Credit to Co-Author Sarah Skillman
In a world awash with tools, frameworks, and automation, it’s easy to mistake leverage for value. But tools don’t solve problems—people do.
SEAM Insight: As Henri Savall observed, the real cost of dysfunction is invisible—buried in lost potential, misused energy, and human underutilization. Tools may optimize effort, but they cannot activate human energy, which SEAM defines as the greatest untapped resource in organizations.
If your goal is sustainable, meaningful progress in digital product delivery, the conversation must shift from “What technology are we using?” to “Who owns the outcome?”
Ownership, however, is a challenge—not just for individual contributors, but for leadership as well. It demands vulnerability, trust, and the willingness to relinquish control. Many organizations remain stuck in a cycle of comfort and control, mistaking process expansion and tooling as progress, when in fact they are often symptoms of fear avoidance.
Value Lives in People, Not Tools
Let’s start with a simple truth: Tools are force multipliers, not force creators.
SEAM Premise: Dysfunctions in organizations stem from poor alignment between structures and people.
Implementing tools without addressing human systems only increases entropy. When you invest in tools before people, you automate and scale dysfunction. We’ve seen this in failed agile transformations, platform overhauls, and digital strategy reboots.
Tools level the playing field. Ownership raises the ceiling. But ownership requires discomfort. Comfort in an org often means nobody is challenging assumptions. Tools become the illusion of control.
The Trust → Ownership → Value Flywheel
Drawing from The Culture Code and SEAM alike, cultures of innovation and sustainable performance emerge when three layers align:
- Psychological Safety
- Belonging Cues
- Purpose Alignment
SEAM Adds: Sustainable performance emerges when trust, dialogue, and co-responsibility are cultivated across all levels.
Ownership is not task assignment—it’s delegation of outcomes. And outcomes require agency.
“A person will take responsibility only for what they believe they influence.” — Henri Savall
The Case for Ownership
A. Strategic Value
- Empowers decentralized, timely decisions
- Unlocks innovation from every level
- Avoids costly over-control
B. Operational Risk Without Ownership
- Slowdowns due to excessive oversight
- Diluted accountability
- High attrition and disengagement
C. Cultural Benefit
- Strengthens mutual trust and collective learning
- Builds a high-energy organization, as defined by SEAM
SEAM Insight: Hidden costs (e.g., absenteeism, waste, time misuse) are signals—not failures—of a system failing to cultivate trust and autonomy.
You Don’t Need to Know It All
Perspective matters more than pedigree. Leaders must create systems where others own the result, even if they approach it differently. This is the shift from control to trust.
SEAM Practice: Dialogic engagement—involving people in the analysis, diagnosis, and co-design of solutions—is the key to co-responsibility.
“Collaboration isn’t consensus—it’s co-responsibility.”
The Risk of Not Owning
If no one owns the outcome, the business owns the risk.
Symptoms of absent ownership:
- Scope churn
- Process sprawl
- Burnout and turnover
You can spend millions fixing the wrong problem because ownership was never distributed. SEAM frames these symptoms as non-material hidden costs that erode organizational vitality. They often arise when technical systems are prioritized over human systems.
Comfort creates complacency. Complacency delays ownership. Delay leads to risk.
Gen AI Can’t Own the Outcome (Yet)
Gen AI is a powerful tool. It accelerates. It summarizes. It even “reasons.”
But it doesn’t own.
Especially not in regulated, high-risk sectors like finance. In a world where hallucinations are catastrophic and accountability is non-negotiable, Gen AI cannot be trusted with outcomes.
SEAM Warning: Dehumanization through technical fixes leads to disengagement. Tools can reduce complexity—but not human meaning.
We believe in using Gen AI. But we don’t believe it can replace judgment, especially where risk, ethics, and regulatory context define success.
How We Do It: The Human OS
We build product teams like we build software: iteratively, transparently, and with the human in the loop.
Inspired by SEAM, we apply small changes in work design, responsibility, and dialogue to compound into systemic gains.
Our Human OS includes:
- Small, cross-functional squads
- Clear domain ownership
- Flexible frameworks
- Retros with purpose, not just ritual
We invest in people first. Then we build systems that allow them to thrive.
Final Word: People Build the Future
Tools will keep getting better. Gen AI will keep evolving. But trust, agency, and ownership are the differentiators.
Henri Savall called this “economic performance through human potential.”
The best systems are not those that eliminate human judgment—they enhance it.
Ownership is not a liability. It’s the only sustainable insurance policy in a world of constant change.
Key SEAM Sources Referenced
- Savall, H., Zardet, V., & Bonnet, M. (2008). Potential of hidden costs recovery: Toward the sustainability of change management. ISEOR.
- Heorhiadi, A., La Venture, K., & Conbere, J. (2014). The impact of the socio-economic approach to management on workplace health. OD Practitioner.
- Savall, H. (2003). Work and People: An Economic Evaluation of Job-Enrichment. Oxford University Press.
- Heorhiadi, A. (2015). Restoring the soul of business: Sustainability through SEAM. SEAM Institute.
- Conbere, J., Heorhiadi, A., & Savall, H. (2018). Decoding the Socio-Economic Approach to Management. ISEOR/University of St. Thomas.
- Zardet, V. & Savall, H. (2009). Mastering hidden costs and socio-economic performance. Information Age Publishing.