Staying with the theme of capability in organizations from my last post, I recall having worked with a woman who was very good at what she did. In one team, she was confident, decisive and always willing to challenge the way things were being done. Later, I saw her working in a different team.

Same person with the same experience and same capability, but her performance was completely different. She had become cautious. She spoke less. Decisions she would once have made instinctively now required reassurance and approval. The only thing that changed was the environment around her.

We tend to think of performance as something that belongs to the individual. When someone underperforms, we question their capability. When a team struggles, we look for better people. But perhaps capability is only part of the equation.

The environment in which people work can either allow that capability to be expressed or slowly suppress it. Fear of mistakes, corporate hierarchy, a boss who needs to be right and approval processes that remove agency. These are all part of cultures where one failure is remembered longer than ten successes.

None of these make people less capable. But over time, they can make capable people behave as if they are.

So this is not an argument against changing people. It is an argument for asking the right question first. ‘What in our organisation is preventing good people from doing their best work?’

Sometimes the capability is already there and the system is suppressing it.

Before asking whether you have the right people, ask whether you have created the conditions in which the right people can succeed.