Unreliability Isn’t a Quirk

Unreliability is often framed as a personality trait.

Busy.
Overwhelmed.
Bad with time.
Bad at planning.

Something innate.
Something forgivable.

But unreliability is not a trait.
It is a behaviour—and it has a cost.

When someone repeatedly fails to follow through, the impact does not land on them.
It lands on the person who adapts.

Plans shift.
Expectations lower.
Contingencies are built.
Emotional and logistical slack is absorbed elsewhere.

Nothing dramatic happens.
No argument.
No rupture.

Just a quiet redistribution of labour.

Over time, one person becomes “flexible.”
The other becomes “busy.”

This is not accidental.

Unreliability persists because someone else keeps making it workable.

And when that person finally stops adapting, the reaction is rarely accountability.
It is surprise.

Why is this suddenly a problem?
You never said anything before.

But the absence of protest was not consent.
It was compensation.

Reliability is not about perfection.
It is about recognising that your delays, indecision, or last-minute changes do not disappear—they move.

If someone else is consistently holding the consequences of your disorganisation, that is not flexibility.
That is an unacknowledged transfer of responsibility.

Nothing about this requires bad intent.

But intent does not carry the weight.
Responsibility does.