Summary of "Why do we celebrate incompetent leaders? | Martin Gutmann | TEDxBerlin"

Concise summary / main takeaway

The talk argues that we routinely celebrate the wrong kinds of leaders: showy, dramatic crisis-managers (“captains of crisis”) who produce noisy, memorable stories but often create or amplify problems, instead of quiet, competent leaders who prevent problems through careful preparation and management. This “action fallacy” — mistaking visible action and drama for good leadership — causes bad promotions, toxic cultures, and worse organizational outcomes. The speaker urges us to re-imagine leadership, reward “boring” behind-the-scenes management, and look below the surface when judging leaders.

Key ideas, concepts, and evidence

Polar-explorer case studies

Ernest Shackleton (Candidate B)
- Famous, dramatic; survived catastrophic Antarctic expeditions (notably the 1914–16 Endurance expedition).
- Celebrated widely despite repeated failures, poor preparation, ignored local advice, equipment and crew problems, and associated lives lost (e.g., the Aurora).
Roald Amundsen (Candidate A)
- Far more successful by objective measures (North Pole/South Pole, Northeast and Northwest Passages).
- Careful planner with deep local knowledge, methodical logistics, and reliable execution — but far less celebrated because his successes were less dramatic.

Action fallacy

The mistaken belief that the best leaders are those who produce spectacular action, drama, or visible struggle. We confuse compelling stories with genuine leadership quality.

Cognitive and social biases that reinforce the action fallacy

Preference for loud speakers, apparent confidence, and perpetual busyness — regardless of actual competence.
Racial and gender biases: leadership associated with white men, causing other effective leaders (e.g., Toussaint Louverture, Frances Perkins) to be overlooked.
Storytelling bias: vivid narratives about crises attract admiration even when the crisis was self-inflicted.

Consequences of celebrating the wrong leaders

Poor organizational performance when noisy, shallow leaders are promoted.
Demotivation and under-recognition of competent but quiet performers.
A self-reinforcing cycle: rewarding crisis-capable personas encourages people to create or reframe situations as crises.

Academic support and terminology

Keith Grint (leadership scholar): warns that rewarding crisis performers and ignoring good managers leads people to seek or manufacture crises.
Raffaella Sadun (Harvard Business School): calls careful, steady, process-oriented leadership “boring management” and shows it has measurable positive impact.
Organizational psychology studies: referenced to support the claims (unnamed studies cited in the talk).

Practical recommendations / action steps

When evaluating, rewarding, hiring, and promoting leaders, favour substance over spectacle:

Look beyond dramatic stories
- Ask for objective track records: how many goals were achieved, how many crises were prevented, what problems were self-inflicted?
- Check preparation and planning quality: were local experts or experienced advisers consulted? Was logistics and training adequate?
- Compare intended timelines/plans with actual outcomes (e.g., Amundsen’s 99-day plan vs. execution).
De-prioritize surface signals of leadership
- Don’t equate talkative or visible behavior with competence; evaluate decisions and results.
- Don’t reward perpetual busyness or confident-sounding rhetoric without evidence of impact.
Reward and promote “boring management”
- Value the creation of reliable processes, risk mitigation, and cultural practices that make teams resilient.
- Publicly recognize behind-the-scenes contributors and managers who reduce crises.
Disincentivize crisis-seeking behavior
- Avoid glorifying leaders who perform mainly in emergencies.
- Use metrics and performance reviews that emphasize stability, foresight, and prevention.
Cultivate hiring and promotion practices that privilege substance
- Include structured assessments of planning, logistical competence, and stakeholder consultation.
- Use peer feedback from quiet contributors to surface unseen leadership.
Change narratives and role models
- Intentionally teach and celebrate examples of planners and mitigators (like Amundsen, Frances Perkins, Toussaint Louverture) in leadership development.
- Train evaluators to spot storytelling bias in résumés, presentations, and media.

Notable examples, quotes, and framing

Contrast highlighted throughout: Shackleton’s dramatic survival story vs. Amundsen’s methodical, less-visible successes.
Blockquote:

“Since we reward people who are good in crises, and ignore people who are such good managers that there are few crises, people soon learn to seek out or reframe situations as crises.” — Keith Grint
Raffaella Sadun’s term “boring management” is used to frame the type of leadership that produces measurable positive results.

Speakers and sources featured

Main speaker: Martin Gutmann (TEDxBerlin)
Historical figures / examples:
- Ernest Shackleton (Anglo-Irish polar explorer)
- Roald Amundsen (Norwegian polar explorer)
- Toussaint Louverture (Haitian revolutionary leader)
- Frances Perkins (U.S. social reformer, key figure in FDR’s New Deal)
- Franklin D. Roosevelt (referenced)
Scholars and commentators:
- Keith Grint (leadership scholar)
- Raffaella Sadun (Harvard Business School professor)
- Organizational psychology studies (unnamed)
Other references:
- Kenneth Branagh (actor who played Shackleton in a TV series)
- The ship Aurora (associated with Shackleton-era expeditions)
Subtitle credits (from the transcript header):
- Transcriber: Méline R
- Reviewer: Raúl Higareda

Moral

Good leadership often looks easy or unremarkable because it prevents emergencies. We should value effect (prevention, stability, predictable execution) over spectacle and intentionally reward the quiet, competent work that keeps organizations healthy.