The Commitment Trap

The Commitment Trap

The commitment trap is a pattern where the structure of how commitments are made guarantees failure.

The Pattern

It works like this:

1. Early commitment required: Budgets, roadmaps, or executive expectations demand dates before scope is clear

2. Confidence projected: Leaders commit confidently because tentativeness looks weak

3. Reality diverges: The work takes longer, costs more, or changes shape

4. Updates delayed: Honest status feels like failure, so it gets postponed

5. Crisis arrives: The gap between commitment and reality becomes undeniable

6. Blame assigned: "The team missed the deadline"

Then the cycle repeats.

Why It's a Trap

The trap isn't any individual decision—it's the system:

- You can't get resources without committing to outcomes

- You can't honestly assess outcomes until you've started

- But you have to commit before you start

- So commitments are always less informed than they pretend to be

This is structural. It's not solved by better estimation alone.

Living in the Trap

Most program leaders learn to live in the trap:

- They commit what's required

- They buffer privately

- They manage expectations when they can

- They absorb blame when they can't

This is survival. But it comes at a cost: chronic stress, eroded trust, and a sense of working in fiction.

Escaping the Trap

There's no complete escape, but there are better approaches:

Make uncertainty visible: "I'm confident about weeks 1-4, less confident about 5-8, and we'll need to reassess at that point."

Commit conditionally: "This timeline assumes X, Y, Z. If those assumptions break, we'll need to talk."

Build in checkpoints: "Let's revisit at this milestone and confirm we're still on track."

Earn the right to uncertainty: Deliver what you commit, and over time you earn credibility for honest uncertainty.

What Leaders Can Request

If you're in a position to influence how commitments are structured:

- Ask for ranges instead of points: "8-12 weeks" is more honest than "10 weeks"

- Ask for explicit assumptions: "What would have to be true for this timeline to work?"

- Ask for update cadences: "When will we know if we're off track?"

- Ask for contingency thinking: "What's plan B if this slips?"

These questions don't eliminate the trap, but they make it more navigable.

The Deeper Question

The commitment trap exists because organizations often can't handle uncertainty.

Changing this is bigger than any individual program. But every honest conversation about realistic commitments is a step toward organizations that can orient to reality rather than fiction.