Both, and which one carries more of the work depends on where the constraint actually sits.
If the constraint is your own read, the work is on you, and pushing it down to your leads will produce activity without change. If the constraint is in the distance between what you designed and what actually runs on the stage, then no amount of work on you closes it, because the gap lives in the hands of the people executing.
What Working With Your Leads Looks Like #
Development, not instruction. The framework gets into the hands of the people who run shifts, and they start reading their own operation with it — the stage read, the kitchen read, the cast read, the numbers read. When it lands, you stop being the only person in the building who can name what is happening, which is the single biggest capacity unlock most operators ever get.
I also name who in your organization runs each piece of the architecture. A design with no named owner is a document, and documents do not run shifts.
What This Is Not #
It is not cast-level training. That is a different product with a different purpose, and it is not what this work is. I develop the people who own outcomes.
One more thing worth saying plainly: leadership development does not survive an operator who will not change his own read. If the work lands with your leads and stalls with you, they will see it before I do, and what you will have built is a bench that can name the problem and cannot act on it. That is worse than where you started.
The coaching door: Growth.
