a real training issue while the current emergency communications objective is still under pressure.

    The episode follows Elena, a shift supervisor in a county 9-1-1 emergency communications center during a severe storm call surge. Calls are stacking. Dispatchers are working active incidents. Call-takers are moving from call to call. Supervisors are watching abandoned calls, emergency priority, non-emergency overflow, call-taker fatigue, dispatch coordination, and floor control.

    Then a second issue appears.

    A newer call-taker hesitates on a storm-damage call. Residents are calling 9-1-1 for non-emergency storm reports because they do not know which number to use. The public message may not be clear enough. The call classification guidance may need correction. The training gap is visible, serious, and real.

    It matters.

    It affects call-taker confidence, supervisor load, dispatch clarity, resident routing, emergency call flow, future storm readiness, and public trust.

    But the call surge is still active.

    The question is not whether the training gap matters.

    The question is whether the leader should let that secondary issue take control before the live emergency call objective is protected.

    In this episode:

    The operating pattern: A real secondary issue can appear while the main public-safety objective is still exposed.

    The leadership trap: Leaders chase the issue that feels serious, visible, and responsible to fix while the live call floor loses attention, rhythm, and control.

    The tool or lens: Identify and Postpone.

    The consequence: Supervisor attention splits, call-takers receive extra direction while overloaded, dispatch inputs can become inconsistent, abandoned-call pressure can rise, and the real training issue may still disappear if it is not assigned and returned to.

    The next move: Capture the training gap, assign ownership, set the return point, and define what trigger brings it forward sooner.

    Direct Action develops leaders to assess accurately, navigate obstacles rapidly, choose deliberately, and execute with control.

    Read the companion article:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/blog/before-the-training-gap-steals-the-911-call-surge-capture-it-and-return

    Get the public-sector-specific Direct Action starter resource:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/public-sector-starter

    Read practical leadership and operations articles on the Direct Action Blog:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/blog

    This briefing is part of the Direct Action Briefings series, where Mikey K breaks down practical decision systems for leaders operating under pressure.
    Show More Show Less
    24 mins
  • DA Briefing 0035: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly in Manufacturing

    DA Briefing 0035: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly in Manufacturing
    Jul 23 2026

    Stuck on a leadership, operations, or decision-making challenge? Have feedback, suggestions, or an idea you would like us to cover? Send it in. We may break it down in a future Direct Action Briefing. Submit your question or feedback here: https://podcast.direct-action-system.io/2623617/fan_mail

    Capability Focus: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly

    Industry Focus: Manufacturing

    Tool Focus: Identify and Postpone

    Episode Focus: Controlling a real returns cleanup issue during an active shipping window without losing the outbound objective.

    In this Direct Action Briefing, Mikey K breaks down what happens when a manufacturing leader identifies a real cleanup issue while the current shipping objective is still under pressure.

    The episode follows a production and shipping leader trying to protect a customer-critical outbound window. Finished goods are staged. The carrier pickup is approaching. The shipment paperwork is being checked. Final pack is moving. The team is trying to keep the dock clear, protect the customer order, and avoid another late-risk update.

    Then a second issue appears.

    The returns area is messy. Returned product is sitting where it should not be. Labels need cleanup. Some units need disposition review. Packaging material is mixed into the wrong location. The issue is visible, frustrating, and real.

    It matters.

    It affects floor discipline, staging space, return flow, inventory clarity, team trust, and future rework.

    But the shipping window is still active.

    The question is not whether returns cleanup matters.

    The question is whether the leader should let that secondary issue take control before the outbound shipment is protected.

    In this episode:

    The operating pattern: A real secondary issue can appear while the main shipping objective is still exposed.

    The leadership trap: Leaders chase the issue that feels visible, concrete, and fixable while the active shipping window loses momentum.

    The tool or lens: Identify and Postpone.

    The consequence: The shipment window tightens, final pack loses focus, dock staging gets noisier, the carrier pickup becomes harder to protect, and the real returns issue may still disappear if it is not assigned and returned to.

    The next move: Capture the cleanup issue, assign ownership, set the return point, and define what trigger brings it forward sooner.

    Direct Action develops leaders to assess accurately, navigate obstacles rapidly, choose deliberately, and execute with control.

    Read the companion article:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/blog/before-the-tool-cart-steals-the-changeover-capture-the-cleanup-issue

    Get the manufacturing-specific Direct Action starter resource:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/manufacturing-starter

    Read practical leadership and operations articles on the Direct Action Blog:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/blog

    This briefing is part of the Direct Action Briefings series, where Mikey K breaks down practical decision systems for leaders operating under pressure.
    Show More Show Less
    25 mins
  • DA Briefing 0034: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly in Logistics

    DA Briefing 0034: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly in Logistics
    Jul 22 2026

    Stuck on a leadership, operations, or decision-making challenge? Have feedback, suggestions, or an idea you would like us to cover? Send it in. We may break it down in a future Direct Action Briefing. Submit your question or feedback here: https://podcast.direct-action-system.io/2623617/fan_mail

    Capability Focus: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly

    Industry Focus: Logistics

    Tool Focus: Identify and Postpone

    Episode Focus: Controlling a real reverse-logistics issue during an active outbound recovery effort without losing the shipping window.

    In this Direct Action Briefing, Mikey K breaks down what happens when a logistics leader identifies a real returns issue while the current outbound shipping objective is still under pressure.

    The episode follows Marcus, a fulfillment manager at an e-commerce distribution center. His team is trying to protect the four P M outbound cutoff after a late pick wave. Customer-critical orders are still waiting. One packing lane is short two people. A high-priority batch was released later than planned. The carrier window is still viable, but it is tightening.

    The current objective is clear.

    Protect the four PM cutoff.

    Move customer-critical orders first.

    Keep the carrier window alive.

    Do not let the late pick wave turn into missed shipments.

    Then a second issue appears.

    A returns lead notices a suspicious pattern across high-value returns. Several items are tied to repeated customer account activity. Return reasons do not match item condition. Some apparel looks worn. A small electronics return is sitting in review. Disposition codes have been used inconsistently by different processors.

    The issue is real.

    It matters.

    It affects reverse logistics, inventory value, resale recovery, disposition accuracy, loss exposure, customer behavior, and future inventory confidence.

    But the shipping window is still active.

    The question is not whether the returns pattern matters.

    The question is whether the fulfillment manager should let that secondary issue take control before the outbound shipping objective is protected.

    In this episode:

    The operating pattern: A real secondary issue can appear while the main shipping objective is still exposed.

    The leadership trap: Leaders chase the issue that feels serious, visible, and loss-related while the active outbound window loses momentum.

    The tool or lens: Identify and Postpone.

    The consequence: Customer-critical orders sit longer, the carrier window tightens, inventory control gets pulled into the wrong moment, the returns issue may still not get solved cleanly, and the customer promise takes the hit.

    The next move: Capture the returns issue, assign ownership, set the return point, and define what trigger brings it forward sooner.

    Direct Action develops leaders to assess accurately, navigate obstacles rapidly, choose deliberately, and execute with control.

    Read the companion article:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/blog/before-returns-cleanup-steals-the-shipping-window

    Get the logistics-specific Direct Action starter resource:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/logistics-starter

    Read practical leadership and operations articles on the Direct Action Blog:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/blog

    This briefing is part of the Direct Action Briefings series, where Mikey K breaks down practical decision systems for leaders operating under pressure.
    Show More Show Less
    25 mins
  • DA Briefing 0033: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly in Healthcare

    DA Briefing 0033: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly in Healthcare
    Jul 21 2026

    Stuck on a leadership, operations, or decision-making challenge? Have feedback, suggestions, or an idea you would like us to cover? Send it in. We may break it down in a future Direct Action Briefing. Submit your question or feedback here: https://podcast.direct-action-system.io/2623617/fan_mail

    Capability Focus: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly

    Industry Focus: Healthcare

    Tool Focus: Identify and Postpone

    Episode Focus: Controlling a real secondary issue during an active patient access recovery effort without losing the callback queue.

    In this Direct Action Briefing, Mikey K breaks down what happens when a healthcare leader identifies a real side issue while the current patient access objective is still under pressure.

    The episode follows Tanya, a patient access supervisor for a busy outpatient specialty group. Her team is trying to recover a callback backlog. Patients are waiting. Staff are short. A provider template changed late the day before. The morning schedule adjustment created extra calls. The supervisor is trying to clear the oldest callbacks, protect same-day access, reduce repeat calls, and keep the team focused long enough to regain control of the queue.

    Then a second issue appears.

    A coordinator notices that the online scheduling page for one clinic location still has outdated wording. The instruction is wrong. Patients may be following the wrong path. The issue may be creating confusion and adding call volume.

    The issue is real.

    It matters.

    It affects patient access, staff workload, online scheduling clarity, patient communication, and future call volume.

    But the callback queue is still active.

    The question is not whether the website wording matters.

    The question is whether the supervisor should let that secondary issue take control before the active access objective is protected.

    In this episode:

    The operating pattern: A real secondary issue can appear while the main effort is still exposed.

    The leadership trap: Leaders chase the issue that feels visible, concrete, and fixable while the active access queue loses momentum.

    The tool or lens: Identify and Postpone.

    The consequence: The callback queue ages, patients call again, staff lose focus, the access picture gets noisier, and the real side issue may still disappear if it is not assigned and returned to.

    The next move: Capture the issue, assign ownership, set the return point, and define what trigger brings it forward sooner.

    Direct Action develops leaders to assess accurately, navigate obstacles rapidly, choose deliberately, and execute with control.

    Read the companion article:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/blog/before-the-side-issue-steals-the-access-queue

    Get the healthcare-specific Direct Action starter resource:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/healthcare-starter

    Read practical leadership and operations articles on the Direct Action Blog:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/blog

    This briefing is part of the Direct Action Briefings series, where Mikey K breaks down practical decision systems for leaders operating under pressure.
    Show More Show Less
    25 mins
  • DA Briefing 0032: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly in Retail, Restaurant, and Hospitality

    DA Briefing 0032: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly in Retail, Restaurant, and Hospitality
    Jul 20 2026

    Stuck on a leadership, operations, or decision-making challenge? Have feedback, suggestions, or an idea you would like us to cover? Send it in. We may break it down in a future Direct Action Briefing. Submit your question or feedback here: https://podcast.direct-action-system.io/2623617/fan_mail

    Capability Focus: Navigate Obstacles Rapidly

    Industry Focus: Retail, Restaurant, and Hospitality

    Tool Focus: Identify and Postpone

    Episode Focus: Controlling a real secondary issue during an active front-end safety incident without losing the floor.

    In this Direct Action Briefing, Mikey K breaks down what happens when a retail leader identifies a real prevention issue while the current operating objective is still unstable.

    The episode follows Dana, a store manager handling an active front-end safety incident. A repeat shoplifting suspect has created tension near the exit. Customers are watching. Associates are nervous. The front end is exposed. The manager is trying to protect staff, control customer movement, keep distance, follow company policy, and prepare a clean handoff to asset protection, security, or law enforcement.

    Then a second issue appears.

    An associate points out that the camera view near the seasonal aisle has a blind spot. That blind spot may explain how the same person has been staging merchandise before moving toward the exit.

    The issue is real.

    It matters.

    It affects safety, shrink, evidence quality, and future prevention.

    But the floor is still unstable.

    The question is not whether the camera gap matters.

    The question is whether the manager should let that secondary issue take control before the active floor objective is protected.

    In this episode:

    The operating pattern: A real secondary issue can appear while the main effort is still exposed.

    The leadership trap: Leaders chase the issue that feels concrete and fixable while the active objective loses control.

    The tool or lens: Identify and Postpone.

    The consequence: The floor loses attention, associates lose clear direction, the handoff weakens, and the real issue may still disappear if it is not assigned and returned to.

    The next move: Capture the issue, assign ownership, set the return point, and define what trigger brings it forward sooner.

    Direct Action develops leaders to assess accurately, navigate obstacles rapidly, choose deliberately, and execute with control.

    Read the companion article:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/blog/camera-gap-real-floor-still-unstable

    Get the retail-specific Direct Action starter resource:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/retail-starter

    Read practical leadership and operations articles on the Direct Action Blog:

    https://www.direct-action-system.io/blog

    This briefing is part of the Direct Action Briefings series, where Mikey K breaks down practical decision systems for leaders operating under pressure.
    Show More Show Less
    24 mins
  • DA Toolbox Brief 0002: Identify and Postpone

    DA Toolbox Brief 0002: Identify and Postpone
    Jul 19 2026
    Stuck on a leadership, operations, or decision-making challenge? Have feedback, suggestions, or an idea you would like us to cover? Send it in. We may break it down in a future Direct Action Briefing. Submit your question or feedback here: https://podcast.direct-action-system.io/2623617/fan_mailDA Tool Brief 0002: Identify and PostponeCapability Focus: Navigate Obstacles RapidlyTool Focus: Identify and PostponeFramework: Decision Execution and Problem NavigationEpisode Focus: Recognizing when a real issue has appeared, weighing its effect against the current objective, and determining whether it requires action now or a controlled return later.Identify and Postpone is the Direct Action tool applied throughout DA Briefings 0032 through 0036.Across those episodes, the industries, operating environments, and consequences change.The decision pattern does not.A real issue appears.The issue matters.The current objective is already in motion.Acting on the new problem creates pressure on time, people, resources, attention, or operational control.Ignoring it creates future exposure.Leadership must decide whether the issue belongs in the current action window or whether it should be captured, controlled, assigned, and returned to later.In this Direct Action Tool Brief, Mikey K introduces the operating condition Identify and Postpone is designed to address.This is not about ignoring a problem.It is not about avoiding accountability.It is not about delaying work because ownership is uncomfortable.Identify and Postpone is used when a real issue has already appeared, but immediate action may pull the team away from a more consequential objective.The issue remains.The consequence remains visible.The leader controls when the issue returns.The episode begins with a major municipal water-main failure affecting a regional medical campus, a nursing facility, fire protection, businesses, and surrounding neighborhoods.The utility isolates the damaged section, exposes the failed main, and prepares to restore service.Then the repair team discovers another serious infrastructure problem.A large isolation valve is incorrectly mapped, difficult to access, and positioned differently than the system records indicate.The defect is real.It contributed to a larger shutdown area.It could delay a future emergency response.The road is already closed.The excavation is already open.The equipment and repair crews are already present.Correcting the valve immediately appears efficient and responsible.But replacing it will extend an active water outage affecting critical facilities and thousands of customers.Leadership must determine whether it is protecting the system or allowing a secondary issue to replace the immediate restoration objective.In this episode:The operating pattern: A real issue appears while the organization is already working to protect another objective.The leadership trap: The existence of a legitimate problem is treated as proof that it deserves immediate priority.The tool or lens: Identify and Postpone.The visible misread: Delaying action looks like avoidance, weak ownership, or acceptance of a known problem.The deeper failure point: Leadership asks whether the issue should be corrected but fails to ask whether it must be corrected before the current objective is protected.The consequence: Attention, resources, operating margin, customer tolerance, public trust, and recovery time are consumed by a secondary issue while the primary objective remains exposed.The next move: Compare the effect of acting now against the effect of waiting, then establish ownership, a return point, and a trigger that brings the issue forward if conditions change.The Tool Brief also applies the recognition pattern to additional operating situations.A hospital may be moving temperature-sensitive vaccines into protected storage while overdue employee competency records create a legitimate compliance concern.A distribution center may be recovering customer-critical medical shipments while inaccurate warehouse location data exposes a recurring operational weakness.A county emergency shelter may be receiving residents ahead of a major storm while outdated room maps create confusion inside the facility.The situations are different.The Identify and Postpone condition remains consistent.The issue has already appeared.The issue is real.The consequence matters.The current objective carries greater immediate priority.The problem can be controlled while it waits.Leadership must ensure it does not disappear.The core lesson is direct:A real issue is not automatically the right-now issue.Do not confuse recognizing a problem with immediately shifting the main effort.Do not say “later” unless the issue has ownership, a return point, and a trigger that moves it forward when waiting is no longer acceptable.Identify and Postpone does not remove responsibility.It requires the leader to protect the current objective while maintaining control of the issue that ...
    Show More Show Less
    24 mins