The instinct is almost universal: the owner feels overloaded, so the fix is "hire someone." Bring on an ops manager, a coordinator, an assistant — add a body to absorb the overflow. It rarely works the way owners expect, and it's not because they hired the wrong person.
Here's what actually happens. You hire someone capable, hand them a stack of responsibilities, and within a few months they're doing exactly what you were doing before: routing every decision back to you. Not because they're incapable — because nothing about how decisions get made actually changed. You didn't remove yourself from the loop. You just added a person standing next to the loop, waiting for you to close it.
A new hire can absorb tasks. They can't absorb a decision-making structure that doesn't exist. If every judgment call still needs your sign-off, hiring more people just means more people waiting on you — you've scaled the headcount and kept the bottleneck exactly where it was.
Before hiring to fix an overload problem, ask a harder question first: what decisions am I making that someone else could make, if they had the authority and the standard to make them by? If you can't answer that specifically — not "they'll figure it out," but the actual decision rights and the actual standard — a new hire won't fix the bottleneck. They'll just be the newest person stuck behind it.
Hire after you've built the structure, not instead of building it. Structure is what makes a new hire actually reduce your load. Without it, you're just paying someone to watch you stay the bottleneck.