Decision Making at the Top: The Dangers of Success
The safety failures of the 737 Max 8 are a tragic tale of faulty leadership. Yet Boeing's leaders are not alone in making disastrous decisions. Past decades have witnessed corporate leadership errors of epic proportions: Enron, BP, Volkswagen, Bear Sterns, Lehman Brothers, AIG, Facebook, and Wells Fargo stand as notable examples. Nor is such failure limited to the business world, as the fall of Richard Nixon, the impeachment of Bill Clinton, and the collapse of the public career of Gen. David Petraeus attest.
A strange similarity is that leaders in these cases were at the top of their game, the reward of carefully built careers of increasing responsibility and achievement.
Social scientists offer some explanations. In The Bathsheba Syndrome: The Ethical Failure of Successful Leaders, Dean Ludwig and Clinton Longenecker suggest that with success comes an overly inflated belief in one’s personal ability and a loss of strategic focus. Successful leaders have more latitude in decision making but fewer constraints – and often fewer voices to challenge their thinking. Their egos and their isolation at the top can overcome their reason.
The fictional character of Col. Nathan Jessup in the film A Few Good Men is a classic example. Jessup ordered a "code red" punishment to deal with someone he considered a substandard Marine. That punishment killed Pfc William Santiago. On the witness stand in the trial of the men who administered it, Jessup lashes out at the defense attorney's demand for the truth:
"You can't handle the truth!
Son, we live in a world with walls that must be guarded. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have more responsibility than you can fathom. You weep for Santiago and curse the Marines. You don't know what I know.
Santiago's tragic death saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque to you, saves lives! But deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties you need me on that wall.
We use words like honor, code, loyalty. They're the backbone of our lives. You use them as a punch line! I haven't the time or inclination to explain myself to a man who needs my protection but questions the manner in which I provide it. Better just to thank me. Or pick up a gun and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!"
An officer with a chest full of decorations, Jessup's inflated sense of himself (reflected is his anger and many references to "I" and "my") led him to lose focus on his real mission as commander of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. His decision making was disastrous for the Corps and his career, as well as Santiago.
In their paper, Why We Aren’t as Ethical as We Think We Are, Ann Tenbrunsel and her colleagues offer another explanation. They suggest we have a “should” self, in which we tell ourselves what we ought to do, and a “want” self guided by strong emotion at the moment of decision. If asked how we will respond to an ethical challenge, our “should” self answers. But at a moment where overwhelming pressures confront us, the “want” self takes over. This appears to have been the case at Boeing, where competition with Airbus led Boeing executives to rush their airplane into the skies against their "should" self values of safety and excellence.
There is no simple fix. Leaders who recognize these dangers will have taken a big first step. Part of the solution is selecting leaders with character. Humility, an openness to criticism, and welcoming dissent are essential. Institutional checks can also help, such as a decision making culture and process that limits the ability of leaders to ignore information that challenges their ego, limited focus, and strategic blindness.
Early in his tenure as Army Chief of Staff in 1939, Gen. George C. Marshall was troubled by the tendency of his senior staff to just go along with his plans. “Gentlemen, I am disappointed in you," he told them. "You haven’t yet disagreed with a single decision I’ve made.” GM CEO Alfred Sloan, Jr. took a similar tack. "I take it we are all in complete agreement on the decision here," he once said. "Then I propose we postpone further discussion of this matter until our next meeting to give ourselves time to develop disagreement and perhaps gain some understanding of what the decision is all about.”
The climb up the leadership ladder is often long and arduous. The fall is much faster. Those who have made it to the top can stay there, but only if their realize the dangers on the uppermost rung.
Photo Credit: Paralysis
