A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about what happens when an executive leaves, and got a massive response.
Today I want to write about what happens when a new leader joins the business and prefers to bring in an assistant they already trust. The chemistry is already there. The rhythm is instinctive. The unspoken understanding is a competitive advantage. I get it.
But I am torn.
Because here’s the issue, and it’s one we don’t challenge enough.
Executive Assistants are not personal property.
They are not an extension of the individual they support. They are a function within the business. And no other critical function – Finance, HR, IT – is dismantled or downgraded every time someone at the top moves on.
When we allow this model, we reinforce the idea that EAs are tied to people, not to roles. We make their careers dependent on someone else’s trajectory. We make their status contingent on proximity, not capability.
This has real consequences. Displaced assistants. Demotivated talent. Unclear reporting lines. And no defined career structure.
⚠️ It undermines career progression
⚠️ It damages morale and motivation
⚠️ It reinforces the outdated view that assistants are expendable
This needs to change.
✅ HR must update job structures and grading to reflect the actual scope of assistant roles, not just the level of the executive they support
✅ Businesses must define the EA role as a core function, not a personal appointment
✅ Assistants must be given career pathways that don’t collapse when an executive moves on
To the EAs in this position.
This isn’t your failure.
It’s the system’s.
You didn’t lose your value when your executive left.
You lost the structure that should have protected it.
And that’s exactly what we need to fix.
