We like to believe that leaders—be they generals, CEOs, or politicians—make decisions based on rational, data-driven analysis. But Norman F. Dixon’s *On the Psychology of Military Incompetence* reminds us that decisions are often clouded by a leader’s background, social network, and emotional biases. This phenomenon isn’t confined to military leaders; it’s deeply embedded in corporate boardrooms and political offices alike.
Leaders shaped by exclusive networks—whether it’s the old-school tie of Eton or the metro elite of today—tend to make decisions that reflect their culture and tribe. This “them and us” mentality can skew strategic thinking, resulting in policies that are detached from the realities faced by those implementing them. In these environments, information doesn’t flow freely or equally. Junior voices, or those outside the inner circle, are often ignored in favor of opinions from within the leader’s trusted tribe.
Ray Dalio’s *Principles* offers a counterpoint to this. Dalio promotes a meritocracy where decisions are weighted by the accuracy of past advice, not the rank of the advisor. If the most junior analyst is consistently right, their opinion should carry more weight than that of a CEO who is often wrong. Yet, most organizations favor hierarchy over meritocracy, filtering information through personal biases rather than impartial analysis.
Dixon’s exploration of military incompetence highlights how flawed leadership structures and decision-making processes are not unique to the armed forces. CEOs and politicians often rely on emotional reasoning, nostalgia, and self-preservation when making critical decisions. In doing so, they allow cognitive biases and class-driven perspectives to shape outcomes.
We must rethink how decisions are made in organizations. Leaders should focus not just on the quality of information but also on how it flows through the ranks. In a world where information can be distorted as it passes through multiple layers of authority, true transparency and inclusivity are vital to improving decision-making.
Key Lessons:
Information quality and flow are vital in decision-making.
Meritocratic systems (as promoted by Ray Dalio) outperform traditional hierarchical structures.
Emotional and social biases often cloud rational decision-making.