An Executive Committee Rarely Fails Because of Its Strengths Taken to Extremes

An executive committee rarely fails because of its flaws. The usual thing is for it to fail because of its strengths taken to extremes, precisely when there's the most pressure.

Imagine a committee that's been working well for three years. A bad quarter arrives and a major client is lost. Within two weeks, the sales director promises the board a recovery no one has calculated, the CFO stops voicing opinions and asks for everything in writing, and everyone else looks to the CEO expecting him to decide.

No one has changed their personality. The situation has changed. This isn't a rare story: I've experienced it first-hand and heard it from several colleagues on very different projects.

What Selection Sees and What Appears Later

When a company chooses someone for its committee, it decides based on what it sees, and what it sees is usually their best side: the energy, the ambition, the confidence, the ability to persuade. That's their reputation, and it's what determines who gets promoted. The problem is the moment when you're looking. A selection or promotion process is precisely when everyone takes most care of their image, which is why it's the worst moment to anticipate how that person will act under pressure.

That's why the Hogan Development Survey is so useful to us. It measures behavioral risks that are barely visible day-to-day and that appear when we stop managing our image: in moments of high pressure, with too many fronts open, in a role that doesn't fit and also—and this is the uncomfortable part—right after a great success or when one feels so comfortable with their team that they stop watching themselves. A committee that's been winning for years may be more exposed than a newly formed one.

And it shows us something valuable and paradoxical: the strengths of the visible side, the one we show every day, often reappear as risks on the hidden side. They're not two different people. It's the same strength without brakes:

• Confidence and vision. They make a great first impression. Under pressure, it becomes hard to admit mistakes and listen to bad news.
• Charisma and ability to persuade. They open doors. Under pressure, too many commitments are made and it's hard to close what gets opened.
• Rigor and order. They provide reliability. Taken to extremes, micromanagement happens and delegation stops precisely when adaptation is needed.

That's why a committee doesn't usually derail because of its flaws. It derails because of its strengths, the day no one reins them in.

If all its members went through the same filter, with the same criteria and the same CEO choosing them, they likely share the same type of risk. It's like a portfolio where all the assets move together: in good years it performs well and in a bad year everything falls at once.

At Xpand we've seen that, under pressure, committees tend toward one of three patterns. The one that withdraws: everyone takes refuge in their area and decisions are postponed. The one that collides: results are promised without calculating them and no one admits mistakes. And the one that folds: the CEO is obeyed and no one tells him no.

Having one risk at the table is normal; almost everyone has one or two. The problem is when everyone has the same one and no one knows it.

What Your Committee Can Do Before the Next Crisis

The best time to understand the risks is when everything is going well. This exercise fits into a single executive meeting:

• Each member writes how they think they behave under high pressure.
• The others tell them how they see it: only behaviors, no labels.
• The committee looks at the whole: what pattern do we share? Who can rein in whom?
• They agree in writing on how to alert each other ("when you see me doing this, tell me like this") and review it each quarter.

And if you're a CEO, one question before the next meeting: who at this table can tell me no? If the answer takes a while to come, you already have a data point.

At Xpand we support executive committees in understanding their behavioral risks and converting them into working agreements before the pressure arrives