There are many lessons to be drawn by thinking leaders from the current conflict between Israel and Iran, but one of the most important things it exposes is the risk of committing to one possible future when it is impossible to know what the future actually holds.
Iran’s leadership became convinced that Israel’s obvious preparations for war were a bluff intended to force it into a negotiated settlement to dismantle its nuclear program during its upcoming talks with the United States, which had been scheduled to begin this weekend in Oman. As a result, it failed to take the steps necessary to prepare its defenses (such as they were) and – more importantly – move senior military leaders and scientists to secure facilities.
This made them easy targets for Israel, thanks to its robust intelligence network.
What Iran failed to do was plan for both possibilities – that Israel was bluffing and that it was not. Taking what steps it could to secure high-value targets while also preparing for the upcoming negotiations with the U.S. would have cost it little and almost certainly reduced its losses from Israel’s initial attacks.
That is why I emphasize the need for leaders to adopt plans with optionality.
It is worth noting that there was nothing inherently irrational in the conclusion the Iranians drew. Indeed, Israel came to a similar one when it saw Egypt and Syria mobilizing for war back in 1973. Like the Iranians, Israel concluded this was just political saber-rattling, designed to force them into concessions at the negotiating table. Israel mistakenly believed that their backers in Moscow would prevent them from launching a full-scale attack, just as Iran mistakenly believed Washington would restrain Israel.
What was irrational in both cases was failing to allow for the opposite to be true.
That is why it is essential for leaders – in government, in the military, and in business – to develop plans and strategies that allow for uncertainty and ambiguity. Decision-support methodologies such as red teaming help leaders do just that.
In my work with clients, I always advocate for the simultaneous pursuit of diverse options. Committing to only one course of action is a recipe for disaster in today’s volatile and uncertain world.
Of course, pursuing multiple strategic options simultaneously requires careful management to avoid confusion, resource dispersion, or indecision. Leaders must rigorously prioritize and communicate clearly, ensuring optionality does not devolve into paralysis or inefficiency. But when done correctly, maintaining strategic flexibility remains undeniably advantageous.
Again, this is as true in business as it is in the military.
The ability to successfully navigate complexity and ambiguity is the most essential skill for leaders to cultivate. So, make that a top priority for your own personal development so that you can be the leader your organization needs today.