Where Creative Intuition meets Business Intelligence

👀 Observed This Week

I was caught by a clip of Kevin O’Leary discussing what it was like working with Steve Jobs.

Jobs was ruthless about ignoring “noise” so he could focus on the small set of decisions that actually shaped Apple’s future: product direction, user experience, quality, and culture.

That discipline created an environment of non-negotiable excellence. But it also introduced a risk most scaling leaders underestimate.

Apple executed exceptionally well after Jobs. What became harder to sustain was category-breaking innovation. Not because the team lacked talent, but because so much judgment had lived in one person.

🧠 What’s Really Happening

Scaling an agency isn’t just a math problem. It’s a permission problem.

At the early stages, the founder is the system. Your instinct, speed, and judgment are the advantages. Decisions collapse into one mind, and that efficiency feels like excellence.

But organisations learn from what works.

When one leader consistently provides the final answer, the system adapts around that reality. Not consciously. Structurally. The fastest path to safety becomes alignment, not initiative. Judgment waits upstream.

Over time, this creates an unspoken rule set:

• Independent judgment feels risky
• Founder alignment feels safe
• Speed follows approval
• Being right matters more than learning

So leaders end up carrying:

• All the decisions (to protect quality)
• All the emotional pressure (to protect the team)
• All the direction-setting (to protect momentum)

The team doesn’t stop thinking because it can’t. It stops because thinking gets overwritten.

Execution stays strong, but only after the signal arrives. This isn’t a motivation problem. It isn’t a talent problem. It’s a structural one.

⚙️ The Hidden Decision Logic

What’s usually missing isn’t strategy, it’s a named trade-off.

Most leaders are trying to optimise everything at once: quality, speed, innovation, and control. But in practice, every leadership model privileges one at the expense of another. Until that trade-off is made explicit, the system defaults to the safest option: reliance on the founder.

Leadership dependence shows up quietly, but it has clear consequences:

→ Symptom: Your judgment becomes the ceiling ​
​→ Impact: The business is difficult to value independently of you. Buyers and partners aren’t evaluating your team; they’re evaluating your continued involvement.

→ Symptom: The team waits for your opinion ​
​→ Impact: You pay people to think, then pay again to do the thinking yourself. Speed suffers not because of incompetence, but because authority sits upstream.

→ Symptom: Innovation slows when you step back ​
​→ Impact: Future cash flow depends on your presence. Momentum becomes conditional, not repeatable.

None of this means you’ve led poorly. It means the system has learned exactly what it’s been taught, and is optimising for certainty, not independence.

👉 What to Do Next

⚡ The Short of It

Your agency isn’t constrained by talent. It’s constrained by an unnamed leadership decision.

Leadership isn’t about holding everything together. It’s about shaping direction so clearly that the business continues to grow and hold value without you in the room.

The discipline isn’t just in what you choose to do. It’s in what you decide to let others own.

Until Next time
​

Warm African Greetings