I Thought There Was a Course Everyone Above Me Had Taken

When I was an analyst, I would watch senior managers and directors talk about strategy, budgets, vendors, and how the business worked. I remember thinking they must have gone through so much training to understand all of that.

It seemed reasonable. Companies invested in technical training. You needed a particular skill, so they sent you to a course or helped you earn a certification. I assumed something similar happened when you became responsible for a team, a budget, or an entire program. I just had not reached that part yet.

When I eventually reached those roles, I discovered there was no comprehensive training waiting for me. There were things to learn from and people to learn from, but no single course that made the business, financial, and people responsibilities fall into place. A lot of my learning came through doing the work, getting things wrong, and dealing with the consequences. Sometimes the lesson arrived as criticism after a decision I had not known how to make in the first place.

Looking back, part of the difficulty started before I ever took the role. I had been trying to understand an entire job through the small part of it I could see.

The part of leadership that reaches you

As an individual contributor, you build your understanding of leadership from the leaders you experience. You see the one-on-ones. The team meetings. The person walking through the office, answering questions, giving direction, or delivering a decision.

You may not see the calibration conversations, financial planning, vendor renewals, or negotiations. You may never see the work of getting different parts of the business to communicate, resolving competing priorities, or making sure information reaches the people who need it.

That is not necessarily a criticism of those leaders. Much of that work happens outside an individual contributor's view, even when it is being done well. But the missing context matters when you are deciding whether leadership is something you want to pursue.

People tell you to look at job descriptions. I did. A lot of them read like dream sheets. Years of experience. A long list of certifications. Exposure to every part of the business. A collection of tools you are apparently supposed to know.

When you are an analyst trying to understand whether you might want to become a director someday, that can be intimidating. You can finish reading every requirement and still have very little idea what that person does all week. So you fill in the gaps. I filled mine with the assumption that, somewhere along the way, somebody would teach me.

You see the outcome, but may miss the tradeoff

Sometimes the part of leadership you see is the disappointment. The tool you asked for is not getting funded. The investment is not coming. The additional person you thought would help carry the workload is not being hired.

You know what those things would have made possible. You are disappointed, and understandably so. What you may not see is what your manager had to choose between.

That new tool might have been traded away to keep an existing one. The additional position might have been given up to protect the people already on the team. Sometimes the work is protecting enough of what you already have so the team can continue doing what is being asked of it. That does not make every disappointing decision the right one. It means the outcome alone may not tell you what the leader was working through.

Compensation is another example. You have a fixed amount of money to distribute across a team. You know the people and their contributions. Sometimes you know their circumstances too.

You want to recognize performance fairly. But giving more in one place can leave less available somewhere else. I have spent a lot of time wrestling with what I believe is right against what I actually have available.

The number somebody receives does not show them that deliberation. From their side, they see the outcome. From mine, I carry the choices that produced it. Knowing that a role includes "budget responsibility" does not prepare you for every decision those two words contain.

The relationship with information changes

Coming up as an analyst, I was used to working through the information myself. If I did not have enough to make a decision, I asked more questions. That instinct stayed with me as my responsibilities grew. What changed was how much of the underlying work I could personally examine.

You become dependent on people who know parts of the problem better than you do. You have to trust them. You also have to ask questions.

What supports this recommendation? What are we assuming? What would make it fail? What happens if we wait?

From the other side of the table, that questioning can feel like opposition. How you conduct the conversation matters. People need room to explain their reasoning, disagree, and acknowledge uncertainty. The purpose is to understand how much weight the recommendation can carry.

At more senior levels, information may have passed through several layers before it reaches the person making the final call. Each layer has made judgments about what matters and what needs explaining. A choice between A, B, and C can represent a substantial amount of work. Its consequences can reach across teams, budgets, livelihoods, and the business.

And there may never be a point where every question is answered. Part of the responsibility is deciding when you know enough to act.

The role also asks something of your life

The visible parts of senior leadership can look appealing. You see the travel, the conference, the speaking invitation, or the dinner with the team. You may not see how long that person has been away from home. You may not see the birthday they missed, the anniversary they rearranged, or the strain of another week away.

The work can be meaningful. They may want to be there, value the opportunity, and believe in what they are doing. The sacrifice can be real at the same time.

Those demands vary by role and organization. They belong in the conversation when someone is deciding what they want their future to look like. Someone can be capable of doing a job and decide that its demands do not fit what matters to them right now. That is an informed choice.

Make the work visible

For some people, the uncertainty surrounding leadership is enough to keep them from exploring it. I have been willing to take those leaps. Over and over again. That willingness is part of how I got to where I am.

But I cannot assume someone else will make the same choice with the same amount of missing information. That is one reason I build career progression paths all the way up to my own tier. I want people to understand the responsibilities along the way, including mine.

I also start weekly meetings by telling the team what I am focused on. The problems I am trying to solve. The areas I am thinking about. Where my attention is going that week. Then I invite their insights, thoughts, and feedback.

It gives them context for my work. It also gives me access to perspectives I might otherwise miss.

We can do the same with decisions. When possible, explain the problem, the constraints, and where you are leaning before making the call. Ask the people who know the work what they see. Where do they agree? Where do they disagree? What have you missed?

You cannot wait for everyone to agree. Sometimes they never will, and the decision is still yours to make. Afterward, walk your team through what you chose, which factors mattered, and why you accepted the tradeoffs.

Over time, people learn which information you need and which assumptions you will question. Their recommendations improve because they understand the decision they are helping you make. That understanding should also leave them comfortable bringing you a conclusion you do not prefer. And someone considering leadership gets to see a part of the job they would otherwise miss: how you work through a difficult choice.

Before you decide whether you want the role

If you are exploring a leadership path, use the job description as a starting point. Then talk to someone doing the work. Ask them to walk through a recent week, including the preparation and follow-up that happened outside meetings.

Three questions can open that conversation:

• What took up your time last week that someone on your team probably would not see?

• Can you walk me through a decision where you could not give everyone what they needed?

• What does this role regularly ask of your time and availability outside the working day?

Then ask what you could observe or help with to understand the work better. An appropriate planning meeting or a bounded assignment can give you something concrete to evaluate.

Consider what attracts you, what you would need to learn, and how the demands fit the life you want. You might decide to pursue the role. You might choose another path or decide the timing is wrong. The point is to make that choice with more context.

If you already lead people, you can help provide it. You do not have to disclose confidential conversations or individual personnel decisions. Explain the responsibilities, the constraints, and the reasoning you can share.

I was willing to walk into the unknown. I want to make it clearer for the next person. By sharing what I have learned, the work people rarely see, and the decisions I have struggled with, I hope to give someone a piece of the map. Enough to better understand what stepping into leadership could mean for them.

But my experience is only one part of it. I cannot do this alone.

We need more leaders willing to make their work visible. Explain the difficult choices. Be honest about the mistakes and sacrifices. Show people what it looks like to treat others well while carrying real responsibility. The way we lead helps shape what someone else believes is possible for their own future.

We each have a piece of the map worth sharing.