Friday, April 17, 2026 | 11:20 PM ISTहिंदी में पढें
Business Standard
Notification Icon
userprofile IconSearch

Predicting a leadership 'crash': Key to averting governance crashes

Rising anti-empathy leadership and unchecked power may trigger governance failures, as boards struggle to identify early warning signs of behavioural derailment

Illustration: Ajaya Mohanty
premium

Illustration: Ajaya Mohanty

R Gopalakrishnan

Listen to This Article

An unchecked situation, if it comes to pass, is what I had called a crash in my 2018 book titled CRASH: Lessons from the Entry and Exit of CEOs. I had written on the dilemma that accountable custodians (meaning institutions or boards) faced in judging leadership behaviour and predicting whether a leader’s behaviour is a once-off or a “deep defect” which makes a crash imminent. An accountable custodian must act before the crash.
 
The high priestess of empathy and vulnerability, Brene Brown, has shattered the genteel language of leadership through her interview in the Financial Times (April 5, 2026) titled “Business leaders now have permission to be the a****les that they are”. In the present atmosphere of tough-talking, confrontational language, and macho posturing, Prof Brown regards as “sinister” the playbook that vilifies empathy and vulnerability, and that “corporate leaders feel a sense of relief and permission from the current political climate to be the a****les that they have always been”.
 
Really? Are corporate chief executive officers influenced by the behaviour of country leaders?
 
Jeffrey Sachs, professor at Columbia University, says that POTUS is deranged, out of control, and needs to be urgently stopped. Geopolitics and corporate governance, of course, are different in many ways, though there are similarities. Everywhere, politicians with less than a 40 per cent vote share behave like they have been chosen by a landslide majority. They plumb the depths of inappropriate, amoral behaviour. Constitutional institutions are distorted to make the system appear to work (companies sometimes do so with corporate governance). Watch how the recent Hungarian elections have delivered a resounding electoral reversal after 16 years of distorted voting constituencies, a captured media, state-sponsored propaganda, and threats and intimidation! Why has our democratic system sacrificed good intent to the false gods of greed and growth?
 
Adolf Hitler became German chancellor in 1933 after winning elections, though his subsequent behaviour negated the process. Winning elections and later manipulating the system is now standard practice for many autocrats. Through 1935-45, Hitler’s admirers fawned on him with increasing adulation. His detractors were quiet or were forcibly quietened. After Hitler’s crash, people helplessly said, “Das haben wir nicht gewusst” (we did not know all that). In the future, “we did not know” could be said of many contemporary leaders.
 
Obsequious adulation is one symptom of a coming crash.
 
Focused on corporate crashes in my book, I had described six “derailers” in leadership behaviour. First, the leader acts all-knowing — and behaviour follows such certitude. Second, addiction to visibility — makes statements and posts at high frequency. Third, a judgement parallax — for example, speaks to internal audience by addressing an external audience. Fourth, unpredictable behaviour — moods and responses are incomprehensible. Fifth, distrust of others — cut to size those who get too close. Sixth, ambiguity, packaged as clarity — say ambiguous things in a forceful manner.
 
You can observe these derailers among many national leaders as well as among CEOs of some companies!
 
During the 1960s and 1970s, the blue-eyed, square-jawed, tough-talking CEO was held out as a global model — for example, Harold Geneen of ITT and Sir Arnold Weinstock of British GEC. By the 2000s, this style peaked out with the idolisation of “Neutron” Jack Welch at GE and Percy Barnevik at ABB. A wave of change was ushered in by professionals like Daniel Goleman, John Mackey, and Amy Edmondsen who deployed words like emotional intelligence, empathy, and vulnerability in the leadership lexicon. Expressions like servant leadership, leading with kindness, and leading from the back followed.
 
Look around you for the leadership signals from the political domain. Senior politicians are insensitive with taunting messages, which divide voting segments. They utter disparaging ideas, and use undignified language, snatch the voters’ mangalsutra, or wantonly allude to religious figures. These will likely affect “future CEO behaviour in the decades to come in the age of self-serving, political anti-empathy campaigns”, Prof Brown argues. Think of Elon Musk or some Indian startup founders!
 
Most often, CEO behaviour changes after the acquisition of power. Power erodes the condition of the brain. Even if controversial, I had called it “brain damage”. Michael Scriven of Claremont Graduate University rightly points out: “To put it simply, and shorn of jargon, leaders lose a bit of their emotional capacities, those very emotional capacities that were essential to their rise.”
 
Predicting leadership behaviour holds the key to averting governance crashes. Institutions and company boards must develop the means to act when leaders receive fawning adulation and start to demonstrate the six derailers alluded to. 
The author’s new book, CHANAKYA AND SUN TZU: A Business Lens on Trade, Thought, and Travel, was coauthored by Nirmala Isaac. gopal.mindworks@gmail.com
Disclaimer: These are personal views of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.business-standard.com or the Business Standard newspaper