That number is not a talent problem. It is a transition problem, and it lands on the balance sheet of the people who backed the seat.
For a PE firm, it is thesis erosion inside the hold period. For a board, it is a governance failure that shows up two quarters later. For a CEO, it is a direct report absorbing dysfunction that eventually surfaces as attrition, missed integration milestones, or a quiet stall in the number.
The leader you chose steps into a system that has been in motion long before they arrived. Relationships carry memory. Informal power has its own logic. The trust, where it exists, was built by someone else.
Their instinct is to prove the placement was right. To move fast. To hold everything together while getting oriented. That instinct reorganizes the system in the wrong direction, and the cost does not appear until month twelve or eighteen, when the force runs out.
Good executives absorb that friction quietly. They hold it together, and holding it together looks like success right up until the moment it does not. This practice exists to make it visible early, while it is still cheap to change.