Sometimes the answer isn't more people. It's more trust.

How listening to a team helped clear a backlog — and built confidence that lasted through an acquisition.

More help, less progress

When an operation falls behind, adding people can seem like the most obvious solution. More hands should create more capacity. But shortly after I took over a distribution facility in Columbus, Ohio, that assumption wasn't holding up.

The operation had accumulated a backlog during a previous leadership transition. Temporary workers had been brought in to help, yet the backlog wasn't shrinking in the way we needed it to. There was activity, staffing, and effort, but not enough progress.

I spoke with the permanent team about what they were seeing. Their explanation was straightforward: they were spending so much time training and supporting temporary workers that they had less time to do the work they already knew how to perform.

In effect, adding headcount had reduced the productive capacity of some of our most experienced people.

Listening to the team

The team offered a different answer. They believed they could clear the backlog themselves if they could focus on the work and use a limited period of overtime instead of continually training temporary employees.

It was their proposal, not mine. My decision was whether to trust it.

I had the authority to change the staffing approach, and I decided to do so. Rather than removing every temporary worker in a single step, we phased out their assignments over roughly seven to ten days, gradually no longer calling them back for shifts. The permanent team took ownership of the recovery effort, supported by overtime.

Within two weeks of pursuing this approach, the backlog was cleared. We also avoided the continuing expense of temporary staffing and the productivity lost to repeated training.

This was a specific response to a specific operational problem, not a belief that fewer employees or prolonged overtime are always the answer. The point was to listen closely enough to understand what was actually constraining performance.

What happened after the backlog

The more lasting result was the relationship that developed between the team and me.

They had explained a problem honestly, proposed a solution, and been given the opportunity to deliver it. I had accepted responsibility for the staffing decision, and they had taken responsibility for the work. That experience gave us a stronger foundation of mutual confidence.

It mattered when the company was subsequently acquired. Acquisitions can create understandable uncertainty for employees, but the team remained calm and focused, and we maintained continuity through the transition.

Later, I was able to lead the facility from Florida for several weeks without significant operational disruption. The team knew what needed to happen, understood its responsibilities, and didn't need me standing in the building to make every decision.

What stayed with me

I'm grateful to have worked with people who were willing to speak up and take ownership of a difficult situation. The operational result was important, but the experience reinforced something I value even more: leadership isn't always about supplying the answer. Sometimes it's about recognizing that the team already has one and giving them the room to act on it.

Trust is not blind faith. It comes with clear expectations, support, and accountability. People will sometimes succeed and sometimes fail; both experiences can help them grow if they're given genuine responsibility and a chance to learn.

Trust isn't the opposite of accountability. It's what makes ownership possible.

The hardest part of opening a warehouse wasn't the warehouse. →