There’s no algorithm to apply, no flow chart to follow, no equation to run to get a perfect hit rate on the decision to develop or replace. The best executives care deeply about their people, and that’s why they often wait too long. But they also improve their judgment over time.

Which brings us to a crucial question: How do you know when you’ve crossed the demarcation line, when it’s time to make the shift from “develop” to “replace” for a key seat? I’ve come to believe the best approach is to ask considered questions and let those questions guide you to an answer. I’ve distilled years of reflection down to seven questions that I offer here to stimulate your thinking when you face the “develop or replace” conundrum. To be clear, these aren’t a prescription; you might come up with only one concern and decide to replace, or you might come up with six concerns and decide to develop.

• Are you beginning to lose other people by keeping this person in the seat?

The best people want to work with the best people, and if they sense chronic tolerance for mediocre performance in key seats, they might begin to vote with their feet. Worse, if you tolerate high-performing people who behave contrary to your stated core values, the true believers will begin to lose heart and become cynical, and some will leave. There’s no better way to destroy a great culture than to retain people in key seats who fail to perform or run roughshod over the company’s core values. roughshod over the company’s core values.

• Do you have a values problem, a will problem, or a skills problem?

If someone in a key seat behaves consistently or flagrantly contrary to the core values of the enterprise, the best leaders replace them. If someone passionately embraces the core values of the enterprise and also has the indomitable will to do whatever it takes to master his or her seat, you can be more patient before reaching a decision to replace them in that seat. The hardest call comes with the question of will. Does the person lack (or has the person lost) the will to develop to meet the demands of the seat? If not, can you ignite their will?...

• What’s the person’s relationship to the window and the mirror?

The right people in key seats display window-and-mirror maturity. When things go well, the right people point out the window, giving credit to factors other than themselves; they shine a light on other people who contributed to the success and take little credit themselves. And when things go awry, they don’t blame circumstances or other people for setbacks and failures; they point in the mirror and say, “I am responsible.” People who look in the mirror—who always ask, “What could I have done better? What did I miss?”—will grow. People who always point out the window to explain away problems or affix blame elsewhere will be stunted in their growth.

• Does the person see work as a job or a responsibility?

The right people in key seats understand that they don’t have “jobs”; they have responsibilities. They grasp the difference between their task list and their true responsibilities. A great doctor doesn’t merely have the “job” of performing procedures but embraces responsibility for the health of the patient… Every person in a key seat has a broader responsibility than a task list, and the right people never hide behind “I got the tasks done” as an excuse for failing to deliver on the broader responsibility.

• Has your confidence in the person gone up or down in the past year?

Just as a company’s stock price rises or falls as investors gain or lose confidence in the company’s growth and performance, confidence in a person also rises or falls based on his or her growth and performance. The critical variable is the trajectory of that confidence over time. When someone says, “Got it!” do you increasingly set your worries aside or do you increasingly feel the need to follow up?”

• Do you have a bus problem or a seat problem?

Sometimes you might have a right person on the bus but in the wrong seat. You might have put the person in a seat misaligned with his or her capabilities or temperament. Or perhaps—and this happens frequently in high-growth companies—the demands of a seat might have grown to outstrip the capabilities of the person in that seat.

• How would you feel if the person quit?

If secretly relieved, then you might have already concluded that he or she is a wrong person on the bus. If genuinely distraught, then you might well believe that he or she is still a right person on the bus.

This wasn’t a moment to stand back and let the team figure out what to do on their own. I needed to make sure people knew exactly what they were working on and had the tools to find solutions as fast as possible. I had to command and control.

In a crisis, everyone has their job:

• If you’re an individual contributor, you need to take your marching orders and start marching. Do your core job while continuing to look for and suggest other options to solve the issue. Try not to speculate or gossip. If you have concerns or suspicions, report them up the chain, then get back to work.

• If you’re a manager, you need to relay information from leadership without overwhelming or distracting your team. Check in with the team a couple of times a day—try not to harass them more than that (hourly messages just freak everyone out). You need to be there for them, not just to ensure that the work is getting done, but also to make sure they’re okay. You’re the first line of defense against burnout. The pressure, stress, red-eyes, and bad food in the middle of the night will get to people. You may need to give everyone a break—even during a crisis. Remember to set expectations and limits. You’ll probably have to work over the weekend. Okay. That happens. But tell your team what the plan is: we’ll work hard on Saturday but everyone needs to get out of the office at 5 p.m. and then we’ll have a check-in on Sunday night.

• If you’re the leader of a broader group or company, you probably spent years of your life unlearning the tendencies of micromanagement. Well, if you’re in a crisis then it’s time to be a micromanager again.

You’ll need to dig into the details—all the details. But you can’t make every decision on your own or fix everything single-handedly. You have experts, so you’ll need to delegate to them. Agree on the microsteps that need to be taken, but allow them to take those steps without you. Schedule check-ins in the morning and at the end of the day and instead of getting the usual weekly or biweekly reports from your team, start going to their daily meetings. You have to be in there, listening, asking questions, and getting necessary information in real time. You might have to be the conduit of that information to the rest of the company, to investors or reporters or whoever else is watching this situation like a hawk. You need to be able to answer their questions. You need to keep up their confidence that you’re getting somewhere.

Clear your calendar of nonessential meetings. Focus entirely on fixing the problem. And don’t let yourself get knocked off balance— you’re human. Don’t make things worse by losing your mind and ignoring the things you need to keep your head on straight. That might be exercising or resting or having dinner with your family or lying on the floor under your desk for ten minutes quietly singing show tunes. Whatever you need. And remember, your team is human, too—people need to go home. They need to sleep. They need to eat. And they need to feel like things are getting better.

So, let’s face facts.

BUREAUCRACY IS FAMILIAR. You won’t have the courage to take on bureaucracy unless you believe there are alternatives. We must search out organizations that have successfully defied management orthodoxy.

BUREAUCRACY IS COMPLEX AND SYSTEMIC. Fragmented, half-hearted attempts won’t cut it. We need to replace the entire edifice of bureaucracy—one stone at a time.

BUREAUCRACY IS WELL DEFENDED. There will be resistance, so management rebels need to join forces. You have to build a grassroots movement that can overwhelm or route around the defenders of the status quo.

BUREAUCRACY SERVES A PURPOSE, HOWEVER POORLY. The goal is to carefully dismantle bureaucracy, not simply blow it up. You need a change strategy that is both audacious and prudent.

BUREAUCRACY IS SELF-REPLICATING. There will be no easy victories. Bureaucrats will fight back. To persevere, you’ll need a sense of purpose that’s as unshakable as the path is arduous.

CONTRARIAN THINKING. If a problem’s been around for a while, it probably can’t be cracked with conventional thinking. Seek out the positive deviants, like Nucor and Haier. Borrow ideas from other domains, like biology, startups, and crowdsourcing. Rigorously challenge your deepest assumptions. Do all this, and you’ll increase the odds of finding a novel solution.

COMPASSION. People aren’t merely skeptical; they’re cynical—and with good reason. Everyone’s fighting their own corner and looking out for their own interests. When asked to help, most people will ask, “What’s in it for me?” To jump this hurdle, you have to put others first. When colleagues see you working to understand their needs, when you help them craft their experiments, and ensure they get the credit, they’ll start to trust you. When your compassion shines through, people will take risks with you and pick you up when you fall.

CONNECTIONS. Building a community is the most important thing an activist can do. This is the ultimate multiplier of individual effort. Employees eager to try something new often make the mistake of asking their boss for permission. Usually they get shot down, or win only grudging support. This isn’t entirely the manager’s fault. A priori, it’s hard to know whether an underdeveloped idea is brilliant or batty. Since great ideas are rare, the default setting for most managers is to say no. So don’t go up, go out. Talk to your peers. Find a few colleagues who will help you build and run an experiment. It’s easy for a manager to say no to a lone supplicant, but much harder to turn aside a small band of partisans who are passionate about making things better and have already made a start.

Lessons for Leaders to Live By:

1. Focus on the Journey, Not the Destination

“The journey is the reward” is ancient Chinese wisdom that, thanks perhaps to Steve Jobs’s affection for it, you’ve probably heard before...

2. Link Little Things to Big Things...

3. Put “Grease People” and “Gunk People” in the Right Places ...

Even if your organization is well designed in other ways, friction problems will fester and flare up if the right people aren’t in the right roles. To avert such troubles, skilled leaders work to put “grease people” in places where friction ought to be low and “gunk people” in places where friction ought to be high. Research on personality and culture reveal differences in responses to rules, risk, and monitoring that can help you figure out where people (including you) fall on our grease-gunk continuum:

Grease People

Gunk People

Rules: “Unbureaucratic personalities” or “Chaos Muppets” who ignore, bend, defy, and remove rules, norms, and traditions.

Rules: “Bureaucratic personalities” or “Order Muppets” who follow, create, and enforce rules, norms, and traditions.

Risk: Comfortable with taking chances, focus on the upside of trying new things. Encourage others to take risky actions.

Risk: Uncomfortable with taking chances, focus on what can go wrong, hesitate to try new things. Discourage others from taking risky actions.

Monitoring: Scrutinize others lightly. Quick to trust others and assume good intent. Downplay and encourage errors, setbacks, and rule breaking.

Monitoring: Scrutinize others closely. Wary about trusting others and assume bad intent. Call out and punish errors, setbacks, and rule breaking.

So, if your organization is plagued by vigilantes who make you jump through hoops akin to “Say, ‘I am filthy,’ five times” consider how they are treated. Are they ignored or underappreciated? If so, firing them isn’t the answer; their replacements will probably act the same way. Try what Larry’s boss did and show them some respect...

4. The Best Friction Fixers Are Friction Shifters...

Leading friction shifting in your team or organization also requires sending clear signals that it’s time for more or less friction, making sure your intentions are understood and shape behavior. You may believe that others hear your message, but as chapter 4 shows, people, especially those with a lot of power, often have a dim understanding of how others interpret and respond to their decisions, orders, and suggestions. Organizations muddy the waters further by pummeling people with confusing, conflicting, and excessive information—making it tough to distinguish “signal” from “noise.” That means, to trigger friction shifting, a leader’s job is to craft simple and crisp signals that it’s time to work in grease or gunk mode...

Paul told us, when you take charge of a troubled company, “you have to assess the situation rather than act quickly. Everyone wants you to do something, so the first thing you say, very calmly, is, ‘We’re not going to do anything today.’” During his first months on the job, Paul hit the brakes and asked “each of the top eighty people in the company to write a two-page document that answered, first, ‘Who are you? What are you responsible for?’ And then: ‘What issues do you believe are most pressing? What would you do if you were me?’” After speaking to all eighty and figuring out what was broken, who the best (and worst) people were, and what was required to fix BHP, Paul let his charges know that it was time to shift gears and start those changes, which, in just a few years, turned the company around...

5. Friction Fixing Is Fueled by Civility, Caring, and Love

A related leadership lesson we’ve implied is that friction fixing is accelerated by shared civility, caring, and love. When such emotions pervade an organization, people form stronger bonds, develop trust, focus on the best qualities of colleagues and customers, and devote more energy to helping others and less to satisfying their selfish needs. Civility, caring, and love reflect a rough hierarchy of collective compassion. As Christine Porath documents in Mastering Civility, when organizations are plagued with rudeness, it causes employee commitment, cooperation, and coordination to plummet...

As Peter Drucker said, “It is a law of nature that two moving bodies in contact with each other create friction.” But civility can help bring out the best in people because, as Drucker put it, “manners are the lubricating oil of an organization.” When employees—and the customers and citizens they serve—treat one another with outward respect, it helps everyone avoid open warfare and backstabbing, resolve (or at least tolerate) tensions, and be more amenable to collaboration. Christine’s research confirms that when civility is pervasive, employees get more done; they go the extra mile to help others and enjoy better physical and mental health. Christine dissects how leaders build civil cultures by modeling desired behaviors, hiring, rewarding, and promoting people for civility, and developing programs that spread respectful actions. She shows how seemingly small interventions pack a wallop. Like the upswing in civility at Ochsner Health in Louisiana. It was sparked partly by the “Ochsner 10/5 way,” which means if an employee is within ten feet of a colleague or patient, the employee is expected to make eye contact and smile. And to say hello if the employee is within five feet. Every organization (and family) would be more civil if we all followed Christine’s advice when we encounter a difficult person: “Before shutting down, saying no, or displaying frustration, try to appreciate where the other person is. You might even go one step further and ask yourself, How can I help them?” Caring is a more powerful form of collective compassion than civility. It entails deeper empathy and concern than surface civil behavior. In caring cultures, people feel obligated to help others avoid and overcome obstacles —they expect one another to take that extra step Christine suggested.