Having a Tony Stark at the office is fine as long as you hire a Pepper Potts

Feb 08, 2013
Often powerful leaders tend to leap before looking, according to new research from BYU.

(Phys.org)—Not every company has an Iron Man, but many have a Tony Stark – a highly powerful, intensely-focused individual who often ignores risk in order to achieve his or her goals.

That's usually a good thing – as long as companies make sure to also hire a Pepper Potts to keep their powerful leaders grounded, according to new research co-authored by a BYU business professor.

"Organizations need to anticipate the tendency of their most powerful members to leap without looking," said study co-author Katie Liljenquist, a professor of at BYU's Marriott School of Management. "The remedy is to surround them with people who can see other angles, or can play a devil's advocate role to point out risk. Interestingly, it is the low-power members of the organization who are best equipped to do this."

The study, appearing online ahead of print in the , found that are less likely to see constraints in pursuing their goals. Meanwhile, their low-power counterparts are more aware of the risks around them.

Liljenquist says the phenomenon mirrors the animal kingdom: Predators have evolved to have an extremely narrow eye focus for tracking prey, but this compromises their peripheral vision.. Meanwhile, prey animals sacrifice such for more  sensitive that tracks movement and potential threats in the surrounding environment.

"In business settings you need both," Liljenquist said. "You need the people with  that unfettered confidence and optimism and the willingness to take big risks, but you need those low-power individuals who say, 'Hey wait a second. Let's identify the pitfalls.'"

The study included two experiments, the first of which measured how power affects memory for goal-facilitating or goal-constraining information.

In that experiment, participants were given a goal, such as traveling to the , and were then primed with a set of statements about the new venture. Half the statements were goal-constraining ("You are afraid of some of the native animals") and half were goal-facilitating ("You have prior experience visiting jungles").

Researchers found that high-power participants recalled less goal-constraining information than low-power participants.

The second experiment asked participants to finish a fairy tale about a king and his princess daughter. The results showed that powerful people don't even conceive of threats when they create imaginary narratives.

Donald Trump is a perfect example of a leader whose confidence guides business decisions. During the first season of his reality show, The Apprentice, Trump offered the winner a chance to manage the construction of the Trump Tower in Chicago – even though the tower hadn't been fully approved yet.

"Trump didn't even have clearance to build that tower yet," says study lead author Jennifer Whitson. "It was that incredible confidence. He didn't have all his ducks in a row yet, but he acted – and it worked out for him."

Liljenquist said that failure to consider constraints can carry weighty repercussions – such as the housing market crises and bank failures of 2008 that caused the worst economic recession since the 1920s.

"Although blindness to constraints may make the powerful more willing to pursue their goals, their willingness to leap before they look may also sow the seeds of their own fall and the fall of those who depend on them," she said. "Power often perpetuates itself and can lead to great things, but when powerful people are blind-sided by unexpected challenges, they may crash and burn."  

The 1986 Challenger Space Shuttle disaster is a classic example of how power can be blinding. On that fateful day, powerful individuals doggedly pursued launch while ignoring the low-power employees who tried to be a voice of warning about the possibility of mechanical failures.

The study was led by Whitson, an assistant professor of business at the University of Texas at Austin's McCombs School of Business. Other contributing researchers are from Columbia University, New York University, Stanford University and the University of Colorado-Boulder.

Liljenquist's business research, which includes this study on how people are unconsciously more fair and generous when they are in clean-smelling environments, has been featured multiple times by Time and other national outlets.

Explore further: Less-numerate investors swayed by corporate report presentation effects

Related Stories

Does power cloud one's ability to make good decisions?

Mar 01, 2012

Grave consequences can result from bad decisions made by people in leadership positions. Case in point: the 2009 Gulf of Mexico oil rig disaster. British Petroleum (BP) executives had downplayed potential risks associated ...

The freedom of power

Dec 01, 2008

With the forthcoming inauguration this January, the nation will be closely watching to see how the President Elect will respond to the advice, influence, and criticism of his advisors, cabinet members, media, and other political ...

When it comes to infidelity, does power trump gender?

Apr 27, 2011

(Medical Xpress) -- We have all seen the headlines. A powerful athlete, politician or businessman has committed adultery. The tabloids fly off the shelves and the papers are consumed with the how’s and why’s.  ...

Research links power and tendency to punish harshly

Jan 17, 2013

Often, employees are shocked by what they think is a supervisor's severe reaction to a subordinate's seemingly minor transgression. The supervisors who punish them seem to be so absolutely sure that they are doing the right ...

Recommended for you

Migrant employment on the rise

Oct 20, 2014

Skilled migrants are enjoying better jobs and higher levels of employment thanks to a shift in policy, according to a new study by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research at the University ...

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Kron
1 / 5 (4) Feb 08, 2013
Flawed study.

Realists are not accounted for. Optimists do not expect negative outcomes. Pessimists do not expect positive outcomes. Realists expect all outcomes. They have superior predictive power.

Optimists and pessimists are complementary (they neutralize their biases). Realists are unbiased.

Asked in an interview: can you handle the job? Pessimist: no. Realist: in some situations yes, in some no. Optimist: yes.

Optimists have an increased probability of being placed in a power position, this does not make them suited for it.

Being in a position of power does not make one powerful. This becomes apparent when everything comes crumbling down around the optimist.
Kron
1 / 5 (4) Feb 08, 2013
An example:
Jumping a gap.

Pessimist: Regardless of my jumping ability, I could trip, fall, and die. No thanks. No risk.
Optimist: I can jump good, I'll do it. Risk.
Realist: Measures gap length. Measures jumping distance. If jumping distance is greater than gap length, realist jumps. Calculated risk.