1.0 Introduction

Here's a conversation I have constantly with technology leaders: they're exhausted, they're productive, they're delivering results, and they can't figure out why they're not advancing.

Usually it sounds like this: "I'm doing everything right. My team performs. Projects come in on time. My boss respects my work. So why am I still here?"

The answer is almost always the same. They've mistaken motion for momentum.

Let me explain what I mean.

Motion is activity. It's busyness. It's the constant state of responding to what's in front of you. You're handling incidents. You're rolling out initiatives. You're solving problems as they emerge. Every day is full. Every week has wins. You can point to tangible work.

Motion feels productive because it is productive. You're generating value. You're keeping systems running. You're the person the organization depends on.

Momentum is different. Momentum is directional movement toward a specific outcome. It's strategic. It's intentional. Each action builds toward something larger. At the end of the quarter, you can point not just to what you accomplished, but to how the organization changed because of it.

Technology leaders live in motion. The work demands it. Systems fail. Priorities shift. Fires need putting out. You're hired to be responsive, to have answers, to keep things stable. For years, you're rewarded for being the person in motion.

But there's a ceiling on motion-based careers.

A technology director whom I know explained it this way.

He had spent most of his early career in motion. He was good at it. His team knew they could count on him. He was the person who solved problems. The person who had answers. The person who was always available. He moved fast. He delivered results. He was indispensable.

And he was completely stuck.

For years, he couldn't figure out why promotions weren't coming. Why peers with similar backgrounds were moving ahead. Why his boss saw him as a reliable executor but not as someone ready for the next level.

Then he watched someone get promoted who wasn't obviously smarter or more technical than me. What she had wasn't better execution. It was different direction.

She asked different questions. She thought about problems differently. While he was in motion—solving problems as they appeared—she was thinking strategically about what problems needed to be solved in the first place. While he was focused on velocity, she was focused on vector.

That's when everything shifted for him.

The distinction between motion and momentum isn't subtle, and it's not optional if you want to advance. Here's what it looks like in practice:

Motion-based leadership: You're in every escalation. You're the decision-maker on technical choices. You're constantly context-switching between problems. Your value is measured by how many things you handle. Your team depends on you.

Momentum-based leadership: You've built systems so your team can handle most escalations. You're making strategic decisions about which problems the organization should solve. You're thinking about where the business is headed and how your work contributes. Your value is measured by the direction you're creating. Your team doesn't need you for everything—they need your vision.

The shift from motion to momentum feels counterintuitive. It feels like you're doing less. It feels irresponsible to step back from some of the work. It feels risky to let go of being indispensable.

But here's what actually happens: when you stop being the person who handles everything, you become the person who shapes direction. You move from being a highly valued individual contributor (even if you have a leadership title) to being an actual leader.

The people I see breaking into C-suite roles have already made this shift. They're not the busiest people in their organizations. They're the most directional.

This is the motion mirage. The belief that more motion leads to more visibility, more opportunities, more advancement. The reality is the opposite. More strategic focus leads to strategic visibility. Which leads to opportunities. Which leads to advancement.

2.0 Breaking Free from the Motion Trap

So how do you make this shift? How do you go from being in constant motion to creating meaningful momentum?

It's not complicated, but it requires discipline.

For one week, track where your time goes. Not at a granular level. Just categories. Strategic thinking. Executing. Responding to emergencies. Meetings. Communications. Look at the breakdown. Most technology leaders discover they're spending 80% of their time on execution and response, maybe 5% on strategy.

That ratio doesn't create momentum. It creates exhaustion.

This is where motion-based leaders get stuck. They believe they're indispensable. Sometimes that's true. More often, it's a story they tell themselves.

I worked with a VP who was in every technical architecture decision. She believed the team needed her expertise. The reality was the team was waiting for her to make decisions instead of developing the decision-making ability themselves.

When she stopped being in every decision and started coaching her team on how to make them, something unexpected happened. The quality of decisions didn't drop. The speed of decisions increased. Her team grew. And suddenly she had 15 hours a week back.

What's the equivalent for you? What responsibility are you holding that's keeping you in motion instead of creating momentum?

Not years. Just 90 days. What needs to be different about how your organization operates in 90 days? What skills does your team need to develop? What conversations need to happen? What decisions need to be made?

Now work backward. What does that require from you? Not execution. Direction.

This is how momentum works. You're not trying to solve everything. You're trying to move the needle on a few things that matter.

Your job is executing. Your role as a leader is creating direction. Most technology leaders spend all their time on their job and almost none on their role.

Your boss doesn't need you to be the best executor. She needs you to be a leader who builds a team of good executors. That distinction changes what deserves your time.

This is the hard part. Motion-based leaders pride themselves on responsiveness. Always available. Always on top of things. Never letting anything slip.

Momentum-based leaders are intentionally behind on some things. They've decided those things don't deserve real-time attention. They batch communications. They have office hours instead of being always available. They let some balls drop because dropping them frees up space to focus on what matters.

This requires trust in your team. It requires being okay with imperfection. It requires accepting that you can't be excellent at everything.

But here's what happens: when you get comfortable letting go of motion, you get access to strategic thinking. And strategic thinking is what separates the people who advance from the people who stay stuck.

The motion mirage is seductive. It tells you that if you just work harder, if you're just responsive enough, if you're just excellent enough at execution, you'll advance.

That's not how it works.

Advancement requires a different kind of excellence. Strategic excellence. Directional clarity. The ability to think about problems before they become urgent. The discipline to focus on momentum instead of motion.

This week, pick one thing. One responsibility you're holding that doesn't require you. One decision you're making that someone else could make. One way you're being in motion that doesn't create momentum.

Let go of it. See what becomes possible.

The people who make it to the top aren't doing more things than you. They're doing different things. More strategic things. Things that create direction instead of handling what's already there.

That person could be you. But only if you're willing to step off the treadmill.

Robert

Robert Castle 

Founder | DIGITAL LEADERSHIP EXCELLENCE

Follow me on LinkedIn

Join the IT Leadership Excellence Network on LinkedIn