Why Ambiguity, Not Apathy, Slows Teams Down

Far too often we wait to make changes, even when the need is clear. Inaction is rarely the result of laziness or resistance. More frequently, it's the result of ambiguity. When leaders fail to define who owns what, even capable teams stagnate. In one department I worked with, a critical initiative stalled for months. Each division assumed another was leading the effort. Once we publicly assigned a project lead, specified deliverables, and posted a visual progress tracker in the break room, things moved quickly. The issue wasn’t technical - it was structural. Ambiguity had created inertia.

This insight aligns with research from the Harvard Kennedy School, which notes that in collaborative organizations, progress often slows not because people disagree, but because no one is empowered to make decisions or take the first step without explicit ownership being established (O’Leary and Vij 2012)¹. Leaders in government settings must combat this by making authority visible. Assigning names to outcomes, especially in cross-functional initiatives, does more than improve accountability - it creates psychological safety. People act more decisively when they know their role is legitimate and expected.

In my current role at Galileo FX, I've applied this principle by introducing a clear ownership framework for our product development sprints. Early on, we experienced delays because it wasn’t clear whether engineering, QA, or product was driving certain deliverables. By instituting a RACI matrix and making each owner's name visible on our internal boards, we saw an immediate uptick in velocity. Team members became more proactive, and handoffs between functions improved. Clarifying ownership didn’t just streamline execution - it unlocked initiative across the board.

Making Progress Visible and Measurable

Once ownership is clear, the next lever is visibility. Performance improves when teams can see progress. In environments where success is defined only at the end of a long process, morale dips and focus drifts. Leaders must break large goals into smaller milestones and make those milestones public. In one city department, we replaced vague monthly updates with a wall-mounted scoreboard showing weekly deliverables, color-coded by status. The change shifted team behavior almost immediately. People began managing their own timelines more aggressively because they understood how their work fit into the whole.

This approach is supported by findings from the Government Finance Officers Association, which recommends using visual management tools like dashboards and performance boards in agency operations to promote team alignment and responsiveness (GFOA 2020)². When individuals can see how their task contributes to a broader goal, they tend to work with more urgency and coordination. Leaders should not rely solely on digital tools either. Physical visibility - whiteboards in shared spaces, charts in hallways - reinforces accountability in a way that email reminders do not.

At Galileo FX, we made progress tracking more tangible by introducing a real-time performance dashboard in our main Slack channel, connected to our project management system. This allowed the entire team to see sprint progress, bug resolution rates, and customer feedback scores at a glance. As a result, we noticed more cross-functional conversations about blockers and faster resolution times. Visualizing progress didn’t just inform - it motivated. The transparency created a healthy sense of momentum and shared responsibility.

Leadership as a Force for Alignment

Leadership perspectives in government settings must shift from being directive to being clarifying. The traditional model of top-down command has limited effectiveness in today’s multidisciplinary environments. Instead, leaders must become facilitators of alignment. This means helping teams understand