Innovation Risks, Rewards, and Consequences

Let’s connect some dots, shall we?

In Kathryn Bigelow’s Zero Dark Thirty, there’s a tense scene set in December 2009 at Camp Chapman, a U.S. Forward Operating Base in Afghanistan. A senior CIA operative paces while impatiently awaiting the arrival of a supposed informant she believes is close to Osama Bin Laden. As his car approaches the base, she demands that the sentries stand down as a demonstration of trust. The chief security officer’s response foreshadows tragedy:

“Procedures only work if we follow them every time.”

Moments later, after entering the compound unimpeded, the "informant" detonates a suicide vest, killing eight CIA personnel and a Jordanian intelligence officer—one of the deadliest days in CIA history.

*****

While rewatching the movie last week, that scene hit differently, in part because I was also making travel plans for a reunion, of sorts, with a few former Arthur Andersen colleagues—some of whom I had not seen since the firm’s collapse in 2002 as part of the Enron debacle. For those less familiar, here’s an oversimplified version of the end of the story:

Enron’s executives pressured Andersen’s audit team to approve aggressive, arguably misleading, accounting treatments. The firm’s Professional Standards Group (PSG), which existed precisely to resist such client pressure, initially objected. But Andersen’s leadership overruled them to protect the relationship—and the fees.

When Enron’s inflated profits and hidden liabilities came to light in 2001, investor confidence cratered, the stock collapsed, and the whole scheme unraveled. Andersen’s reputation was destroyed, capped by an obstruction of justice indictment tied to the Enron investigation.

In other words: procedures only work if we follow them every time.

*****

The world of innovation is filled with stories about bold risk-takers who pushed past safeguards to bring their brilliant ideas to life. From Henry Ford increasing the Model T assembly line to unsafe speeds, to Uber’s early rollout ignoring safety and licensing requirements, to Facebook’s “move fast and break things” ethos, cutting corners can be a recipe for success. Until it isn’t.

Effective leaders know they must balance innovation excellence with operational excellence. But deliberately bypassing established protocols because “this time is different” is a fast track to predictable, preventable disasters. In both the Camp Chapman and Andersen cases, the appearance of diligence was maintained while the substance was abandoned. Professionals tasked with enforcing controls were overruled for expedience, with irreversible consequences.

Organizations design procedures to manage risks that can never be fully eliminated. The true test of these safeguards is whether they’re applied when it’s inconvenient—when the mission is critical, the client is valuable, or the stakes are highest. In both the Camp Chapman and the Andersen cases, decision-makers chose to override their own controls in pursuit of outsized rewards—and the result was catastrophe.

Effective decision-making requires the courage to take calculated risks without abandoning essential safeguards, especially when the pressure to do so is greatest.*

Choose wisely.

---

*For my fellow Tom Clancy fans, insert reference to the "arrogant" Russian submarine Captain Tupolev here. :-)