Thinking the Unthinkable

THINKING THE UNTHINKABLE; A NEW IMPERATIVE FOR LEADERSHIP IN THE DIGITAL AGE
9
We set the bar of ambition high. To ensure intellectual weight and impact for the
research, only the highest level of current and recently serving public servants and
business leaders should be interviewed. The initial suggestion was to convene a panel.
We rejected this. First, there was the near practical impossibility of coordinating diaries
in order to bring together such busy executives. More importantly, it was vital to hear
the frankest possible assessments. This was unlikely to happen if we brought highest level
peers together to listen to each other. Therefore we aimed for 1-1 interviews to last up
to 90 minutes each. That would be the most efficient and productive use of their time
as they would be the sole focus. The invitation was for the meeting to be off-the-record,
with no public acknowledgement that it had even been held. All accepted on that basis,
but subsequently a handful then asked to go on the record. We are most grateful for the
extraordinary candidness that each interviewee has shown.
The take up has been remarkable. Instead of the fifteen senior figures we hoped would
say yes, sixty top level interviews took place between February and July 2015 in an
intense process of interviewing and transcribing. Additionally, “Thinking the Unthinkable”
became the theme of several major international conferences or individual interactive
panel sessions. It had been expected initially that the project would be modest and
limited in both scope and timescale. Instead it swiftly grew into something far bigger,
with organisational and content implications to match what became its fast growing size.
The impact has been strengthened because of the partnership built with the Chartered
Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA) and the Chairmen’s Forum. CIMA provided
research support by way of funding. They and the Chairmen’s Forum provided additional
introductions to the highest C-suite levels. Both hosted events to test the first ideas and
conclusions emerging from the interviews.
The candid nature of discussion and responses from each interviewee was remarkable.
As co-authors, we took an active decision not to be prescriptive about the emerging
direction of travel for the project’s findings. The priority in the first 30-40 minutes was
to encourage each of them to unburden themselves and reveal voluntarily the pressures
on them personally, and on leadership more generally. It was important not to influence
their thoughts. Usually, only in the final third part of each meeting were the project’s
interim findings shared. This was in order to gauge the level of agreement, qualification
or disagreement. While time consuming in many obvious respects, without exception
this methodology and the wealth of one-to-one engagements, produced extraordinary
frankness and revelations about the new fragilities facing such top-level executives from
whichever segment of leadership experience they came.
Finally, it must be recognised that this has been an empirical exercise designed to gather
first-hand data and experiences from the current generation of highest level leaders. In
the time available, there has been no attempt to relate the findings to the vast volume
of literature on leadership, which numbers at least 158,000 results for books by the latest
count on Amazon. 12