The one lever in this issue: Conformity is a decision. We just rarely treat it as one.
Spent the entire week learning about org development from a sociological perspective in Hamburg! What a privilege.
Two things worth your time this week:
(🇩🇪 only) - I recently wrote a piece for Springer about leverage in decision-making.
I found this book on transitions refreshing (lots of stories) and well-researched. Breaks the mold of stereotypical self-help non-fiction.
The Story: 73 Seconds
A cold January morning. The organization was a showpiece — a symbol of human progress, technical excellence, the pride of a nation. From the outside, everything looked perfect — state-of-the-art technology, experienced teams, strict protocols.
Until it didn’t.
73 seconds. That was all that remained of years of preparation, billions in investment, and the future of seven people who had gone to work that morning. The direct cause was a brittle rubber O-ring that failed under low-temperature conditions — exactly as predicted.
The day before the launch, engineers had warned. Allan McDonald, the project manager, and Roger Boisjoly, the O-ring expert, protested. They told leadership the seals would fail below freezing. Robert Lund, the deputy director of engineering, backed them and escalated to his boss, Jerry Mason.
Mason’s reply ended the discussion: “Take off your engineering hat and put on your management hat.”
Lund relented, and the warning was set aside. The launch was approved.
Challenger, exploding shortly after launch.
On January 28, 1986, the Space Shuttle Challenger broke apart 73 seconds after lifting off from Cape Canaveral. Seven astronauts died.
This was the predictable output of a culture that systematically rewarded the avoidance of responsibility. No one planned to sabotage the mission.
The engineers who had spoken up — McDonald and Boisjoly — were later quietly moved to other departments, which they experienced as a kind of punishment.
The Insight: The Script of Conformity
There’s a script even more powerful than passivity. The script says “don’t disagree” — at least not when disagreement might threaten the group's harmony or goal.
The fuel for this script is one of our oldest fears: the pressure to belong. The fear of being cast out, of being labeled difficult or “not a team player,” becomes one of the strongest motivators for irresponsible silence. And it produces that familiar, painful inner conflict: we know exactly what’s right, but the wish to belong is louder. Because humans are wired to belong.
So we accept being wrong over being alone.
When this script becomes the unwritten rule of an entire organization, what emerges is a complicity of silence — and it can take down the largest, most important projects humans ever attempt.
The question worth sitting with: in your organization, what gets rewarded when someone takes off their (proverbial) engineering hat and puts on their management hat?
Your Quick Win: The Hat Test
Before your next leadership meeting, run this five-minute check:
Name the decision on the table. Write it in one sentence.
Ask the hat question. “What would I say about this if I only had my expertise hat on, with no political consideration?” Write the answer.
Compare it to what you actually plan to say. Note the gap.
Identify what’s closing the gap. Is it new information — or social pressure?
If it’s pressure, say one sentence of the harder version out loud in the room. Not the whole thing. Just one sentence that wouldn’t have made it through the filter.
One sentence is often enough to break a script.
Yours,
Julius Bachmann
At Bachmann Catalyst, we help CEOs of scaling companies (100-1,000 employees) navigate complexity with clarity – integrating strategy, leadership architecture, and personal mastery to build businesses that matter without burning out.
↪️ Ready to find your one lever? Book a call here.
If this email was forwarded, click here to subscribe to the newsletter.
