The Problem With Constant Availability

Imagine if you had a boss who was constantly available.

Whenever a problem arose for you at work, he or she always showed up to help.

Some would find that pleasant.

Some would even call it great leadership.

But it’s not.

Because your respect for that leader would slowly deteriorate over time.

Constant availability signals that they have nothing more pressing to attend to than your problems.

And even if you genuinely like them, you will subconsciously begin to perceive their time and attention as cheap. It's human nature.

The subconscious reason someone might not deeply respect a leader who constantly helps and attends is this:

If a leader always deals with things within their capacity, meaning the same problems their followers are struggling with, but never stretches beyond it by dedicating time and energy towards themselves, it signals that the leader is not growing beyond the level of the people they are supposed to be leading.

If I simplify all of this, let me ask you this question.

Whose help would you most appreciate?

The busy but most competent person in the world, or someone half decent who can give you all of their time?

Of course it is the busy and competent one.

Because in order for that person to have become competent, being busy is a prerequisite.

How else could that person have grown?

You should help when it is needed, of course, but not just because it's wanted.

Always being available, never truly taking the big risk, constantly helping others at the expense of your own growth, might limit your potential to be respected by your followers and by extension limit the desire for improvement in those around you.

And in the end, everyone gets damaged.