“I want us to be uniform about how we handle this,” said the lawyer.

He’s creating an office systems manual. He’s doing it right. He’s got all of his team members on board, and they’re drafting detailed documentation of each step in every process. It’s excruciating, but it’s happening.

Systems are important. They only get developed when the leader presses for their development.

It takes pressure.

People don’t stop what they’re doing and think, “I should document this system.” That just doesn’t happen.

The leader must build support for the idea of systems, advocate for the advantages that come from creating the documentation, and then acknowledge and reward those who contribute. It’s tough work, and it’s time consuming.

What Is the Cost of Developing Systems?

Building systems comes at a steep cost. It’s doesn’t happen without the leader taking time away from an external focus (marketing) and turning inward (systems). The shift of focus can be expensive.

A leader focusing on systems isn’t focusing on marketing. What does that cost the firm? For some, it comes at a cost of millions of dollars in new business lost.

Is it worth it? Totally. The business can’t continue to grow without systems. Of course, it can’t continue to grow without new business either.

Building systems (internal focus) has to be part of a balanced leadership approach with marketing (external focus) continuing to get attention as you move forward. It’s all about finding the right balance.

How to Balance the Internal and External

Be careful finding the right mix. When the leader gets overly internally focused, he gets distracted from (1) communicating the vision and (2) staying focused on external issues/marketing.

For most of us, the path of least resistance is to focus internally. After all, focusing on the internal—the systems and other issues—is important and relatively stress-free. It’s a nice break from the stress of selling all the time. In the long run, however, it can’t be our primary focus. We’ve got to empower others to do the internal work.

Empowering others will involve some letting go. It’s not going to be done our way. They’re going to do things we wouldn’t do. They’re going to allow some flexibility and alternative approaches. They’re going to do it “wrong.”

When the lawyer said, “I want us to be uniform about how we handle this,” he was right. But is that the hill he wants to die on? Does he want to be that involved in the development of that particular system?

It’s all part of the balance. The leader needs to get the ball rolling. He needs to keep it rolling, but he needs to limit his engagement in the details. He needs to stay externally focused instead of fighting for the specifics of each system.

So what if paralegals sign letters one way and the lawyers sign them another? So what if some documents are delivered by courier and some are delivered by overnight delivery service? Are those really the hills you want to die on? Are they worth the fight? Each hill comes at a steep price.

The big picture is about getting the systems developed. The specifics need to be left to the individuals doing the work.

Sure, you’d do it better. You’d be right, and they’d be wrong. But—and this is a big “but”—who cares?

What difference does it make if your objectives get accomplished your way or their way? Ultimately, isn’t it better if the progress comes from them? Isn’t that what leadership is really all about anyway?