A catalyst is an agent that affects the outcome of a process by providing a (normally alternative) mechanism involving a different execution path and lower activation energy.

This diagram (courtesy of Wikipedia), shows the concept visually.

Normally, you hear about catalysis in chemical or biochemical processes (also known as enzymes in the former realm) and they have a vital role there, but here I would like to draw the attention to the general notion of it: anything that “enables” things to happen, not because they are part of the result, but because they allow it to happen more easily (thus increasing its likelihood of success).

One type of catalyst that I talked about previously is a standard: here the catalytic action is created by separating the concerns and allowing independent evolution (while focusing coordination management costs).

But there is another type of catalyst that is often overlooked: the human one.

There is a general tendency to believe that things either happen or don’t depending on how good the starting idea is and how good its execution is. My experience tells me that the presence of one (or more) human catalysts is always a huge factor in the success (or failure) of any activity.

Then why is it that so very few organizations make such positions explicit in their management hierarchy?