How I Spotted the Broken GAL System in 2 Seconds

Leadership & Systems · By Gale McArthur · 2026-04-04 · 7 min read

When I was at Amazon HQ for 7 years, we lived by Leadership Principles and Mechanisms. If a process required 'heroic effort' to succeed, it was broken. Here's how I diagnose a failing system the moment I walk into a room.

When I was at Amazon HQ for 7 years, we lived by Leadership Principles and Mechanisms. If a process required "heroic effort" from a person to succeed, it was broken.

Here is how I diagnose a failing system the moment I walk into a room (or a Zoom call):

The "Work-Around" Warning

If I hear "Oh, we usually just do manually because the software doesn't do ," that's a red flag.

Work-arounds are scar tissue on a broken process.

In Washington's GAL system, the work-arounds are everywhere: - Parents manually verifying GAL credentials because no central registry exists - Attorneys calling courthouse clerks to check training status - Judges relying on "I've used this GAL before" instead of verified data

Every one of these is a symptom of a system designed without mechanisms.

Ambiguous Ownership

If I ask who is responsible for a specific metric and two people point at each other — or worse, no one points at anyone — the system is failing.

In the GAL system: - Who owns GAL quality? → "The court… or maybe the county… or the WSBA?" - Who tracks outcomes? → "No one." - Who audits training compliance? → "It's self-reported."

That's not a system. That's a suggestion box.

High Friction, Low Output

If the energy spent managing the task outweighs the value of the result, the system is a vampire. It's sucking the productivity out of the team.

Consider this: A parent in Washington spends an average of $15,000–$50,000 on a custody case with a GAL. The GAL submits a report. The judge may or may not read it carefully. The outcome may or may not reflect the investigation.

High friction. Uncertain output. Classic broken system.

The 2-Second Audit

When I look at a process, I ask one question:

> "Is this a person problem or a process problem?"

99% of the time, it's the process. If a good person is failing, the system is designed for failure.

The GAL system isn't failing because every GAL is bad. It's failing because: - Good GALs have no incentive structure rewarding quality - Bad GALs have no accountability mechanism removing them - The process makes it impossible to distinguish between the two

My Blueprint for Replacement: The "Gut and Rebuild"

I don't believe in "patching" systems. If a boat has ten holes, you don't just keep plugging them; you get a new boat.

My plan for replacement follows a strict logic:

1. Define the North Star

What is the one thing this system must achieve?

For the GAL system: "Every child gets a qualified, accountable, transparent advocate — regardless of county or income."

2. Remove the Middle-Man

I look for "human loops" that can be automated. If a human has to click "Approve" on something that meets 100% of the criteria, that human is a bottleneck.

In the GAL system: - Registry verification → should be automated - Training compliance checks → should be automated - Fee transparency → should be a public dashboard

3. Build-in Audits

A system is only as good as its feedback loop. I implement "Andon Cords" — the ability to stop the line the moment a defect is detected.

In manufacturing, anyone can pull the cord. In the GAL system? Parents can't even file an effective complaint.

That's why we built the GAL eRegistry — it's the Andon Cord the system never had.

Why I'm Obsessed with Fixing the "Gale System"

People often ask why I'm so focused on optimizing every facet of my professional life — what I call the Gale System.

It's because of my background in court reform advocacy and business consulting. I've seen what happens when "The System" — whether it's legal, corporate, or personal — is left to rot.

It doesn't just lose money; it loses people. It causes burnout, injustice, and wasted potential.

I am obsessed with fixing the system because systems are the architecture of our freedom. When my business systems run perfectly, I have the bandwidth to be the Washington State Lead for the Family Justice Accountability Act. When my "Gale System" is optimized, I am a better advocate, a better consultant, and a better leader.

I don't fix systems because I love the mechanics. I fix them because I love the results: Efficiency, Clarity, and Impact.

The Takeaway

> Don't settle for "good enough" processes. If you can feel the friction, it's broken.

Build a system that works for you, so you don't have to work for the system.

For GAL verification data, county transparency scores, and system accountability research, visit www.galeregistry.com.