Case kit 2: the lead who will not delegate during the crunch

Leans: management track · Laws in tension: Empowerment, Priorities, Sacrifice · Camps: protect the deadline vs force the handover now

This case is currently wired into the deck, guide, and board as case 2. Read the full case text from `case-bank.md`, case 2, out loud at the case slot (about 5 minutes).

To run it in the other slot, or to restore it after a swap: replace the four case slides in `slides/week-5-case-clinic.md` with the slide block below, re-render the deck, and rename the case frame on the activity board with the labels below. The decision sheet in `worksheets.md` works unchanged for every case.

Slide block (Marp)

The slides for this case, on brand and ready to present. Click the deck, then use the arrow keys. Open full screen.

## Case: the lead who will not delegate
    A new team lead absorbs all the critical-path work five weeks before a hard deadline. Two senior engineers do filler work. One is already interviewing.
    
    You sit in the seat of Heba: the most senior engineer left, and the lead's former peer.
    
    You will now hear the full case, one page, 5 minutes. Listen for what has already been tried.
    
    ---
    
    ## Case: the laws in tension
    - Empowerment: "I can do it faster myself" is the anti-law, and this lead is doing exactly that
    - Priorities: absorbing everything means deciding nothing
    - Sacrifice: working every night for the deadline feels like dedication; is it leadership?
    
    Again, three laws, and they pull in different directions.
    
    ---
    
    ## One deadline, both tracks
    Whether you lead a team of reports or lead technical direction without reports, you have held work you should have handed over.
    
    ICs hoard the component only they understand. EMs hoard decisions.
    
    Same fear, same audit.
    
    ---
    
    <!-- _class: activity -->
    ## Activity: prepare your camp
    10 minutes. One camp argues: protect the deadline, fix delegation after go-live. The other camp argues: confront the lead and force the handover now.
    
    Build your opening and your best evidence from the case text.
    
    Challenge: what is the other camp's strongest attack on you?

Board frame labels

• Frame title: Case: the lead who will not delegate
• Camp A zone: Deadline camp. Sub: protect the deadline, fix delegation after. Post your opening and your best evidence, one sticky each.
• Camp B zone: Confrontation camp. Sub: confront the lead and force the handover now. Post your opening and your best evidence, one sticky each.
• Decision zone question: Could you defend your 3 lines face to face with the lead in the case?

Facilitator notes

What has already been tried: one direct conversation as a friend (he agreed and changed nothing), one component handed over and taken back after one decision, and a director's corridor question that Heba dodged.

Cross-examination questions:

• Deadline camp: Nour signs an offer in week three of your five quiet weeks. Was the deadline protected?
• Deadline camp: after go-live, what exactly changes? Name the event that breaks the pattern, because "after the crunch" has no date.
• Confrontation camp: you force redistribution in the riskiest five weeks of the year, and the integration slips. Who pays, and was it worth it?
• Confrontation camp: Heba already tried the direct conversation once. What is different about your version of it?

Debrief: expect the deadline camp to quietly assume Nour stays and the confrontation camp to quietly assume the deadline survives. Name both assumptions out loud; neither is in the case text.

← Case bank Facilitator guide