I have been thinking about something after a few recent conversations.
In one conversation, a senior consultant told me very honestly that he could not easily place me in a “sellable position”.
I appreciated the honesty.
Because I think it shows something bigger than my own profile.
Many organisations, and also many consulting models, are still built around clear labels.
Lean person. Project manager. Supply chain person. QA person. Transformation person. Digital person. Consultant for a specific task.
This makes sense when the problem is clearly inside one box.
But many of today’s business problems are no longer inside one box.
They sit between functions. Between systems. Between decision forums. Between local KPIs and end-to-end value flow. Between the current operating model and the new reality.
And this is where I believe many organisations struggle.
Especially in flat and trust-based cultures, there is often a strong assumption that alignment already exists.
Production does its part. QA does its part. Supply Chain does its part. IT does its part.
Everyone is competent. Everyone is responsible. Everyone is trusted.
So we assume the value chain will work.
But value flow does not automatically emerge from good local performance.
A process can be well-managed inside each function and still be slow, fragmented, or unclear end to end.
Another pattern I have observed is how organisations respond when new complexity appears.
Often, the first reaction is to add something.
A new role. A new project. A consultant. A task force. A new improvement initiative.
Sometimes that is the right answer.
But not always.
Sometimes we add roles to solve what is actually a flow problem.
The issue may not be lack of people. It may be unclear ownership across functions. It may be handovers nobody truly sees. It may be decisions waiting between departments. It may be an operating model that no longer fits the current technology, customer expectations, or business priorities.
When reality changes, adding more people to the old operating model may increase capacity.
But it does not necessarily improve flow.
This is why I believe we need to ask a different question more often:
Are we missing capacity, or are we missing flow?
For me, this is not about adding more hierarchy.
It is not about reducing trust.
It is not about creating heavy governance.
Actually, it is the opposite.
The question is how we keep the strengths of trust, autonomy, and flat culture while making the end-to-end value chain more visible, owned, and continuously improved.
Because the organisation chart shows who reports to whom.
But it rarely shows how value actually moves.
And sometimes the missing capability is not a person.
It is the connection between people.