Stories of high-level leaders making poor decisions are not rare, ranging from minor personnel mistakes to global scandals. Although each example seems unique, there is often a common thread: leaders are drawn away from disciplined behavior related to wise management due to various temptations and reactions brought on by power.
Power itself is not bad, especially when applied constructively. However, the possession of power, especially when it stands out significantly compared to others, can trigger an erroneous pattern of behavior in the brain. In other words, power can distort a person’s normal way of thinking.
Research reveals that high levels of power are often associated with heightened activity in the brain’s Behavioral Activation System (BAS). BAS, proposed by psychologist Jeffrey Alan Gray in 1970, is a neural circuit pattern that explains how the brain processes experiences of immediate reward. For leaders, increased levels of BAS activity due to their position of power can lead to increased efficiency—manifested as strengthened attention to goal-related information, increased acceptance of innovation and risk, and more proactive thinking.
Gray and subsequent scholars have also hypothesized that when BAS is activated, another system in the brain—Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS)—becomes less active. BIS is usually associated with feelings of anxiety, sensitivity to punishment, feelings of frustration, and risk-avoidant behavior. It is a system that monitors and helps you recognize the discrepancy between goals and actions, which is useful in stopping you from carrying out seemingly incorrect actions.
You might perceive the activity in BAS as a positive energy that helps with task completion; whereas BIS activity may seem to hinder progress. However, in reality, successful high-level leaders balance these two systems, and as a result, are more likely to make correct decisions and build a diverse team with high engagement, strong sense of responsibility, and high performance.
Power may blind leaders to insights into details. Leaders can become overly focused on grand visions and overlook the specific details necessary to realize these visions. For the sake of reaching goals quickly, they may reduce direct communication with subordinates. Additionally, leaders tend to be optimistic, which might lead to excessive faith that things will improve, ignoring the preparations needed to address potential risks.
Some leaders prefer to operate at an abstract level, emphasizing “why to do” to motivate the team, while others focus on the specifics of “how to execute.” Research shows that individuals with less power tend to focus more on specific details: the low-level practical operations and specific steps to complete tasks. When leaders ignore these details, even the most intelligent individuals may overlook danger signals right in front of them.
As a leader, you need the ability to flexibly switch between detailed execution and high-level strategy. In large strategic meetings discussing grand project visions, a leader might raise specific questions: “How will this vision be implemented in daily operations?” Using “if-then” logic to clarify action directions is also a tool for leaders: “If debt exceeds the predetermined level, we will suspend expansion plans and restructure the team.” This approach prompts strategic meetings to focus on specific details, bringing overlooked potential options to the table.
It is also important to reinforce team members’ thinking at a detailed level. One or two members could be assigned as “Detail Focusers,” whose task is to constantly raise questions in every meeting discussing future plans. Such team division helps achieve a balance between focusing on abstract visions and specific implementation details.
However, power often leads to leaders unconsciously isolating themselves from others. Senior managers often dine in private spaces, travel to airports in limousines, and sit in business class; thus reducing interactions with team members and making in-depth conversations rare. This may help in maintaining clear thinking and making rapid, significant decisions, but it might also weaken a leader’s inclusiveness and breadth of perspective. As a leader, one should focus on broadening one’s perspective to ensure that the needs of employees and clients are also significant factors influencing decisions.
The high rank in management correlates with substantial financial responsibilities. As leaders rise in position, they may focus more on numerical targets and overlook others’ ideas and needs. This bias may make leaders feel efficient and satisfied, yet it may cause colleagues and subordinates to feel a lack of consideration and foresight.
Social needs and their satisfaction levels are crucial for humans. The SCARF model, proposed by renowned neuroscientist David Rock, emphasizes five fundamental social needs: Status, the need for one’s standing within an organization; Certainty, the need for control over one’s environment; Autonomy, the need for independence; Relatedness, the need for belonging and inclusion; and Fairness, the need for just treatment. Leaders who overlook these needs might stir concerns about relationships, fairness, and status in others, leaving them feeling unable to express their opinions or that their views are unvalued.
Leaders should seek to break free from the shackles of their own thinking, and be aware of the potential harm caused by long-term neglect of others’ perspectives. It is necessary to show the team that their views are important, heard, and seriously considered in decision-making. This can be achieved by actively seeking, affirming, and utilizing the team’s diverse perspectives through meeting discussions, email responses, and everyday conversations.
Rather than secluding oneself in a private office, leaders might consider spending some time in the public office area, which will create more opportunities for interaction with employees. These interactive moments are great opportunities to collect various perspectives and solicit opinions and feedback from employees on important issues.
Having a persistently optimistic mindset is often a notable characteristic of senior leaders. They tend to focus greatly on the potential benefits of their ideas or actions, turning a blind eye to potential adverse outcomes. Such an attitude helps maintain employee morale during difficult times. However, excessive optimism can lead to recklessness, thereby posing risks to projects, departments, or the entire organization.
Many executives have a distorted perception of risk, clinging to past successes and being resistant to change. However, if you recognize a similar cognitive bias in yourself, then it’s necessary to start taking steps to have a clearer perception of potential risks. An effective strategy is the so-called “mental contrasting,” which involves considering the ideal expected future alongside the possible future, thus realizing the ideal future is just one of many possibilities and not guaranteed to happen.
Using scenario planning can help you think deeply about how your personal actions will directly impact the future. For example, if you want to develop a successful product, you must clarify the necessary steps and their sequence. By doing so, you’re essentially visualizing potential story developments. Research shows that this kind of step-by-step mental practice can lead people to make wiser choices, for it allows them to intuitively feel the long-term consequences more persistently, rather than simply relying on willpower.
To become an exceptional leader, you need to learn to accept. An overly zealous pursuit of foresight, focus on goals, and excessive optimism can reinforce each other, potentially exacerbating situations. Another way to reverse this momentum is to see inclusiveness as the cornerstone of reshaping leadership. Research reveals that valuing inclusiveness—providing opportunities for people with different backgrounds to speak and contribute—can significantly increase team effectiveness.
The best companies embed inclusiveness into their corporate culture, ensuring everyone has a voice and is recognized for their constructive opinions. However, in many companies, those in power may inadvertently send a signal that is detrimental to inclusiveness, believing that diverse viewpoints may not always be compatible with maintaining an optimistic drive or setting visionary goals.
Initiatives related to inclusiveness are beneficial for avoiding cognitive bias traps while also enhancing the organization’s capacity for innovation and reducing risk. Alternatively, leaders should not work in isolation but consider working in an open or semi-open office environment. This way, colleagues can easily ask questions as they pass by, and responses are more readily available. If you notice that some young members of the team are always silent, actively invite them to share their views. These simple practices, which are close to the actual work, not only help to understand the specifics more deeply but also facilitate recognizing and evaluating risks from multiple perspectives.
When facing team meetings, if colleagues are discussing abstract visions or unrealistic forecasts and aspirations, you can choose a different path. Ask a key question: “What practical actions can we take today?” This question can help the group focus on specific strategies that can be immediately executed.
Every day before leaving the office, spend some time reflecting on whether there is a cautious and solid approach that can achieve goals without taking unnecessary risks. With these new plans, you can have a thorough discussion and validation with team members when you return to your position the next day.
Leaders cultivate this habit as part of the culture, and over time, they will more naturally seek feedback, reduce biases, amplify voices that are less considered, and ensure that the decision-making process includes a diversity of perspectives.
