The Loneliness Argument

The senior person, by definition, has structurally fewer peers as she rises. The people who were peers, in earlier stages, are no longer at the same level. Some are reporting in to her. Some are reporting elsewhere on the operation. Some are in different functional remits where the work has so little overlap that the peer relationship cannot, in practice, do the work it once did. The actual peer, in the strict sense, is someone at the same stage, in the same kind of fight, with no structural conflict of interest. That person is structurally rare.

What this produces, over years, is a particular kind of operating reality. The thinking she would normally test against another person of equal scope is now happening in her head alone. The doubts that would have surfaced in conversation with someone at the same level are now resolved internally, or not resolved at all. The instinct that would have been calibrated against another mind operating at the same pressure is now calibrated against herself, or against the team's calibration, which is structurally downstream of hers.

This is not loneliness in the casual sense. It is closer to a particular kind of structural isolation in which the senior person is the highest-resolution thinker about her own situation in the room, and there is no room available in which she is not the highest-resolution thinker. The work she does is increasingly without genuine challenge. The team can challenge her tactically, but rarely structurally. The board can challenge her on outcomes, but rarely on the texture of how she is operating day to day. The spouse, if there is one, is often outside the work entirely.

What this means, in practice, is that decisions she would, in earlier years, have arrived at after a real argument with someone capable are now arrived at after an argument she has held with herself. The argument with oneself is not the same argument. It is shorter. It is less rigorous. It is more easily resolved. The decisions that result are not necessarily worse, but they are decisions that have not been pressure-tested in the way they used to be.

The work that addresses this is not, primarily, the work of adding more communication to existing relationships. The existing relationships are configured for what they are configured for. The team relationship is structurally what it is. The board relationship is structurally what it is. The spouse relationship is structurally what it is. None of them, by their nature, can do the work that a peer relationship at the senior level does.

The work is the slow installation of a different category of relationship into the life. The relationship is with someone at the same stage of capacity, in their own version of the same fight, without a structural conflict of interest, willing to hear what is actually happening rather than the version that gets reported in the meeting. That category of relationship is hard to install for three reasons.

The first is that the people who would qualify are themselves structurally isolated and are not naturally finding each other. The second is that the existing relationships that look like peer relationships, the friend from twenty years ago, the colleague from the old firm, are often no longer at the same stage and have drifted into a different operating reality. The third is that the senior person has often spent twenty years not relying on peer relationships because the career was structured to reward independence, and the muscle for genuine collaboration at the senior level has atrophied.

What changes the situation is the deliberate construction of a small number of peer relationships that meet a specific standard. These relationships are with people who are at the same stage of capacity. They are with people whose interest in the conversation is not transactional. They are with people who are doing their own version of the same work. They are with people who can hear what is actually happening rather than the version that gets reported.

These relationships are rare. They are also, in my reading of the pattern, what makes the next decade of senior work sustainable. The senior person who continues to operate without them is the senior person whose decisions slowly degrade in quality, not because she has become a worse thinker but because the calibration against another mind at the same resolution has not been happening. The senior person who installs them gradually rebuilds the conversation the operation has lost.

The Diagnostic is not, in itself, a peer relationship. It is, structurally, the kind of conversation the senior person has not been having in her current configuration. Thirty minutes, free, on Tuesdays and Wednesdays.

Continue reading: The First Thirty Days After →

Or if you'd rather start a conversation: Book the free 30-min Diagnostic →