The Ownership Illusion
Jenna pressed the ‘send’ key, the adrenaline still humming from the standing ovation she’d just received for accepting the “full ownership” of Project Chimera. She felt the sudden, sharp pain of having bitten the side of her tongue hard, an involuntary reaction to the celebratory champagne-or perhaps just the reflex of a body bracing for impact after a corporate cheerleading session.
She looked at the email confirmation, the subject line screaming: Jenna O. – Project Chimera Owner. It felt less like ownership and more like being handed the title deed to a condemned house, complete with a massive, invisible liability waiver.
The Liability vs. Authority Gap:
Accountable for a potential $2,344,444 loss, yet unable to approve a necessary software license costing over $44 without four VP sign-offs. The button that cost 14.4% in conversions was untouchable due to “Branding Consistency.”
This is not empowerment. This is liability transfer dressed up in the language of motivation and self-determination. It is the sophisticated corporate equivalent of handing someone a shovel, blindfolding them, telling them to dig a precise 44-foot tunnel to China, and then punishing them when they emerge covered in mud, having hit bedrock four separate times.
Structural Gaslighting
This contradiction-the granting of absolute accountability divorced from the necessary authority, budget, or personnel control-is one of the fastest ways to breed corrosive organizational cynicism. It’s a form of structural gaslighting: we tell you that you are capable and responsible for leading, but we secretly ensure you do not possess the tools required for success.
The Cost of Paralyzed Systems
I’ve seen this pattern repeat itself endlessly, and I have participated in it myself, both as victim and perpetrator. My most embarrassing failure involved an internal communications overhaul. I was given the mandate to “revolutionize engagement,” but when I tried to reallocate internal marketing funds-a grand total of $4,444-away from useless, glossy brochures and toward interactive workshops, the CFO vetoed it instantly, citing a mandated $4,000,000 spend on print collateral that year.
I spent three months feeling like a fraud, holding weekly meetings about empowerment while knowing I had none myself. That’s how deep the compulsion goes: we self-fund the gaps created by management paralysis.
High Consequence
Instant Action
Where Control Must Equal Consequence
But there are places, specific professions, where this misalignment cannot be tolerated, where the risk of failure is immediate and catastrophic. Consider roles where control must equal consequence. If a security guard or an emergency responder is ’empowered’ to secure a perimeter but needs six sign-offs to move a cone or call for backup, the whole system collapses in the face of the first real crisis.
Functional authority must be instantaneous, trained, and backed by trust. This is why organizations like The Fast Fire Watch Company operate on models where the delegated individual possesses clear, documented authority that matches their mandate.
The Trauma Specialist Paradox
Sarah A., a grief counselor, was accountable for client health but forbidden from adjusting the inputs needed for healing-like changing her room layout or selecting a better-suited external therapist outside the mandated network of four providers.
Management wants credit for successful outcomes (healed employees) without assuming the risk of granting necessary control (budget freedom, deviation from rigid policy).
Grant Authority Upfront
Message: We trust your judgment.
Demand Accountability First
Message: Be the scapegoat.
The Path Out: Demanding Strategic Authority
This entire scenario is underpinned by a deep-seated institutional distrust. If you truly trusted your Project Owner, you would grant them the full scope of authority commensurate with the risk you are asking them to manage. If you don’t grant the authority, the unspoken message is clear: we don’t trust your judgment, but we absolutely trust your ability to be the scapegoat.
Demand written delegation for budget, personnel, and policy deviation limits before proceeding.
The fundamental disconnect is that accountability is a passive consequence, but authority is an active grant. When organizations reverse this order-demanding accountability first while delaying or denying authority-they successfully externalize systemic risk onto the individual contributor.
Otherwise, we are simply accepting the role of the responsible failure. And what good is being an owner if you can’t even change the color of the bruised plum that is choking the life out of your project?