Why we keep showing up when things have stopped working.

It began well enough: a weekly engineering sync meant to surface blockers and set priorities. In the early weeks, people prepared. Problems came out into the open. Decisions actually got made. The cadence felt alive, a steady backbeat to the work.

Then, slowly, the meeting thinned out.

By week eight, updates sounded like status reports. Cameras stayed dark. Slack messages replaced conversation. Nobody declared the meeting over, yet it lingered, familiar but noticeably hollow.

One week I asked a question and waited. Seven seconds of silence. A flicker of a camera on, then off. Someone typed, then deleted. What filled the room wasn't discussion but dread, like we were attending the funeral of something we used to need.

And still we kept showing up. Not out of conviction, but out of habit. Inertia dressed up as loyalty. A ritual can die while we keep holding space for it anyway, hoping presence alone might bring it back.

Teams often use the word "cadence" to mean predictability—the repeating events that divide a week or a quarter. Cadence is easy. Put it on the calendar and it happens. Reserve a room, send calendar invites, and you've created structure.

Rhythm is different. Rhythm only exists when people actually engage. Cadence reserves a room; rhythm fills it with purpose.

We search for rhythm outside of work as well. The daily run, the Friday night call, the holiday tradition that brings the family together. But repetition without reflection hollows out even the best patterns. The run becomes routine. The call becomes small talk. The tradition becomes logistics. What was once rhythm turns into theater.

Loyalty does strange things when patterns lose their pulse. We keep watering plants that will never bloom. We keep rituals alive not because they're working, but because stopping feels like admitting something we cared about has slipped away.

Inside companies, these hollow patterns multiply with particular vengeance. There's the all-hands where nobody listens. The retro that produces no change. The newsletter that goes unread. They persist not because they're useful, but because inertia takes over once purpose disappears.

The rituals that endure always share one ingredient: someone is paying attention. They ask if the format still fits. They listen for signals, not just silence. They're willing to revise rather than preserve for its own sake.

Think of it like tending a fire. You don't rebuild from scratch every time, but you do poke at it, adjust for wind, add fuel, and notice when something is going out. The difference between maintenance and neglect often comes down to attention.

That's what eventually saved our weekly sync. We shrank the guest list, dropped the slides, and replaced status updates with one question: what's in the way right now? The change wasn't dramatic, but it worked. The energy and care returned.

Someone had been paying attention to what was failing and was willing to act on what they observed.

Rituals aren't fixed assets. They're living patterns that can be redesigned, reclaimed, or retired. The hard part is admitting when the beat has gone flat and having the courage to change course.

For operations leaders, this isn't a soft skill—it's core work. A team's health often shows up first in the quality of its rhythms. If you can diagnose which rituals are still alive and which have become empty cadence, you can see where the system is drifting before it collapses.

The warning signs are consistent across contexts: declining participation, perfunctory responses, the gradual shift from engagement to attendance. What matters is developing the peripheral vision to notice these patterns early and the confidence to address them directly.

Designing new rituals is easy. Sustaining them requires different muscles entirely. You need to notice when energy fades, be willing to name what you observe, and stay open to what might work better instead.

This goes beyond meeting hygiene. This is how you keep an organization's pulse steady enough to carry the work forward. The difference between cadence and rhythm might be subtle, but the organizations that understand the distinction keep going, stay alive.

Like this? Subscribe via email here.