Briefing
The situation
Lisa leads a team where several members now regularly build small tools and automations. Every week someone arrives with a new idea or a finished prototype that 'just needs sign-off'. Lisa doesn't have time to review everything properly. She doesn't understand all the technical details. Saying no feels like crushing engagement — saying yes to everything feels irresponsible. She's started pushing meetings to keep up, and is starting to feel like a bottleneck in a system she helped fuel. As a leadership team, you need to help Lisa — and every other manager facing the same problem.
Discussion
Questions to wrestle with
What are we actually reviewing?
- 1.When Lisa 'approves' a tool — what is she actually vouching for: the idea, the security, the data quality, or just the fact that she knows about it?
- 2.Which approvals genuinely belong with the line manager, and which should live somewhere else?
- 3.What's the difference between sound judgement and the illusion of control in this kind of decision?
Build the system, not the hero
- 1.If we don't want every manager to become a bottleneck — what support, role or forum is missing in our organisation?
- 2.What would have to be true for a team to make a decision on its own without Lisa having to be in the room?
- 3.How do we teach managers to tell the difference between 'I don't know and need to learn' and 'I don't know and need to delegate'?
Framework · Delegated judgement
To lean on
Reviews personally
Decisions where the manager's judgement is what genuinely adds value — customer, person, strategy, ethics.
Delegates with guardrails
Decisions someone else (tech lead, data owner, peer review) takes better — manager sets the frame and reviews patterns.
Lets go entirely
Decisions that don't need the manager at all — make the threshold explicit, remove the approval step, trust the process.
Reviews patterns
Instead of individual decisions: the manager looks at trends, exceptions and risks after the fact.
Decision
Possible paths
- ASet up an internal 'AI review board' (tech lead, data owner, security) that takes over tool reviews — the manager gets a pattern report.
- BMake thresholds explicit: below X risk/data no approval is needed at all, above Y a formal process kicks in.
- CTrain every manager in 'delegated judgement' and make it part of performance review that they let go of the right things.
- DSlow down: pause new initiatives until review capacity matches the pace.
Triggers
Drop in when the discussion stalls
- ▸A tool that was approved last month turned out to pull data from a source Lisa didn't know existed.
- ▸One employee has stopped asking and just started using — 'it's faster that way'.
- ▸Senior leadership has just asked for a quarterly report on 'AI initiatives per team'.
For the facilitator
Tips to get more out of it
- Have participants list the three most recent 'AI approvals' they personally made and place them in the framework — the discussion gets concrete fast.
- Watch for the 'but I'm still accountable' reflex — that's exactly what turns the manager into a bottleneck. Challenge it.
Reflection
To take with you
- "Does our current leadership development prepare managers to be pattern reviewers rather than individual approvers? What's missing?"
- "Which decisions in our own leadership team should we be letting go of, delegating, or reviewing as patterns rather than individual cases?"