das expectativas mais comuns dos gerentes e outros subordinados, ocorre uma distorcao na estrutura hierarquica da organizacao, prejudicando a linha de delegacao. Torna-se visivel a perda de comando do diretor e o "by-pass" do funcionarios torna-se frequente, mas nao se deve confundir a situacao com a "democracia" no ambiente de trabalho, como muitas vezes se dissimula a disfuncao.Cabe ao proprio diretor perceber o desgaste que sofre e buscar um reequilibrio de suas funcoes junto ao Presidente, CEO ou Proprietario. Afinal e a maior vitima da situacao e o melhor candidato a um infarto. E claro que existem chefes que nao entenderao ou nao aceitarao esta discussao e continuarao com a pratica habituada. Mas se nao houver um posicionamento do diretor, nao havera nenhum outro interessado no assunto.A Diretoria deve ser uma instancia de decisao na organizacao onde os conflitos sao minimizados, os objetivos sao mais alinhados, as atitudes sao mais desprendidas, as alocacoes de recursos sao mais racionais, as negociacoes sao mais colaborativas e as decisoes contemplam um contexto amplo.Yoshio Kawakamiyoshio@raizconsultoria.com.br WHEN DIRECTORS DO NOT DIRECT...Directors exist to make decisions and assist the President, CEO or Owner to run the company, right? However, we often realize that despite the title and the perks of the position, directors have little autonomy to make decisions.Certainly some have not been prepared to make decisions or have no suitable initiatives for the position, while others are not allowed to make decisions and take initiatives. In both situations, the company loses and lose the Presidents, CEOs and Owners. In short, loses who pays the high bill!A capable leadership should create an organization with relationships that allow and encourage directors to use their full potential to contribute and add value to the business. When this does not happen at its maximum potential, there is an organizational dysfunction whose responsibility lies often in the leader himself. Rather than maximizing the ability of each director individually and the group of directors collectively, there may be a "reverse delegation", where decisions and responsibilities are pushed up. By not perceiving or tacitly accepting the situation, the leader himself becomes one of the main causes of dysfunction.But it is true that one of the functions less defined or that holds less similarity between companies is this of the direct helpers of the # 1 of the organization. For many years I have argued that directors are directors of the company and not directors of "something" or of some specific function. They should always think about what is best for the whole company and not what is best for the "his or her" unit or division. Thus, they maximize their contributions to every organization by identifying the best practices to be transformed into policies, which, when disseminated throughout the organization, generate better results.The main stance that points out dysfunctions at the top of the organizations is the belief that the directors exist to "support the boss." It is a sign that may indicate that the problem is more serious, coming from the company's lack of strategy. President, CEOs and their directors are accountable to