If everything keeps landing on you, leadership has nowhere else to go

In my last post, I wrote about something I keep seeing across nonprofits.

Everything ends up sitting with the CEO.

Not because people aren’t capable.
But because the model underneath the organisation isn’t designed for the mahi it’s trying to do.

I’ve had a lot of messages since then from people saying:

“I’ve seen this dynamic firsthand, and I couldn’t agree more.”
“You are absolutely right Rochelle - this can be such an area of challenge, especially for our many volunteer governors.”

So I want to take this one step further.

If everything keeps landing with one person, it’s not just about workload.

It means leadership has nowhere else to go.

And that’s the part we don’t always name.

Because even in small teams, even in stretched organisations:

there are other people, other relationships, other capabilities already there.

They’re just not set up to hold leadership. We’re working in organisational models that were not designed for us.

Distributed leadership can sound like a big idea.

But in practice, it’s actually more simple.

It’s not:

• everyone doing everything

• removing accountability

• flattening the organisation

It’s this:

Leadership sits in more than one place.

Here’s what I’m starting to see when this shifts — even slightly:

Not everything needs to go up and back down again.

People closest to the work:

• make more of the day-to-day calls

• bring fewer things “up” for approval

Funders, partners, stakeholders:

They’re not all sitting with the CEO.

Other people:

• build and hold relationships

• step into kōrerorero / conversations

• represent the organisation

Not in titles.

But in:

• ownership

• confidence

• clarity about what someone holds

People stop waiting for direction and start stepping into it

Not smaller.

But different.

Less:

• holding everything together

• being across every detail

• being the default

More:

• connecting people

• holding overall direction

• supporting others to lead

This isn’t about removing accountability.

Or pretending constraints don’t exist.

You still need:

• clarity

• financial oversight

• good governance

• strong relationships

But those don’t require one person to carry everything.

Because most nonprofits don’t have:

• large teams

• stable funding

• perfect structures

What they have is:

• committed people

• deep knowledge of their communities

• a lot of pressure sitting in one place

So the question isn’t:

What’s the perfect model?

It’s:

How do we make this work better with what we already have?

This is the mahi I’ve started building into a more practical model.

Not something abstract.

But something that helps nonprofits across Aotearoa New Zealand:

• see where leadership is currently sitting

• identify where it could be shared

• shift decision-making in small, realistic ways

• reduce the load on one person without losing clarity

I’m still shaping this.

Testing it in real organisations.
Learning what works, and what doesn’t.

If you’re reading this and thinking “this is us”, I’d love to hear what it looks like in your organisation.

Where is everything currently sitting?
What’s feeling heavy?

You can reply here or reach out — I’m starting to test this in real contexts, and those conversations are shaping what this becomes.

Share