Instability

1.  Instability. In times of crisis and confusion, followers seek direction and clarity; they want leaders to stabilize matters, often in the quickest way possible. Instability in the environment makes it convenient for calculating leaders to assert more power than they should and make decisions that are not within the bounds of the established organizational structure. When rules and systemic structures are not clearly established, opportunistic leaders can exploit the system to their own ends. Acting unilaterally, they can make radical changes. It is natural for all of us to want to find certainty in uncertain times, but we need to be vigilant about who we let lead and how they lead in these situations. Unstable contexts provide ripe opportunities for leaders to grab power and create rules that serve the leaders and their own purposes rather than the common good.

A classic historical example of an unstable situation resulting in ineffective leadership is apparent in the events surrounding the assassination attempt on U.S. president Ronald Reagan on March 30, 1981. The president was shot while leaving the Washington Hilton after giving a luncheon speech for representatives of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations. He was immediately rushed to George Washington University Hospital where he was taken to surgery. Because his condition was unknown, there was great anxiety in the country and around the world. In the White House, there was chaos because there was no established protocol in place for this type of calamity. It did not help matters that Vice President George H. W. Bush was out of town giving a speech in Texas.

Behind the scenes at the White House, efforts by staff to stabilize matters were ineffective. In this disordered and tumultuous context, Secretary of State Alexander Haig decided on his own to address the press. He was out of breath and appeared very anxious, and when asked by the media who was making decisions for the government, Haig made a now famous statement: “As of now, I am in control here, in the White House.” Furthermore, he made the mistake of erroneously claiming that after the vice president, he, the secretary of state, was third in the line of succession to the presidency rather than the Speaker of the House. Haig’s attempt to lead was seen by many as overreaching his role and taking power that was not legitimately his to take. In the end, instead of providing calm, Haig’s leadership resulted in greater uncertainty and anxiety.