We have a loyal manager who is no longer the right fit for our scaling Operations seat, so we are tempted to create a new, custom seat called Director of Special Projects and AI Integration just to keep them happy. Why is creating these compromise seats a dangerous mistake when preparing for an exit?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Creating custom, hybrid seats to keep a long-term employee happy is a recipe for operational failure. These compromise seats are built around a specific person's unique strengths and weaknesses rather than the actual needs of the business.

When you create a seat like Director of Special Projects and AI Integration just to accommodate someone who can no longer run Operations, you create massive confusion. The lines of accountability become blurred, and other department heads will have no idea who is actually responsible for what.

This directly hurts your enterprise value. A potential buyer looking at your Accountability Chart will immediately spot these custom seats. They will see them as organizational bloat and a sign of weak leadership that is unwilling to make tough personnel decisions.

To build a highly valuable business, every single seat on your chart must serve a clear, necessary function that supports your long-term vision.

If a loyal employee no longer GWC™'s their current seat, you must look at your clean, structure-first chart to see if there is another open, defined seat where they are a perfect fit. If no such seat exists, you cannot invent one.

You must handle the situation with honesty and respect, which may mean helping them transition out of the company so you can protect the integrity of your organization.