1.2.10.4. Harvard Business Review Article

“Why Smart Leaders Make Bad Decisions” — Harvard Business Review

Strategic failure is rarely the result of incompetence — it is often the consequence of unexamined cognitive bias operating beneath confidence, expertise, and past success. This article reveals a counterintuitive reality: the smarter and more experienced leaders become, the more vulnerable they may be to errors in judgment — not because of a lack of skill, but because their minds increasingly rely on pattern recognition, intuition, and familiarity when navigating uncertainty.

The authors demonstrate how assumptions formed during earlier successes can unconsciously harden into unquestioned truths. When leaders have been right repeatedly, their brains begin to trust those familiar pathways automatically. This creates a subtle but powerful trap: intuition replaces analysis, confirmation replaces curiosity, and conviction replaces inquiry. The danger is not the use of experience — but the absence of mechanisms to challenge it.

A central theme in the article is the idea of self-reinforcing mental models. Leaders may unintentionally filter new information through prior interpretations, seeking evidence that validates existing beliefs while overlooking signals that contradict them. Early warning signs — market shifts, customer behavior changes, or performance anomalies — may be interpreted as noise rather than vital strategic data. By the time misalignment becomes undeniable, adaptation is often more expensive, disruptive, and difficult.

The article also highlights how organizational culture interacts with cognitive bias. When teams hesitate to question senior decisions — whether due to hierarchy, loyalty, or fear — blind spots multiply. Alignment becomes visible but not real; consensus becomes mistaken for correctness. In these environments, strategic errors escalate from individual cognitive bias into systemic failure modes.

As you read, approach the article as both analysis and mirror. Consider where you may rely on familiarity instead of fresh evaluation, where confidence may overshadow inquiry, and where past success may shape current assumptions.

Key reflective question:

Where in your leadership practice do you default to being right rather than making sure you are not missing something?