Nothing Was Robust. It Was Borrowed.

A few years ago, I noticed something that I still can’t quite explain.

Two organisations can look remarkably similar from the outside. They deliver on time. Their customers are happy. Their people seem engaged. The numbers look healthy. If you were asked to choose between them, you’d probably struggle.

Then one experienced person leaves.

Six months later, one organisation barely notices.

The other begins to unravel.

I’ve seen versions of this often enough that I no longer think it’s coincidence, but I don’t think I’ve ever really understood why.

My first instinct was to blame leadership. Or culture. Or poor succession planning. All of those probably matter.

I’m no longer convinced they’re the whole story.

---

I spent much of my career in high level sport, where people are obsessed with performance. We measure almost everything. Training load. Sleep. Strength. Power. Recovery. Injuries. We look for patterns because small differences accumulate over time.

One thing always bothered me.

I remember working with an outstanding medical department. Rehabilitation was meticulous. Return-to-play decisions were thoughtful. Athletes trusted the staff completely. If you judged the department by the quality of its work, it would have been difficult to find fault.

Every Monday another athlete walked through the door with a hamstring injury.

That image stayed with me far longer than I expected. Not because the medical team was doing anything wrong. They weren’t. They were exceptionally good at what they did.

What bothered me was something else.

The better they became at rehabilitation, the easier it became for everyone else to stop asking why rehabilitation was needed so often in the first place.

At the time, I assumed those were unrelated questions.

Now I’m not so sure.

---

Since then, I’ve started noticing the same pattern in places that have nothing to do with sport.

The customer service team that somehow recovers every poor client experience, so gracefully that nobody upstream ever hears about it.

The executive assistant who quietly prevents a leadership team from descending into chaos, rearranging, reminding and smoothing until the leadership team believes it is simply well organised.

The finance manager with twenty spreadsheets nobody else understands, who has become, without anyone consciously deciding it should be this way, the real system of record.

The operations director who knows every workaround because the documented process stopped matching reality years ago.

We admire these people.

So we should.

The more I’ve thought about it, the more I’ve wondered whether they also change the way we judge organisations.

From a distance, what do we actually see?

Projects are delivered.

Customers stay.

Targets are met.

We don’t see the conversation that prevented a resignation. We don’t see the spreadsheet rebuilt by hand because the system failed again. We don’t see the phone call made after hours to repair a relationship that should never have been damaged in the first place.

We see the outcome.

We almost never see the work that made the outcome possible.

Remove the finance manager and watch how long it takes before someone asks where the real numbers actually live.

Lose the operations director and discover that the documented process was never really the process.

Replace the experienced coach and realise that what looked like a robust performance programme depended on one person noticing what everyone else missed.

---

Institutional knowledge is usually how we describe what happens next.

I’m not sure that’s quite right.

Institutional knowledge suggests something the organisation once possessed and has now misplaced.

What I’m describing feels closer to debt.

Capability quietly borrowed from individuals, year after year, without ever appearing on any balance sheet.

Eventually the debt falls due.

People talk about the departure as though it caused the decline.

Perhaps it merely exposed it.

I keep returning to the same question, and I don’t think I have a comfortable answer.

How would you know, right now, whether the parts of your organisation that are working are working because of what you’ve built, or because of who happens to still be there?