Your Campus Remote Work Policy Might Be Right But Not Good

May 24, 2022

We’ve had every wrench known to Home Depot thrown into the mix as campus leaders are working to telegraph the COVID-19 variant punches over the last few years.


What was expected to be a mass migration back to the happy office spaces last fall was halted as leaders protracted their work-from-home policies indefinitely into another miserable pandemic winter.


As spring winds down, you are once again preparing for what your new office environment will look like to start up the 2022-2023 academic year while praying not to lose any of your best talent, right?



What hangs in the balance is a ton of tension to manage. Many leaders I serve are scrambling to solve this conflict via fixed policies and practices designed to be RIGHT (efficient) but not always GOOD (effective).

What hangs in the balance is a ton of tension to manage. Many leaders I serve are scrambling to solve this conflict via fixed policies and practices designed to be RIGHT (efficient) but not always GOOD (effective).


I hear ideas from leaders across the country which are widely divided and (in my opinion) narrowly grounded in personal bias and views rooted in a pre-pandemic framework for how the work should be done.


Grounded Perspective

Gallup has been a trusted base for making sense of the mucky middle of these types of tensions for years. I have appreciated their most current study conducted to give voice to the needs and plans of more than 140,000 U.S. employees surveyed since the pandemic. These insights paint a vivid picture of how campus leaders might not want to FIX the problem but FLEX it to keep their best talent and attract more of the same in the year ahead.


Spoiler alert: Employees with the ability to work remotely universally desire a hybrid office environment, which allows them to spend part of their week working remotely and part in the office.


Hybrid work in the educational space is increasingly complex but can’t be set apart as a non-starter. Some campuses are mustering up the courage to take on a learning posture in this new reality. The following lessons will define our work lives for years to come. Ultimately, how a hybrid campus unfolds will depend on the capacity of work teams to be uber-clear about the work priorities and how leaders adapt to the changing needs of the learner experience.


Let me make a bold statement that will make half of you want to stop reading. I believe it is becoming shallow and a bit selfish to say that the work of education must be 100% on-site. Equally, I don’t think it is best practice to allow everyone to work and learn 100% remotely. It’s the middle ground where we will find leaders in the winner’s circle.


Based on Gallup’s insights, approximately half of the U.S. full-time workforce (representing about 60 million workers) report that their current job can be done remotely by working from home, at least part of the time. The new term for these workers is "remote-capable employees."


Before the pandemic, very few remote-capable employees worked exclusively from home (8%), while one-third had a hybrid work arrangement.


Then the pandemic hit, and most remote-capable employees were forced to work from home in some capacity.

Fast forward to the current day, most campuses are wondering what to do with this new group that CAN work from home. Those who are seeking to even the playing field are calling them back to campus.


When asked how these remote-capable employees desired to work into the near future, about 53% preferred a hybrid arrangement, and 24% would choose to work exclusively remote.


Nine in 10 remote-capable employees currently prefer some degree of remote-work flexibility in the future, and six in 10 specifically prefer hybrid work. Most employees have developed an affinity for remote-work flexibility that has matured into an expectation for those now coming into the workforce.


While permanent plans for remote flexibility are lagging in the educational space, more and more demand is trending in this direction.


What does this mean in the battle for talent? I suspect that many of your best talent on campus will not receive the flexibility they desire, and many (more) will leave.


Fact: Remote work isn’t a fad. It is here to stay, and hybrid work is the future for most remote-capable employees.


Working for a campus that doesn't consider the unique needs of remote-capable employees might create more inertia than engagement. When employees are required to work entirely on-site but would prefer to work hybrid or fully remote, employees experience:


  • significantly lower engagement
  • significantly lower wellbeing
  • significantly higher intent to leave
  • significantly higher levels of burnout


Counter Fact: To be fair, the long-term effects of mass-scale remote work in education are yet to be seen.


Nonetheless, attracting and retaining top talent amid today's "Great Reshuffling" of the workforce will require all campus leaders to address the remote-work question in a fluid, vs a fixed manner.


Failing to offer flexible work arrangements is a significant risk to campus hiring, employee engagement, performance, wellbeing, and retention strategies.


Why Hybrid?

Gallup asked remote-capable employees who prefer hybrid work why they desired this arrangement.

The most common responses won’t surprise you.


The top reason employees prefer hybrid work is to avoid commute time.


We all can agree that a large slice of the life pie is taken away from us in the time it takes to get ready for work, travel to the office, and return home every day.


The other key reason employees prefer hybrid work represents a strong desire for more personal freedom to work when, where, and how it best suits them. Their demands for better well-being, work-life balance, and flexibility represent a new "will of the workplace” that won't consent to the traditional office attitudes in the future.


For balance, the study also pointed out that remote-capable employees are increasingly isolated by the digital world and need to feel connected to their coworkers and their organization. There is a common agreement that connecting with the team and feeling a part of the campus culture is easier to experience in person.


Although remote employees enjoy their flexibility, four in 10 would give up some time at home to have in-person office experiences.


Overall, the top reason people want a hybrid work arrangement is to have the flexibility to manage their week while still feeling connected to their organization.


These sentiments align with adjacent Gallup research showing that achieving work-life balance and improved personal wellbeing are top reasons people would change jobs.


Hybrid work helps employees get the most out of their day while ensuring they feel connected to coworkers and the organization.


So, What’s the RIGHT and GOOD Response? 

For starters, campus leaders should delineate between the work.


What’s your team’s interdependent work?


What’s your team’s independent work?


Highly interdependent teams must stay tightly connected and rely on one another to work in a real-time/high-definition world. The more interdependent your teams are, the more explicit leaders must be about when work must be done collectively and on-site.


These teams require a certain amount of air traffic control and more face-to-face time to keep everything moving cohesively.

Conversely, when teams work independently (doing tasks that require less real-time collaboration and more asynchronistic focus), they can be given more autonomy and flexibility over work schedules.


In a hybrid environment, highly independent teams must double down on quality communication, ownership of performance outcomes, and team connection. Their most significant risk is working in isolation for too long or at the wrong moments. Highly independent teams also risk culture erosion and the neglect of remote-working coworkers.


While hybrid work schedules should look different by campus and team, it is universally important to keep assessing, adjusting, and reassessing how the current arrangement is working.


In the end, campus leaders who retain their best talent and attract more of the same will have apparent answers to WHY people should come into the office and HOW they should spend that time together.


Campus leaders are working to create firm ground for this new normal in the face of increasing volatility. It can be easy for leaders to get bogged down in policies and rules concerning hybrid work. Based on the needed efficiencies (right) and desirable effectiveness (good), the modern hybrid workplace needs to provide three things:


  • Productivity: Workplaces that execute upon 90-day priorities for all teams.
  • Flexibility: Workplaces that allow personalized work schedules that honor the remote-capable voice to thrive in life and work.
  • Connectivity: Workplaces that encourage the spirit of partnership, teamwork, and organizational culture


Here are a few recommendations to help campus leaders stay focused on what's essential while managing the tension of work triage.


Boost Productivity

Shape work strategies around objective productivity, not just policy compliance.

Now is the time to redefine what Higher Performance looks like for your team and how to best work together to achieve that vision. Ensure collective focus on the immediate performance outcomes and have the right tools for tracking your progress. Assess which team activities are best on-site and which can be done remotely.


 Consider the interdependency of the work. 

As previously discussed, when teammates are more interdependent, they need more coordination of schedules and time on campus. Team members are responsible for a mix of interdependent and independent work. These individuals should consider where they can best focus on their assignments and when they should be in the office to boost collaboration and team culture.


Boost Flexibility

Allow for flexibility within a framework. 

There is likely no single campus work policy that will be ideal for all teams. Allowing leaders some authority to individualize policies is necessary, given your campus' different kinds of work and life circumstances. It is also essential to set boundaries for when employees are expected to be in person and allowed to work remotely.


 Warning: Flexibility and autonomy can create ambiguity and coordination issues.


Experience (and the research) find that leaders communicate less frequently and effectively in the remote modality. However, hybrid team engagement can actually surpass on-site engagement when managers proactively check in with their teams multiple times per week. As flexibility increases, leaders need to increase communication about work priorities, progress, and handoffs between team members.


Boost Connectivity

Think virtual first. 

When team members in the office behave as if everyone is working remotely, remote workers are more likely to feel part of the team. For example, having laptops at team meetings, so everyone has an on-screen presence can create a more inclusive experience. Also, taking time to learn together is a great way to grow into a hybrid team.


Consider a few of our Higher Performance Team Workshops to sharpen your advantage and raise your team engagement. 


Give people a compelling reason to come to the office.


“I come to the office with a smile because of a policy,” said not one of your high-capacity team members. A policy is not an answer to why people should be working on campus. Leaders need to develop a compelling workplace value proposition representing the culture, benefits, and interactions your people will experience on-site.


Say Hello to the Modern Workplace


Saying your campus is a modern workplace is much easier than creating an effective one. Undoubtedly, hybrid work will be more challenging for leaders than their old ways of working. Flexibility for workers makes coordination difficult. Remote workers can feel neglected, technology requirements must change, and hybrid work will raise additional complex issues of trust, equity, and accountability.


Because of this, you might want to armor up and shut your eyes tight. However, "hybrid" isn’t just a work schedule or employee perk -- it's an entirely new way of working together.


Crafting an exceptional hybrid work experience (culture, not policy) will be worth it -- if you put in the hard work to make it worth it.


I have already seen the benefits for those who did it before the pandemic and are living it today with lines of people who are ready to fill open positions.


These exceptionally led hybrid teams tend to have more engaged employees, more intentional and meaningful interactions, and, ultimately, better flexibility to integrate work and home life.


All signs indicate that hybrid is fast becoming a new expectation of your high-capacity employees and teams.


I am fired up to experience the next chapter of this tremendous global work experiment and its impact over the next few years.


One Question

What valuable lessons did you and your team receive by working differently over these past two years?


One Challenge

I am encouraging (and challenging) every campus executive team to block off time this summer to critically think about your work triage assessed against your 90-day priorities. What work can be done independently? What work must be done interdependently? How can you boost productivity, flexibility, and connectivity?


The Research

Check out the Gallup article on hybrid workplace.



P.S. Here are the two best ways I can help you right now:


1) Get your FREE guide:  
5 Evidence-Based Practices to Reclaim More Team Engagement with Less Effort.
Download this free guide now. 


2) Schedule a Call:  
Let’s talk about the obstacles (and opportunities) that you & your team are currently facing.
Schedule a call with Joe.

More Blog Articles

By HPG Info July 27, 2026
Why the seven forces driving burnout in your cabinet move exactly the way a piano does — and why the room adjusts to the wrongness long before anyone names it. Twenty years ago, I moved my family away from everything they knew. Not across town. Across area codes — away from the school where I was principal, away from grandparents, away from the only bedrooms my three kids had ever slept in, away from every friendship they'd built since kindergarten. I told my wife it was the right move for our family. I still believe that. But telling a nine-year-old “this is the right move for our family” lands about as well as telling your cabinet a reorg is the right move for the institution. Correct. Unpersuasive. Deeply unwelcome. So we did what desperate, loving parents do. Ice cream. A puppy negotiation I'm still not proud of. And one purchase that turned out to matter more than either: a baby grand piano for the new house. That piano is still in my living room. Twenty years, three kids, and a tuner later — a woman who showed up twice a year for over a decade and never once used the word “burnout” — here's what she taught me about running a cabinet, without ever meaning to. A piano doesn't fail all at once. It drifts. One string at a time, one season at a time, so slowly that everyone living inside the house adjusts to the wrongness without ever naming it. Your leadership team is doing the exact same thing right now. And the people closest to it — the ones playing it every single day — are the last people on earth who'll hear it. THE DIAGNOSIS · NOTHING BROKE. IT DRIFTED. Let's talk about drift like adults who've sat through enough strategic planning retreats to know the difference between a crisis and a slow leak. When's the last time a VP in your cabinet pushed back — and meant it? Nobody's cabinet collapses on a Tuesday. What actually happens is smaller and slower: the VP who used to push back in meetings stops pushing back. The initiative that launched with real energy in August is, by February, running on habit and a group chat nobody reads anymore. The meeting that used to run ninety minutes now runs sixty — not because anyone got more efficient, but because half the room quietly decided the extra thirty minutes of honesty wasn't worth it. None of that shows up on a dashboard. It shows up the way a piano goes flat — not as an event, but as an accumulation. By the time someone finally names it (usually a board member, not gently), you're not looking at one broken string. You're looking at an instrument nobody's tuned in two years, and a room full of good people who adjusted to the wrongness because it arrived one cent at a time. (This is the part where I'm supposed to tell you to “communicate more.” You already knew that. The real problem isn't communication. It's that nobody in your cabinet has a name for what's actually going wrong — so everyone quietly assumes it's just them.) Structure is never neutral. Every system is a self-portrait of whoever built it — and most of yours was painted before you ever took the seat. ❞ Which means the villain was never the people in the room. Individual brilliance, individual empathy, individual self-awareness — all present, all functioning. Multiply eight individually excellent people by a system nobody's maintaining, and the output doesn't hold. That's not a people problem. That's structural neglect wearing a people costume. What looks like burnout in your cabinet is usually the rational response of a capable person inside a broken system. ❞ (This is the exact gap Burnout Force was built to name — not another framework asking your cabinet to try harder individually, but a diagnostic for the structural neglect sitting underneath what looks like burnout. Seven forces, seven distinct mechanisms, each requiring its own fix — the same way a tuner never fixes “the piano,” she fixes one string at a time. More on all seven in a moment.) THE PIANO TUNING METHOD — OR WHY SEVEN FORCES, NOT ONE A piano has seven notes before the octave repeats. Do, Re, Mi, Fa, Sol, La, Ti. Seven distinct tones, each capable of going wrong in its own particular way, each requiring its own fix. A tuner doesn't fix “the piano” — she fixes seven specific things, one string tension at a time. Here's the part most people miss: the seventh string never sounds right until the first one's fixed. Burnout Force works the same way. Not one villain. Seven — each with a distinct mechanism, each recognizable once you know what you're listening for. 1 · Fragmentation — Unisons, Out of Sync Most piano notes aren't a single string — they're two or three strings tuned to the exact same pitch, meant to ring as one voice. Drift even slightly apart, and the note doesn't go silent. It goes blurry. Chorused. Technically playing, technically wrong. That's Fragmentation: a cabinet where everyone's still showing up, still contributing, and the collective sound is somehow muddier than any one of them alone. 2 · Exhaustion — String Tension Under Constant Load Piano wire doesn't need to be struck to lose its tension. Sustained load alone, with no release, causes metal fatigue — the string goes flat just from sitting there under pressure. There's an old performance formula worth borrowing here: performance equals potential, minus interference. Not potential plus effort. Your best people are going flat the same way — not from one hard day, but from load with no release, for long enough that flat becomes their normal. 3 · Isolation — Notes That Won't Resonate Together Piano strings produce overtones — secondary frequencies that aren't perfectly clean multiples of the main pitch. Tuners call this inharmonicity: individually well-tuned notes can still clash rather than support each other in a chord. A cabinet can be full of individually excellent leaders who still don't resonate together, because nobody ever tuned them to each other. (Coal miners didn't bring a canary into the mine for company — they brought it as an instrument. When the person who used to drive every meeting suddenly goes quiet in the back row, that's not an attitude problem. That's a reading coming off the instrument.) 4 · Scarcity — Compensation That Crowds the Room When a piano is stretched to compensate for inharmonicity, one note's resonance can crowd out another's — more presence for one string at the expense of the one beside it. Scarcity is the belief that someone else's win is quietly your loss. It's rarely true. It's a tuning problem mistaken for a competition. 5 · Comparison — The Sound of Two Things Measured Against Each Other When two strings are close but not exactly matched, you hear an actual physical pulsing — tuners call it a “beat.” It's the audible result of two things being judged against each other instead of each being allowed to be itself. Comparison in a cabinet works the same way: audible, measurable, and it doesn't resolve on its own. 6 · Noise — Losing the Reference Point Every piano is tuned from one reference octave first — usually the one built around middle C — and everything else is set relative to it. If that reference is never revisited, the whole instrument can be internally consistent with itself and still be wrong, because the one thing everything else depends on was never checked. That's Noise: a cabinet that's stopped returning to its actual reference point and started tuning to whatever's loudest that week. 7 · Drift — The One That Doesn't Announce Itself And then there's the one nobody has to cause. Piano tuners genuinely use this word: drift — the slow, seasonal, nobody-touched-anything loss of pitch that happens just from humidity and temperature changing in the room. No event. No single decision. Just time, and an environment nobody adjusted for. This is the force behind the other six — and the one every leader I know insists could never happen to them, right up until the year it does. WHY FOUR, LIVE — THE AMPLIFICATION ENGINE Here's the part most burnout content skips: not all seven forces are equally random. Four of them are the causal engine — they manufacture the other three. Fragmentation produces Exhaustion (coordinating around broken structure is its own kind of tired). Exhaustion produces Isolation (depleted people stop reaching for each other; reaching itself becomes the thing they can no longer afford). Isolation produces Scarcity (a cabinet that's stopped resonating together starts believing there isn't enough credit, attention, or budget to go around). And Scarcity feeds straight back into Fragmentation — louder, the second time through. Comparison, Noise, and Drift sit downstream of all four. Fix the engine, and the other three get dramatically easier for your own people to spot and name themselves. You cannot fix the seventh string by tightening it harder. You fix the first one, and the seventh gets easier to hear. ❞ I didn't learn any of this from a leadership book. I learned it from the same tuner — never used the word “burnout,” never needed to. She just knew the instrument needed her back, regularly, not once and done. ❝ Your cabinet needs the same thing. Not a single retreat. Not one framework, delivered once, expected to hold. A tuner. A rhythm. Someone who comes back. ❞ THE APPLICATION · MONDAY MORNING Here's what to do Monday morning (assuming your cabinet isn't already visibly out of tune — in which case, start today): Step 1 — Name your loudest string. (15 minutes) Of the seven forces, which one is making the most noise in your cabinet right now? Don't overthink it. Your gut answer is usually the correct diagnosis your data hasn't caught up to yet. Step 2 — Ask your cabinet the “beat” question. (20 minutes, next meeting) Ask directly: “Where do two of us sound like we're being measured against each other instead of just doing our own job well?” That's Comparison, made audible. You'll hear the beat the moment someone answers honestly. Step 3 — Schedule the return visit. (5 minutes) A piano tuned once and never revisited drifts right back. Put a recurring cabinet health conversation on the calendar — quarterly, minimum. The tuner's value was never the single visit. It was the relationship. “We don't have time for this.” You're already spending time managing the symptoms of an out-of-tune cabinet — the redundant meetings, the parking-lot conversations, the initiative that quietly died in month four. That time is already being spent. You're just spending it on maintenance instead of tuning. “My team will think this is soft.” Nobody thinks a piano tuner is soft. She shows up with a very specific diagnosis for a very specific string, and the room sounds different when she leaves. Precision isn't soft. Vague inspiration is soft. This isn't that. THE MATURITY SHIFT Immature leaders think: “We need a retreat to fix morale.” Mature leaders think: “We need a rhythm to maintain the instrument.” Immature leaders wait for the piano to sound obviously wrong before calling anyone. Mature leaders schedule the tuner before the drift is audible to the room. The uncomfortable truth: your cabinet didn't break. It drifted — one string, one season, one quiet accommodation at a time — and nobody wrote it down because nothing dramatic ever happened on any single day. The optimistic reframe: drift is the one force that responds completely to maintenance. You don't need a new piano. You need someone who comes back. Your worth was never conditional on the note holding perfectly. It just needs someone willing to notice when it doesn't — and come back. ❞ Your turn: Which of the seven strings is out of tune in your cabinet right now? Name it in the comments — the word is enough. Tag the person on your team who'd hear it the second you said it out loud. BURNOUT FORCE Burnout Force is the name for what's actually happening — seven specific, researched forces, each with its own mechanism, each solvable once it's named correctly. The keynote fights the first four, live, together, with your cabinet in the room — the causal engine, the ones everything else grows out of. The book carries all seven, in full, with the research behind each one, so your team can finish the tune-up without me there. This isn't another framework to add to the pile you already haven't implemented. It's a diagnostic — built from work across 987 leadership teams in 43 states — for naming precisely which of the seven forces is loudest in your institution right now, and what actually reverses it. 📊 3x performance improvement · 29% higher engagement · 27% better organizational outcomes · zero increase in burnout — because these teams stopped treating exhaustion as a personal failing and started treating it as a structural, solvable problem. If you already know which string is out of tune in your cabinet, the conversation about whether Burnout Force is the right next step for your institution is a short one. Book 30 minutes and let's have it. higherperformancegroup.com/burnout-force FOUND VALUE IN THIS? Help another leader hear their own drift: → Repost with the force that's loudest in your cabinet right now. → Tag a leader who'd recognize this the moment they read it. → Comment with the last time something on your team went quietly out of tune — and nobody said anything for months.  The more leaders who learn to hear the drift before the crisis, the fewer institutions have to relearn this the hard way. Follow DR. JOE HILL and Higher Performance Group for weekly Team Intelligence insights.
By HPG Info July 21, 2026
That's the Problem. Your best cabinet member is running on a parking brake nobody's ever named — and everyone, including them, is calling it dedication. Last week, a superintendent colleauge - Jay Poroda posted about his dog Daisy — a 70-pound labradoodle who skips group play, gets nervous around strangers, and only, only comes alive for a yellow tennis ball. Not red. Not orange. Yellow. I left a comment: "Daisy going only for yellow is the whole argument for fit over effort — she's not lazy about the others, she's just not spending energy on what isn't hers to chase. What's the yellow tennis ball in your work right now?" Jay's answer: "Right now it's a capital improvement project for our district — the thing that outlasts me. Daisy would approve. I just try not to bat the building plans around." Good exchange. But I want to take it somewhere neither of us went. I have a dog too. Ms. Etta. People think she's four or five. She turns eleven next month. Etta doesn't have a yellow-ball problem. Etta has a stopping problem. She'd fetch until her legs gave out — no off-switch, no internal "enough." She's eleven and not seven because somebody with more sense than her keeps saying stop. That's not a dog story. That's your best cabinet member. THE DIAGNOSIS · WHY YOUR BEST PERFORMER IS YOUR BIGGEST EXPOSURE You know the person. Maybe it's you. Takes the 6 AM call, chairs three committees, still remembers every kid's name. (The email lands at 11:47 PM, and you think "dedication" — not "nobody has ever told this person to stop.") You can't treat pain you haven't diagnosed. So here's the diagnosis, precisely: this isn't a talk about stress, and it isn't a talk about resilience. Stress resolves. A hard board meeting is stress. A fire drill is stress. What doesn't resolve — what compounds inside a system built to compound it — is burnout. Not the tired version. Something structural: a system extracting capacity, belief, and mission-fuel from the people most committed to it. Coal miners didn't carry a canary as a pet. They carried it as an instrument. When it went quiet, that was data — the air was already unlivable, long before it reached the miners. Your most committed people are the canaries. Etta is the canary that never goes quiet — she'd keep singing right up until her legs gave out. That's not resilience. That's exactly the problem. The canary that won't stop singing is the one you have to build a system around, because it will never save itself. Here's the part most cabinets skip: you can be stacked with brilliant people and still have nobody positioned to see a colleague redlining before they collapse. Smart gets hired for. Watching each other doesn't. (This is the exact gap the Burnout Force keynote and book close — not another resilience training, not a Wellness Wednesday with cucumber water in the break room, but a structural diagnosis of the forces draining your most committed people before anyone thinks to ask if they're okay. More shortly.) THE FORMULA · WHY EFFORT ISN'T THE VARIABLE Performance psychologist Timothy Gallwey built an equation that should be taped inside every cabinet room in the country: performance equals potential, minus interference. Not potential plus effort. P = p - i Most educational leaders have it backwards — pressing the accelerator harder while a parking brake nobody named stays locked. The average leadership team in our research spends roughly 40% of the workweek on tasks that only exist because something upstream is broken. Sixteen hours. Two full workdays. Every week. Spent servicing damage a broken system did to itself — handed to the one person who cares too much to say no. That's not commitment. That's interference — and it's invisible to almost everyone carrying it, because it doesn't look like failure. It looks like a very busy Tuesday. Gallup finds 62% of employees aren't engaged — not because they stopped caring, but because diminishing capacity is meeting a hundred percent of the workload. Healthcare burnout tops 60%. New teachers leave within five years at rates near 50%. Almost none of that loss is the actual work. Almost all of it is interference nobody audited. Underneath it is a sentence, not a skill gap: I must be indispensable to matter. That's what keeps a leader — or a labradoodle — running long after "enough" should have kicked in. It isn't ambition. It's a substitute for a question nobody's answered yet. THE ARTIFACT · WHAT A BRAKE AUDIT ACTUALLY FINDS Skip the case study. Here's what a real Brake Audit log looks like — names removed, pulled from our research: Month 1 — "Two departments have never held a joint meeting. Every project between them runs through the CAO as translator. Six hours a week, minimum." Month 1 — "She answers email at 6:15 AM. Nobody asked her to. Nobody told her not to." Month 4 — "First missed deadline in two years. Cabinet reads it as a bad week." Month 6 — "Answers in cabinet meetings get shorter. Nobody names it." Month 7 — Brake Audit installed. One task eliminated: a joint department sync replaces the CAO-as-translator. Six hours a week, returned. Month 18 — Zero comparable losses. Same person. Same ambition. Different brake. That's not a story I'm telling you — it's a pattern showing up cabinet after cabinet. The good ones almost never announce they're burning out. They just get quieter, one meeting at a time, until the quiet gets mistaken for calm. The gap between Month 1 and Month 7 wasn't more resilience. It was eleven months and a $41,000 search a different cabinet is running right now — for someone whose name you don't know yet — because nobody named the brake before it locked. WHAT TO DO BEFORE YOUR NEXT CABINET MEETING Skip the retreat. Do this instead: Run the Canary Audit (20 minutes). Go through your cabinet, one person at a time. Who would tell you the truth if they were past capacity — and who would just keep singing until they went quiet? Write both lists. The second list is your exposure. More than one name on it isn't a resilience problem. It's an interference problem with excellent attendance. Run a Brake Audit — out loud (one meeting). Name every task on the table that exists only because something upstream is broken — a form nobody killed, a handoff nobody clarified, a decision made twice at the wrong level. Eliminate one. You're not asking your team to feel more. You're asking them to see the interference they've been mistaking for commitment. Name the sentence when it shows up (ongoing). Next time someone's visibly past capacity, say it out loud instead of admiring the work ethic in silence: "I'm naming this because I care what you're building, not because I doubt your commitment." Usually what's underneath isn't passion — it's I must be indispensable to matter, quietly running the show. Naming it isn't therapy. It's data. Then you adjust the load. "My best people would resent being told to slow down." Less than the district resents them six months into their eventual leave of absence. You're not asking them to want less — you're asking a Brake Audit to catch what their own adrenaline can't. The leaders who resist this hardest usually need it most. That's not a coincidence. That's the interference talking. "We don't have the bandwidth for a new protocol." You have the bandwidth to lose your CAO for eight months and run a national search. That's the actual cost of skipping this. The audit takes one meeting to install. The alternative takes a year to recover from. THE MATURITY SHIFT Immature leaders think: "My best people just need better resilience training." Mature leaders think: "My best people don't have a resilience problem. They have an interference problem I haven't audited." Immature leaders treat exhaustion as loyalty and quietly reward it with more work. Mature leaders treat exhaustion as a signal and build the system that removes interference before it becomes a resignation letter. Immature leaders keep the canary singing longer by praising the song. Mature leaders build the system that lets the canary rest before it goes quiet. Ms. Etta doesn't know she's eleven. She'd fetch until her legs gave out and call it Tuesday. She's still here because somebody with more sense than her keeps the ball in the drawer sometimes. Your best cabinet member doesn't know they're the canary either. That's not a character flaw in them. It's an interference problem you haven't audited — and a sentence running the room in the dark: I must be indispensable to matter. Name them in the comments — the person on your cabinet running on the brake right now. Then tell us why. That's the part that actually helps the next reader see themselves. THE BURNOUT FORCE · WHY THIS ISN'T A RESILIENCE PROBLEM Most leadership development treats exhaustion as an individual wellness problem — a meditation app stipend, a "self-care" breakout at the annual retreat, a years-of-service pin that mostly proves someone stayed. None of that touches the system extracting capacity from your best people. Here's the honest question worth sitting with: where's the gap between what your cabinet is capable of collectively — and what interference is quietly costing you before anyone's named it? The Burnout Force names seven structural forces working against every leadership team right now. Here are the first four: 🔗 Fragmentation — the silo tax that makes good work disappear between offices that never talk to each other. 🔋 Exhaustion — the parking brake we just walked through. 🫥 Isolation — the way good people stop reaching out once asking for help gets expensive enough. 🍽️ Scarcity — the empty table. Stanford's Sendhil Mullainathan found a scarcity mindset alone costs the cognitive equivalent of thirteen IQ points — the tax is neurological, not emotional. None of these are personality problems. They're systems. Systems don't care who's standing in them. Three more wait past the ones we named live — comparison, noise, and drift — each with its own research trail, each just as invisible until it's named. Across our own research — 987 leadership teams, 43 states — 82% report feeling marginalized or undervalued. MIT's Human Dynamics Lab found fragmented teams lose up to 60% of their energy to coordination drag. If that gap doesn't close on its own over the next two years, what does it actually cost you — not in dollars, in the people you can't afford to lose? The keynote walks your cabinet live through the first four forces — and the wound underneath each — so your team names the pattern themselves, before anyone pitches them anything. The book carries all seven, cover to cover. Two ways in this week: an hour with the keynote, or an afternoon with the book. higherperformancegroup.com/burnout-force Found something here worth passing on?  → Repost with the name of the person on your team who needs a brake audit, not a pep talk → Tag the leader you've watched run without one → Comment with what redlining actually cost your institution — the real number, not the polished one Follow DR. JOE HILL and Higher Performance Group for weekly Team Intelligence insights.
Show More