.png)
Leading Through Uncertainty: Risk and Decision-Making in a Nonlinear World
- Julien Haye
- Mar 28, 2025
- 14 min read
Periods of prolonged uncertainty have become a defining characteristic of the modern operating environment. Geopolitical instability, technological disruption, cyber threats, climate-related events and economic volatility increasingly interact in ways that challenge traditional approaches to leadership, governance and risk management.
In these conditions, organisations naturally look to leaders for certainty. Yet certainty is often unavailable. Decisions must be made with incomplete information, evolving assumptions and consequences that extend well beyond individual functions or business units.
The question is no longer:
"How do we return to normal?"
It is:
"How do we continue making sound decisions when normal is constantly evolving?"
Leading through uncertainty therefore requires more than resilience or effective crisis management. It requires leaders who can navigate complexity, encourage informed challenge, adapt as conditions change and preserve the quality of strategic decision-making despite ambiguity.
Drawing on insights from Roger Spitz, together with our ongoing work on ethical leadership, psychological safety and risk culture, this article explores how leaders can develop the capabilities needed to move beyond reacting to disruption towards leading confidently in an increasingly complex world.
Executive Takeaways
For readers scanning rather than reading in full, five governing insights frame the argument:
Uncertainty has become a permanent operating condition rather than an occasional disruption.
Leaders can no longer assume that organisations will return to stable conditions after each crisis. Economic volatility, geopolitical instability, technological change and systemic interdependencies require organisations to make strategic decisions while uncertainty continues to evolve.
Leadership under uncertainty depends on decision quality rather than certainty.
Effective leaders do not wait for perfect information. They combine disciplined judgement, informed challenge and adaptability to make sound decisions despite ambiguity, continuously reassessing assumptions as new information emerges.
Complexity requires governance that enables learning and adaptation.
Traditional governance remains essential but must evolve beyond control and compliance alone. Organisations need governance structures that encourage collaboration, support timely escalation, enable informed challenge and adapt as conditions change.
Culture determines how effectively organisations navigate complexity.
Psychological safety, diverse perspectives and open challenge improve the quality of information reaching decision-makers. Organisations that encourage learning and constructive challenge are better equipped to identify emerging risks, question assumptions and respond before issues become systemic.
Resilience is measured by the ability to preserve decision quality as conditions change.
Organisations rarely outperform uncertainty because they predict disruption more accurately. They succeed because they continue making disciplined decisions, learn from new information and adapt without losing strategic direction.
From Crisis Response to Complexity Competence
Traditional crisis management frameworks emphasise control. They follow a familiar sequence: stabilise, assess, respond, and recover. Implicit within this approach is the assumption that disruption is temporary and that, once managed, the organisation will return to a relatively stable operating environment.
More and more, that assumption no longer holds.
Economic volatility, geopolitical instability, cyber threats, artificial intelligence, climate-related disruption and increasingly interconnected supply chains have fundamentally altered the operating environment. Uncertainty is no longer episodic. Leaders are expected to make strategic decisions, deliver their objectives and adapt while conditions continue to evolve.
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed this shift. Reactive, control-based approaches were outpaced by rapidly changing circumstances and complex interdependencies. The organisations that responded most effectively were not necessarily those with the most detailed crisis plans, but those that combined disciplined governance with curiosity, adaptability, transparent communication and the ability to learn quickly as new information emerged.
This represents an important evolution in how we think about resilience. Recovering from disruption is not enough. It is also necessary to adapt while disruption continues, preserving the organisation's ability to make sound decisions, coordinate effectively and pursue its strategic objectives despite changing conditions.
Developing this capability requires more than robust processes. It requires leaders who are comfortable navigating ambiguity, organisations that encourage informed challenge and continuous learning, governance that enables decisions to be taken at the appropriate level, and timely information that helps identify emerging patterns before they become material risks. It also requires organisations to reconsider the balance between efficiency and adaptability, recognising that resilience often depends on maintaining sufficient flexibility, capacity and optionality to respond when conditions change.
Complexity competence is therefore becoming a core leadership capability. It enables organisations to move beyond containing uncertainty towards operating effectively within it, treating uncertainty not as an exception to manage, but as a defining characteristic of the modern business environment.
Practitioner Insight - How should boards lead through prolonged uncertainty?
To explore how senior leaders view governance priorities during sustained uncertainty, I recently asked board members, executives and risk professionals:
What should boards focus on most during prolonged uncertainty?
111 professionals responded:
34% – Stronger oversight
31% – Faster adaptation
19% – Better information
16% – Better decisions
While stronger oversight received the highest proportion of responses, the results suggest that practitioners recognise uncertainty as more than a governance challenge alone. Oversight, adaptability, information quality and decision-making are deeply interconnected. Effective boards do not simply strengthen oversight; they ensure governance enables organisations to adapt, learn and continue making sound strategic decisions as conditions evolve.
Source: Aevitium LinkedIn Poll, July 2026 (111 responses at the time of writing).
The Risk of Linear Thinking in a Nonlinear World
Linear thinking offers comfort. It assumes stability, predictability and a clear path from cause to effect. Traditional risk management has long relied on this logic by classifying risks, assigning ownership, estimating likelihood and impact, and designing controls to reduce exposure. These disciplines remain essential, but they are no longer sufficient on their own.
The world no longer behaves in predictable, linear ways.
We now operate in a nonlinear risk environment where second- and third-order effects, feedback loops and systemic interdependencies increasingly shape outcomes. Consider climate change, cyber threats, geopolitical instability, artificial intelligence or global supply chains. These risks rarely develop in isolation. They interact, amplify one another and often create consequences far beyond their original source.
What makes this shift particularly challenging is that many leadership and governance practices still assume complexity can be broken down into manageable parts. Organisations naturally divide risks into functions, assign clear ownership and optimise individual processes. While these approaches improve accountability, many of today's most significant risks emerge from the interactions between systems, functions and external dependencies, rather than from any single source.
This represents a fundamental shift in how we think about risk. Rather than viewing risk solely as something to identify, measure and control, organisations must increasingly anticipate how risks interact, evolve and influence strategic objectives over time.
It also requires organisations to rethink how they:
Develop leaders, building curiosity, systems thinking and sound judgement alongside technical expertise.
Design governance, enabling adaptive decision-making, cross-functional collaboration and timely escalation as conditions evolve.
Evaluate leadership performance, recognising decision quality, learning and adaptability alongside business outcomes.
In a nonlinear world, good decisions will not always produce good outcomes, and poor outcomes do not necessarily indicate poor decision-making. Recognising this distinction helps organisations avoid hindsight bias, learn more effectively and strengthen future decisions rather than simply judging past results.
The response is not to pursue ever greater control, but to develop the capability to lead effectively in complexity. Complexity competence enables leaders to combine disciplined governance, informed judgement, adaptability and continuous learning to navigate uncertainty while maintaining strategic direction.
Case Study: Netflix and Leading Through Uncertainty
Netflix's evolution from a DVD-by-mail business to a global streaming platform and leading content producer is often presented as a story of strategic foresight. In reality, it is a compelling example of leading through uncertainty in a rapidly changing and highly interconnected environment.
Each stage of Netflix's transformation unfolded amid significant uncertainty. Broadband infrastructure was still developing, consumer behaviour continued to evolve, content licensing models shifted, and new competitors emerged from both the technology and media sectors. Rather than following a predetermined roadmap, Netflix continuously adapted its strategy as market conditions changed.
The journey was far from linear. In 2011, Netflix announced plans to separate its DVD rental and streaming businesses under a new brand, Qwikster. The proposal was poorly received, leading to the loss of approximately 800,000 subscribers and a sharp decline in market value. Rather than defending the decision, leadership quickly acknowledged the feedback, reversed course and incorporated those lessons into future decision-making. The setback became part of the organisation's learning process rather than evidence that experimentation should be avoided.
This ability to learn was reinforced by Netflix's distinctive culture of "Freedom and Responsibility." Rather than relying on detailed rules or highly centralised decision-making, leaders focused on providing context, empowering employees to exercise judgement and encouraging informed experimentation. Governance centred less on control and more on enabling capable people to make sound decisions while adapting as new information emerged.
Netflix also recognised that good decisions do not always produce immediate positive outcomes. New products, original content and market expansion all carried uncertainty, and not every investment succeeded. Individual failures were evaluated for the quality of the underlying decision rather than judged solely by the eventual outcome. This encouraged continuous learning, challenged assumptions and strengthened future decisions rather than reinforcing risk aversion.
Netflix's success was not built on accurately predicting the future. It was built on creating an organisation capable of adapting as the future unfolded through disciplined decision-making, continuous learning and a culture that embraced uncertainty rather than resisted it.
Key Insight: Complexity competence does not eliminate uncertainty or prevent setbacks. It enables organisations to respond, learn and adapt without losing strategic direction when conditions evolve in unexpected ways.
Complexity Is Not Chaos
Complexity is often confused with disorder. In reality, complex systems exhibit patterns, dependencies and feedback mechanisms that can be understood, even if they cannot always be predicted with precision.
Leadership in complexity is therefore not about eliminating uncertainty or waiting for complete information. It is about recognising where certainty is possible, where judgement is required and where adaptation becomes more valuable than prediction.
This distinction changes the role of leadership. Rather than seeking perfect answers, leaders focus on improving the quality of decisions by encouraging diverse perspectives, testing assumptions, monitoring weak signals and remaining prepared to adjust course as conditions evolve.
Complexity does not remove the need for governance. It increases its importance. Governance provides the discipline that enables organisations to adapt without losing strategic direction.
What Great Leaders Do Differently in Uncertainty
1. They stay anchored in values, not just plans.
In a complex environment, strategy provides direction rather than certainty. Plans remain important, but they must evolve as conditions change. Leaders who rely solely on prescriptive plans often find themselves constrained when assumptions no longer hold. Those anchored in values such as integrity, transparency and fairness can adapt their approach without compromising the principles that guide their decisions.
Values provide consistency when circumstances do not. They help leaders make disciplined decisions, balance competing priorities and maintain trust, even when information is incomplete and the path forward is uncertain.
This links directly to our article on Ethical Leadership in Risk Management, where we explored how values-based decision-making provides strategic clarity when certainty is no longer available.
2. They embrace dissent and diversity of thought.
Uncertainty multiplies blind spots. Leaders who discourage challenge or surround themselves with like-minded voices increase their exposure to risk. In our earlier discussion on Speak-Up Culture, we explored how silence creates organisational fragility. By contrast, organisations that foster psychological safety surface weak signals earlier, challenge assumptions more effectively and make better-informed decisions.
Roger Spitz emphasises that leaders must cultivate cognitive and cultural diversity not as a compliance exercise, but as a strategic capability for navigating uncertainty. Diverse perspectives improve the quality of decisions by broadening the information available, exposing hidden assumptions and reducing the risk of collective blind spots.
3. They make reversible decisions.
Waiting for perfect information is rarely an option in a complex environment. Effective leaders distinguish between reversible decisions, which can be adjusted as new information emerges, and irreversible decisions, which require greater scrutiny and stronger evidence before commitment.
This reflects Roger Spitz's concept of dynamic foresight: the ability to act with incomplete information while preserving the flexibility to adapt as circumstances evolve. Rather than seeking certainty, leaders build learning into the decision-making process through regular review, continuous monitoring and a willingness to change course when assumptions no longer hold.
This mirrors the evolution of risk management itself. Organisations are moving beyond static risk registers towards living frameworks that continuously learn, adapt and evolve alongside the changing environment.
Explore how leadership clarity and escalation behaviours can be strengthened with our Risk Leadership Diagnostics.
Decision-Making Frameworks for Volatility
In an unpredictable world, no single decision-making framework is sufficient. Different situations demand different approaches. Effective leaders therefore develop a portfolio of decision-making practices that help them interpret uncertainty, challenge assumptions and adapt as new information emerges.
These approaches do not eliminate uncertainty or create false precision. They improve decision quality, particularly when time is limited, information is incomplete and conditions continue to evolve. They complement disciplined judgement rather than replace it. For a deeper exploration of this topic, see our article Preserving Executive Decision Discipline Under Uncertainty.
Here are three powerful approaches:
1. OODA Loop (Observe – Orient – Decide – Act)
Originally developed for military pilots, the OODA loop has become a go-to mental model for making agile decisions in volatile situations. It enables leaders to stay ahead by cycling rapidly through:
Observe: Scan for new data, anomalies, and weak signals.
Orient: Make sense of information in context—what does it mean for us?
Decide: Choose a course of action quickly, even if incomplete.
Act: Implement, then loop back to observe results.
In highly dynamic environments, such as cyber incidents, public crises or geopolitical events, learning quickly becomes more valuable than predicting perfectly. The OODA Loop enables organisations to shorten feedback cycles, test assumptions continuously and adapt decisions as conditions evolve.
2. Pre-Mortems and Red Teaming
Traditional risk assessments often ask what could go wrong. A pre-mortem assumes that an important initiative has already failed and asks why. This subtle shift encourages teams to challenge assumptions before they become embedded in decision-making.
This unlocks fresh thinking by:
Reversing hindsight bias
Creating space for candid conversations about vulnerabilities
Highlighting hidden assumptions and blind spots
To learn more, please review the Aevitium’s downloadable pre-morten toolkit.
Red Teaming takes it further. It deliberately introduces structured dissent into decision-making. A “Red Team” is empowered to challenge assumptions, simulate adversaries, or pressure-test proposals. Red Teaming deliberately introduces structured challenge into significant decisions. Rather than seeking consensus, it tests the resilience of assumptions, explores alternative scenarios and exposes vulnerabilities before they become operational issues.
Both methods work best in environments where dissent is safe and challenge is welcomed, not penalised.
3. Complexity Mapping
In a world of entangled risks, mapping out interconnected dependencies across systems, actors, and processes is essential. Complexity mapping helps leaders move beyond individual risks to understand how decisions ripple across the organisation. It highlights dependencies that traditional risk registers often struggle to capture and improves strategic conversations by making interconnected systems visible.
Complexity mapping visualises:
Cross-functional impacts of key decisions
Feedback loops and delays
Unintended consequences and non-obvious touchpoints
This can be done through causal loop diagrams, network maps, or systems thinking workshops. The goal isn’t to model everything—it’s to make visible what’s often invisible.
Culture Is the Precondition
No framework, however well designed, will improve decision-making if people are reluctant to challenge assumptions or share concerns.
If challenge is viewed as disloyalty,
If mistakes are punished rather than examined,
If decisions are driven by politics rather than evidence, then even the strongest decision-making frameworks will fail to deliver their intended value.
Culture determines whether information moves, whether assumptions are questioned and whether leaders receive an accurate picture of reality. Without these conditions, decision-making gradually becomes less informed, blind spots multiply and organisations become slower to recognise emerging risks.
This is why the role of the risk function must continue to evolve beyond policy enforcement. It should become a strategic enabler, strengthening decision quality by facilitating constructive challenge, surfacing weak signals, supporting organisational learning and building trust in how decisions are made, challenged and escalated.
Without this cultural foundation, even the most sophisticated frameworks remain processes rather than capabilities.
Board Oversight Checklist
Five Questions Directors Should Ask About Leading Through Uncertainty
1. Does our governance enable better decisions as uncertainty increases?
Periods of prolonged uncertainty place greater demands on governance, not fewer. Directors should assess whether governance structures support timely decision-making, informed challenge and adaptation, or whether they unintentionally slow responses through excessive hierarchy, rigid approval processes or outdated assumptions.
2. Are leaders receiving information that reflects reality rather than reassurance?
Decision quality depends on the quality of information reaching senior leadership. Boards should seek assurance that reporting captures emerging risks, operational concerns and diverse perspectives rather than filtered updates that reinforce existing assumptions or provide a false sense of certainty.
3. How effectively does our organisation challenge assumptions before major decisions are made?
Uncertainty increases the likelihood of blind spots and cognitive bias. Directors should understand how constructive challenge is embedded into strategic decision-making through diverse perspectives, scenario analysis, pre-mortems or structured challenge before significant commitments are made.
4. Does our organisation adapt quickly as conditions change?
Resilient organisations recognise that assumptions evolve over time. Boards should examine whether major decisions are regularly reviewed, whether learning is incorporated into future decisions, and whether governance enables timely adjustment rather than defending decisions that no longer reflect current conditions.
5. Are we building a culture that strengthens decision quality?
Culture influences how information flows, how concerns are raised and how decisions are challenged. Directors should consider whether leadership behaviours, governance practices and organisational incentives encourage transparency, psychological safety and continuous learning, enabling better decisions under uncertainty rather than simply stronger compliance.
Conclusion: Leading Through Uncertainty Is a Cultural Choice
Leadership in today's environment is no longer defined by having the most certain answers. It is defined by the ability to make disciplined decisions, adapt as conditions evolve and maintain trust when certainty is no longer available.
The leaders who thrive in complexity:
Make disciplined decisions despite uncertainty.
Encourage informed challenge and diverse perspectives.
Adapt strategy without compromising core principles.
Treat learning and adaptation as competitive advantages.
This is not simply a leadership philosophy. It is a risk management imperative.
And it does not stop at the executive team. Your risk function, too often viewed primarily as a control mechanism, must continue to evolve into a strategic enabler by:
Facilitating constructive challenge and difficult conversations.
Helping leaders interpret uncertainty and improve decision quality.
Building trust in how decisions are informed, challenged and owned.
Embedding learning into governance, not just compliance into processes.
Without this cultural foundation, even the most sophisticated decision-making frameworks become processes rather than organisational capabilities.
These themes are explored further in The Risk Within, which examines how psychological safety, leadership behaviour and organisational culture influence the quality of strategic decision-making in uncertain environments.
Uncertainty is no longer an exception to manage. It is a defining characteristic of modern leadership.
Organisations do not outperform uncertainty because they predict every disruption more accurately. They outperform it because they preserve the quality of their decisions as uncertainty increases.
Leadership through uncertainty ultimately depends on culture, governance and the ability to learn faster than the environment changes.
The question is no longer whether uncertainty will continue to grow.
It is whether your organisation is equipped to make better decisions because of it.
About the Author: Julien Haye
Managing Director of Aevitium LTD and former Chief Risk Officer with over 26 years of experience in global financial services and non-profit organisations. Known for his pragmatic, people-first approach, Julien specialises in transforming risk and compliance into strategic enablers. He is the author of The Risk Within: Cultivating Psychological Safety for Strategic Decision-Making and hosts the RiskMasters podcast, where he shares insights from risk leaders and change makers.
FAQs
1. Why is leading through uncertainty becoming a core leadership capability?
Uncertainty is no longer limited to isolated crises. Organisations now operate in environments shaped by interconnected geopolitical, technological, regulatory and economic changes that evolve continuously. Leaders must therefore make strategic decisions while conditions remain fluid, balancing speed, judgement and adaptability rather than waiting for complete certainty.
2. How can boards improve decision-making during prolonged uncertainty?
Boards strengthen decision-making by focusing on the quality of governance rather than the quantity of oversight. This includes ensuring leaders receive timely and diverse information, encouraging constructive challenge, regularly testing assumptions, reviewing decisions as circumstances evolve and creating governance structures that enable organisations to adapt without losing strategic direction.
3. Why do good decisions sometimes produce poor outcomes?
In complex environments, outcomes are influenced by factors beyond any single decision. External events, interconnected risks and changing conditions may alter results even when decisions were reasonable based on the information available at the time. High-performing organisations therefore evaluate both decision quality and decision outcomes, using unexpected results as opportunities to learn rather than evidence that every decision was flawed.
4. What role does organisational culture play in decision-making?
Culture influences how information moves through an organisation, whether assumptions are challenged and whether emerging risks are raised early. Organisations that encourage psychological safety, informed challenge and continuous learning are more likely to identify weak signals, avoid blind spots and maintain better decision quality during periods of uncertainty.
5. How can organisations become more effective at leading through uncertainty?
There is no single framework that eliminates uncertainty. Organisations improve by combining adaptive governance, disciplined decision-making, continuous learning and leadership behaviours that encourage curiosity, collaboration and informed challenge. The objective is not to predict every disruption but to preserve the quality of decisions as conditions continue to evolve.