Who owns the problem?

Have you ever experienced this?

A problem becomes visible. Maybe a cross-functional process isn't working, decisions take too long, or the same issue keeps appearing in different parts of the organization.

Someone suggests taking a closer look.

And then you hear:

“There is already a project for that.”“We have an initiative looking at this.”“This is covered by the new process.”

And often, all of this is true:

There are projects. There are initiatives. People are working hard to improve things.

And yet, the problem remains.

This makes me wonder whether what we sometimes describe as a lack of ownership might actually be something different.

What if there is plenty of ownership – but mostly local ownership?

Functions own their processes. Teams own their deliverables. Project managers own their projects.

But many of the problems organizations face today don't fit neatly into these structures.

As complexity increases, so do interdependencies. Problems emerge across functions, at interfaces and in the spaces between established responsibilities.

Perhaps complexity is not creating a lack of ownership. It is creating more problems that no longer fit the way we distribute ownership.

When we respond by breaking these problems down into projects, initiatives and functional responsibilities, something interesting can happen:

Every activity has an owner – while nobody remains accountable for whether the original problem is actually being solved.

And that changes the questions we might want to ask.

Instead of:

“What are we already doing about this?”

We could ask:

“What would be different if we had actually solved it?”

And:

“Who is looking across our different activities and making sure we actually get there?”

Maybe we don't always need another initiative.

Sometimes we may simply need someone to keep owning the problem.