Can't Do / Won't Do / Not Set Up To Do
Three reasons things don't happen — and 70-80% of the time it's the third one, which is yours.
- Difficulty
- Easy
- Time to result
- ~days to results
- Steps
- 4
- Confidence
- 94%
Rathi's diagnostic for any underperformance: when something didn't happen the way you wanted, there are only three explanations. The person can't do it (capability), they won't do it (motivation or alignment), or they were not set up to do it (your failure as a leader to design the org, the OKRs and the ways of working). His hard-won claim is that the third bucket accounts for roughly 70-80% of failures — which makes it the first place a leader should look, not the last.
Origin
Rathi's own leadership framework, the mirror image of his three PM skills (raw sharpness / drive / influence). He connects the setup diagnosis to Conway's Law and the book 'Team Topologies' by Matthew Skelton and Manuel Pais: show me an engineering architecture and I'll tell you the org design — and the same holds for products.
Core principles
- 01Only three causes exist: can't do, won't do, not set up to do.
- 02Start with the assumption that it's a setup issue, because statistically it usually is.
- 03Can't do maps to the capability axis (raw sharpness); won't do maps to motivation and alignment; not set up to do maps to you.
- 04Setup failures include unexamined OKRs and unexamined org design.
- 05Conway's Law works in reverse: look at the product and you can infer the org design that produced it.
- 06Stop externalising — 'you are the reason for your own misery'.
How to run it
- 1
Classify the failure into one of the three
When something doesn't happen as you wanted, name it: is this a capability issue, a motivation/alignment issue, or a setup issue? Do not proceed until you've picked one.
Pro tip Because setup issues are 70-80% of cases, actively try to falsify 'it's a people problem' before accepting it.
Watch out Defaulting to 'can't do' is the lazy read and quietly turns into a performance-management problem that was actually your design failure.
- 2
If can't do — decide coach, mentor, or move
Ask whether you have the right people in terms of capability. If not, is the right answer to coach and mentor them, or to move them somewhere their capability is better suited?
Pro tip Capability may be genuinely suited elsewhere — moving someone isn't a punishment.
- 3
If won't do — go deeper on why
Are they not aligned to you? Do they not agree with your vision? Do they simply not have enough time? Each has a different answer — don't stop at 'unmotivated'.
Pro tip 'Not enough time' is a setup issue wearing a motivation costume — check it first.
- 4
If not set up to do — audit OKRs, org design and ways of working
Examine what your OKRs are actually doing to the company, whether org design was thought through, and whether the ways of working were properly designed. This is your problem, not theirs.
Pro tip Use the Conway's-Law lens from Team Topologies: read the product or the architecture backwards to infer the org design that generated it.
Watch out In a multi-sided marketplace, OKRs themselves are frequently the setup failure (see Rathi's marketplace framework).
In the wild
Rathi applies the Team Topologies / Conway's Law idea beyond engineering: look at almost any product and you can name the org design that led to it. If the product is fragmented, the org probably is too.
→ Underperformance gets re-diagnosed as a structural issue the leader can actually fix, rather than a people issue.
Lenny reframes it as a performance framework: did the person have the skills, did they have the motivation, or were they simply not set up for success? Rathi agrees.
→ Reviews stop being verdicts on the individual and start allocating responsibility honestly between person and system.
Common mistakes
Skipping the setup question
Leaders jump to capability or motivation because those blame someone else. Rathi's estimate is that 70-80% of failures come from the leader not having thought through OKRs, org design and ways of working.
Externalising
Rathi's stated motto is 'stop externalising — you are the reason for your own misery'. If the leadership meeting went badly or the product bombed, the first question is what you could have done differently.
Is it for you?
Best for
Product leaders and engineering managers diagnosing a team or individual that keeps missing outcomes
Not ideal for
Situations where the failure was genuinely external and stochastic — Rathi concedes roughly half of any single outcome is luck; the framework earns its keep over long runs
From the transcript
“either that person can't do which is a capability issue or they won't do which is a motivation or an alignment issue or they were…”
“I realized that apart from what product managers can do almost 70 80% of problems why things don't happen are a setup issue”
“show me an engineering architecture and I will actually tell you what the a design of of this company is”
“stop externalizing that's one which also means the the more artistic way to say that is you are the reason for your own misery”
From the episode
The full-stack PM
Anuj Rathi (Swiggy, Jupiter Money, Flipkart)