Why the "fewer than 10 direct reports" rule is wrong

This discussion about the max or min number of direct reports has always been around. Rajeev formulates it well below and with good examples, some of which I experienced myself while working at NSN up and close. So the definitely answer to the question: it depends. And for the rest? Build trust within the team and within the organization, cut silos, move fast — and keep the company laser-focused on customers and your core business.

Great Debate(I think) Rajiv Suri Sir You're absolutely right that the 'magic number' is a myth. Context and leadership intent trump textbook formulas every time. But this makes me wonder about the next constraint: the 'Cognitive Span of Control.' A new wave of thought suggests it's not about the number of reports, but the diversity of them. Can one leader effectively context-switch between 16 completely different domains (e.g., Marketing, Legal, R&D, Supply Chain) without becoming a bottleneck? The emerging trend isn't about capping reports at 7 or 10. It's about designing the leader's team to minimize cognitive load. This might mean grouping similar functions under a 'Chief of Staff' or creating 'Pods' that interface with the CEO as one unit. Your point on 1:1s and trust is the key that makes any structure work. But is there a point where even the best leader's bandwidth is stretched too thin for the variety of problems? What are your thoughts and (Off course All's) on this shift from counting heads to managing cognitive load?

In working with dozens of growing businesses, I've realized that one pattern shows up again and again: there’s always a pivotal moment when a company needs to expand its leadership bench — but hesitation sets in.  Should we bring in a Sr. Manager, Director, or VP now? Do we wait?  For years, this debate has played out hundreds of times across industries. When Is the Right Time to Hire a Leader? In the last five years, one solution has gained more and more traction: fractional leadership. What Fractional Leadership Really Means Not every business needs a full-time VP.  But every team needs leadership. Fractional leadership isn’t about “renting” an executive. It’s about delivering the right level of guidance, structure, and accountability — exactly when it matters most. For Sales, BDR, and Ops teams, this can look like: Designing scalable playbooks and processes Coaching frontline managers to lead with clarity and confidence Driving consistency in pipeline reviews for accurate forecasts Turning raw data into actionable dashboards & KPIs Leadership, Right-Sized for Growth A fractional leader brings analysis, strategy, and execution — without the overhead of a full-time hire. We step in to: - Bridge the gap when a leader exits - Support Talent Acquisition in finding the right long-term candidate - Onboard and coach new leaders for a smooth, effective transition The outcome? Embedded best practices, sharper accountability, and renewed team capacity to focus on what truly matters: growth. Flexible Engagement: One Month to Multiple Quarters No two businesses grow the same way. That’s why fractional leadership is designed to flex with your stage and needs. Engagements can be: - Short-term: for rapid turnarounds - Medium-term: to stabilize operations - Long-term: as a bridge to permanent leadership Outsourcing Leadership — With One Crucial Difference Think of it as outsourcing leadership, but with one key distinction: A fractional leader doesn’t sit on the sidelines. We embed into your organization, join the leadership table, and take ownership of outcomes. This isn’t just advice. This is leadership, right-sized for your stage. If your business is at a crossroads — scaling fast, filling a gap, or preparing for the next stage of growth — let’s start with a conversation. Reach out to explore whether fractional leadership is the right fit for your team.   

Leaders Without a Chief of Staff Are Playing Business on Hard Mode.   Running a modern organization is complex — shifting priorities, competing demands, limited time. Without a Chief of Staff or Strategy & Ops partner, leaders spend more time firefighting than driving impact.   Here’s the truth: this role doesn’t slow anything down — it multiplies organizational and leadership effectiveness.   5 Misconceptions About Chief of Staff / Strategy & Ops Roles (and the reality behind them):   1️⃣ “They’re glorified assistants.” ➡️ Reality: They’re strategic advisors and operators, enabling leaders to focus on vision while they align people, projects, and priorities. 🎯 🧠   2️⃣ “The role is temporary or a dead-end.” ➡️ Reality: It’s a career accelerator. Chiefs of Staff often move into VP, GM, COO, or enterprise strategy roles — because they gain cross-functional exposure few roles provide. 🚀 📈   3️⃣ “They only run side projects.” ➡️ Reality: They bridge the gap between strategy and execution. Whether it’s OKR alignment, business reviews, or critical initiatives, they ensure plans turn into measurable outcomes. 🧩♟️   4️⃣ “They slow things down.” ➡️ Reality: They remove friction — creating clarity, connecting teams, and driving decisions faster with better context. ⚡ 🔍   5️⃣ “They’re an overhead cost.” ➡️ Reality: They improve efficiency for leaders by freeing up time to focus on their mandate, priorities, and high-value work. Chiefs of Staff create leverage that compounds across the organization. 🛠️ ⏱️   👉 At their best, Chiefs of Staff are the connective tissue of the business: Translating strategy into action Building trust across teams Identifying blind spots before they become risks Driving efficiency, alignment, and execution at scale   This isn’t about titles. It’s about impact.   💬 Chime in: what’s the biggest misconception or value add you’ve seen about this role? https://lnkd.in/gx4rPJmH

Every leader comes with their own operating system. Some zoom into every detail. Others float in the clouds with a grand vision. 👉 The professionals who thrive aren’t the ones who resist these differences. They’re the ones who decode and adapt—without losing their own voice. 🔍 Why This Matters for Your Career Your relationship with your boss often decides your trajectory more than your KPIs. Yes, performance matters. But perception and alignment matter just as much. A micromanager may test your patience, but if you learn to anticipate their concerns, you reduce friction and build trust. A visionary leader may seem disconnected, but if you translate their big ideas into actionable steps, you become indispensable. The reality? You don’t get to choose your leader’s style. But you do get to choose your response. ⚡ The Future-Focused Playbook for Managing Up 1️⃣ Decode the Style Is your leader detail-obsessed? Or outcome-obsessed? Observe their patterns before reacting. 2️⃣ Adapt, Don’t Abandon Adaptation doesn’t mean losing yourself. It means aligning with their style while still delivering your unique value. 3️⃣ Bridge the Gap Micromanagers crave control → Give proactive updates. Visionaries crave clarity → Turn their abstract ideas into tangible next steps. 4️⃣ Protect Your Identity Adaptation is strategy, not surrender. Keep your professional values intact while flexing your approach. 5️⃣ Elevate the Relationship Managing up isn’t manipulation. It’s partnership. You help your leader succeed, and in return, your growth accelerates. 🌍 The Bigger Truth Future-focused professionals know: 👉 Promotions don’t always go to the most talented. They go to those who create trust and alignment at every level of leadership. When you master the art of managing up—whether with a micromanager or a visionary—you don’t just survive workplace politics. You position yourself as a strategic asset no leader can afford to ignore. 💡 Over to You: Which leadership style do you find harder to navigate—micromanagers or visionaries? And how have you learned to adapt? 👇 Share your experiences in the comments. Someone in your network needs to hear your story today. 🔁 If this post resonates, hit Repost so more professionals can learn the hidden career skill of managing up. — ✍️ Amiet Mukhopadhyay

Decision-Making in Critical Times: Key Elements for Finding the Right Solutions In business and in life, there are moments when decisions cannot wait. These critical times test not only our ability to analyze but also our capacity to stay calm, think strategically, and move forward with conviction. The difference between success and failure often comes down to how leaders approach decision-making under pressure. 1. Clarity of the Problem When stress levels rise, it’s easy to get lost in noise. The first step is defining the problem with precision. Ask yourself: What exactly is at stake? What outcome do I want to achieve? Clarity helps separate the urgent from the irrelevant and prevents wasted effort. 2. Gathering Reliable Information Speed matters, but so does accuracy. In critical times, leaders must rely on trusted data and insights rather than assumptions. This means identifying credible sources, consulting key stakeholders quickly, and validating information before acting. 3. Balancing Logic and Intuition Logic provides structure, while intuition adds perspective from experience. In high-pressure moments, the best solutions often come from a balance between data-driven analysis and gut instinct. Leaders should not ignore either side of this equation. 4. Evaluating Risks and Trade-Offs Every decision has consequences. A strong leader evaluates risks realistically—acknowledging what could go wrong, but also recognizing the opportunities. The key is not eliminating risk, but managing it in alignment with long-term goals. 5. Staying Calm and Decisive Panic is contagious; so is calm. In uncertain times, people look to leaders for direction. Even an imperfect decision made with clarity and confidence can inspire trust and momentum. Indecision, on the other hand, often leads to greater losses. 6. Engaging the Right People Critical decisions rarely belong to one person alone. Building a circle of trusted advisors, experts, or team members ensures diverse perspectives and reduces blind spots. Collaborative problem-solving can reveal solutions that might otherwise be overlooked. 7. Commitment and Adaptability Once a decision is made, commitment is essential. However, adaptability is equally important. Circumstances can change rapidly, and strong leaders remain open to adjusting course when new information emerges.

Are you a “hands-on leader” or just another micromanager? Let’s explore the scenario: performance is down. Your team tells you it’s “just seasonality.” What do you do? The obvious options: – Trust them blindly – Dive into accounts yourself and try to fix it If you’re managing a multi-million € budget, neither works. - You can’t waste shareholder money on autopilot. - And you can’t scale if you’re micro-managing every campaign. The real job of a growth leader is harder: Educating your team to operate at your standards, without your constant scrutiny. That means: - Giving them context (macro + micro) - Sharing your decision frameworks - Embedding commercial thinking (not just channel metrics) - Aligning them with company strategy and market shifts And yes, sometimes it means asking very detailed questions. Not to take over, but to recalibrate how they think. Being “hands-on” doesn’t mean alienating your team with micromanagement. It means building a team that performs at your level even when you’re not in the room. That’s the difference between managing channels and leading growth.

Why Fractional Leadership is a Game-Changer Many mid-sized and growing companies reach a stage where the leadership bench simply isn’t enough. Growth outpaces structure, opportunities appear, and challenges emerge that require executive-level guidance. But hiring a full-time C-suite leader often feels premature—or too costly. That’s where fractional leadership comes in. Fractional executives—CEOs, CFOs, COOs, CMOs—step in part-time or on a project basis to provide senior-level expertise exactly when it’s needed. They aren’t “consultants” who just advise; they lead, execute, and deliver outcomes. Here’s why this model has become a game-changer: 🔹 Flexibility – Companies get the right expertise for the right period of time—10 hours a week or six months—without long-term commitments. 🔹 Cost-Effectiveness – High-level leadership at a fraction of the cost of a permanent executive. 🔹 Immediate Impact – Fractional leaders are brought in with a clear mandate and can hit the ground running. 🔹 Reduced Risk – Organizations can test executive capacity before making a permanent hire. Example: A growing tech services firm we observed had stalled because the CEO was wearing too many hats. By bringing in a fractional COO, operations were streamlined, the CEO refocused on customers, and sales quickly rebounded. Within a year, the company was healthy enough to make a full-time executive hire—seamlessly transitioning from fractional to permanent leadership. Fractional leadership isn’t about filling gaps—it’s about unlocking growth at the right time. For many organizations, it serves as a bridge strategy: stabilize now, scale smartly, and then decide whether a permanent hire is the right move. 💡 Question for you: If your company hit a growth barrier tomorrow, would fractional leadership give you the flexibility to move forward—or would you feel stuck until you could justify a full-time executive hire?

Over the years, I’ve had the privilege of watching many business owners navigate tough decisions. A pattern emerges: in the early stages, gut instinct often gets leaders moving quickly and decisively. But as businesses grow and the stakes get higher—hiring key executives, entering new markets, or making major investments—that same instinct-only approach can start to create real problems. I’ve seen leaders charge ahead with the first “good deal” that comes across their desk, only to discover hidden costs later. I’ve seen talented teams spin their wheels because the decision criteria weren’t clear from the start. And I’ve watched opportunities slip away simply because assumptions went untested. The leaders who avoid these traps aren’t necessarily smarter or luckier. They’ve learned to combine instinct with structure. They slow down enough to: > Put multiple options on the table instead of clinging to the first one. > Bring the right voices into the conversation—peers, experts, and key people inside their company. > Define what truly matters: alignment with mission, strategy, finances, people, customers, and capacity. > Challenge their own assumptions and ground decisions in facts. > Look hard at trade-offs and opportunity costs. > And, most importantly, make sure someone owns the plan with both accountability and passion. What I’ve noticed is that this process doesn’t remove instinct—it refines it. It turns gut feelings into informed choices that stand up under pressure and deliver long-term results. That’s what this blog is all about: moving beyond gut decisions and building a framework that helps business owners make choices with greater confidence and clarity. Please see the comments section for a link to the full blog.