Discover proven strategies for leadership under fire. Learn crisis management techniques from military and business leaders to thrive under pressure.
Written by Laura Bouttell • Tue 30th December 2025
Leadership under fire refers to the capacity to lead effectively during periods of intense pressure, crisis, or uncertainty—maintaining composure whilst making critical decisions that determine organisational survival. Unlike everyday management, crisis leadership demands a unique blend of emotional regulation, rapid cognition, and moral courage that separates exceptional leaders from those who merely hold titles.
Consider this sobering reality: research from Harvard Kennedy School indicates that 70% of leaders who fail during crises do so not from lack of technical competence, but from character-related deficiencies—an inability to remain calm, think clearly, and inspire confidence when circumstances turn hostile. The question isn't whether you'll face your own trial by fire, but whether you'll emerge from it having strengthened or shattered your leadership credibility.
The concept draws heavily from military traditions, where commanders have always understood that the character revealed under fire matters far more than credentials displayed during peacetime. As the Duke of Wellington reportedly observed after Waterloo, the true test of leadership arrives precisely when plans fall apart and improvisation becomes survival.
Leadership under fire is the ability to provide direction, maintain team morale, and make sound decisions when facing severe organisational stress, reputational threats, or operational emergencies. It encompasses crisis management whilst extending beyond it—addressing not just the tactical response to threats, but the psychological and interpersonal dimensions of leading people through uncertainty.
The term originates from military contexts where officers literally faced gunfire whilst commanding troops. Today's business equivalents—hostile takeovers, product failures, public relations disasters, or sudden market collapses—may lack physical danger but create comparable psychological pressure. The neurological response remains remarkably similar: elevated cortisol, narrowed attention, and the temptation to revert to familiar but potentially inadequate responses.
Modern leadership under fire increasingly references the VUCA framework, originally developed by the U.S. Army War College:
| Element | Definition | Business Example |
|---|---|---|
| Volatility | Rapid, unpredictable change | Currency fluctuations, sudden competitor moves |
| Uncertainty | Lack of predictability | Regulatory changes, technological disruption |
| Complexity | Multiple interconnected forces | Supply chain dependencies, stakeholder conflicts |
| Ambiguity | Unclear cause-and-effect relationships | Market signals, consumer behaviour shifts |
Understanding VUCA conditions helps leaders recognise that crisis leadership isn't about eliminating uncertainty—it's about functioning effectively despite it.
The distinction between leaders who excel under fire and those who falter often comes down to what psychologists call executive function—the cognitive processes governing working memory, flexible thinking, and self-control. Leaders with robust executive function can simultaneously hold multiple variables in mind, resist impulsive reactions, and adapt strategies as new information emerges.
Research from the Domestic Preparedness Journal highlights that executive function operates as "the crisis leader's edge in a high-pressure world." Unlike raw intelligence or domain expertise, executive function can be strengthened through deliberate practice, making it a trainable competitive advantage.
Programmes like Ivey Business School's Leadership Under Fire course consistently reveal a counterintuitive finding: in high-pressure situations, technical skills and knowledge often take a backseat to character-related behaviours. The critical traits include:
This emphasis on character echoes ancient Stoic philosophy, which held that virtue—not external circumstances—determines whether we respond to adversity with wisdom or folly. Marcus Aurelius, who composed his Meditations whilst commanding Roman legions, understood that the leader's internal state shapes the entire organisation's response to crisis.
Developing leadership under fire requires more than reading case studies or attending seminars—it demands experiential learning that simulates genuine pressure. Several approaches have demonstrated effectiveness:
Programmes modelled on military training deliberately place participants in uncomfortable situations where their default responses prove inadequate. The University of Michigan's Sanger Leadership Center offers simulated business and media crises where participants must strategise through extreme turbulence, think on their feet, and demonstrate poise under pressure.
Similarly, Navy SEAL-derived programmes like Unbeatable Mind's Leadership Under Fire teach mission planning and decision-making drills originally designed for special operations. The underlying philosophy recognises that VUCA conditions once prioritised for military training are now regular risk factors in the business world.
Authors Pepyn Dinandt and Colonel Richard Westley, in Business Leadership Under Fire, propose a systematic approach for leaders facing organisational crises:
Mental conditioning practices borrowed from elite military units increasingly appear in executive development. These include:
Understanding common failure modes helps leaders avoid predictable errors when stakes escalate. Research across military, medical, and business contexts reveals consistent patterns:
Under severe pressure, most people instinctively narrow their options and revert to well-tried solutions. Whilst this conserves cognitive resources, it often proves catastrophic when familiar approaches don't fit novel circumstances. Effective crisis leaders train themselves to do the opposite—opening up the solution space by involving others in tackling challenges.
Leaders facing crisis frequently retreat into isolation, hoarding information whilst teams speculate anxiously. This creates information vacuums that rumour and fear quickly fill. Research consistently demonstrates that communicating early and frequently, even with incomplete information, maintains trust far better than silence.
Whether addressing your team, the public, or shareholders, their trust depends heavily on perceiving you as authentic. Yet crisis pressure tempts leaders toward artificial confidence or blame-shifting. The paradox is that acknowledging appropriate vulnerability actually strengthens credibility—leaders who admit uncertainty whilst demonstrating resolve inspire more confidence than those projecting false certainty.
Crisis creates a tension between acting too quickly (before understanding the situation) and too slowly (whilst problems compound). Effective leaders recognise that doing something—even if imperfect—typically beats paralysis, but they also build in feedback loops that allow course correction.
The transfer of military leadership principles to business contexts has accelerated dramatically, driven by recognition that both domains face high-stakes decisions under uncertainty. Key lessons include:
Military operations use "commander's intent"—a clear statement of the mission's purpose that allows subordinates to improvise tactically whilst maintaining strategic alignment. When plans inevitably change upon contact with reality, personnel at all levels can make autonomous decisions that serve the overarching objective.
Business application: Ensure every team member understands why the organisation exists and what success looks like, not just their immediate task list. This enables intelligent adaptation when circumstances shift.
Colonel John Boyd's OODA Loop (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) provides a framework for competitive decision-making under pressure. The leader who cycles through this loop faster than competitors gains decisive advantage—not by being reckless, but by processing information and adapting more rapidly.
| Phase | Military Application | Business Application |
|---|---|---|
| Observe | Battlefield reconnaissance | Market intelligence, customer feedback |
| Orient | Situational analysis | Strategic assessment, scenario planning |
| Decide | Mission planning | Resource allocation, priority setting |
| Act | Tactical execution | Implementation, market action |
The U.S. Army's systematic after-action review process—asking "What happened? Why did it happen? What should we do differently?"—has proven equally valuable in business contexts. The discipline of reflecting whilst events remain fresh prevents repeating mistakes and captures tacit learning that might otherwise dissipate.
A surprising insight from leadership under fire research concerns the importance of followership—the ability to support and trust others in leadership roles. Effective crisis response rarely depends on a single heroic figure; it requires teams where leadership flows to whoever possesses the most relevant capabilities for each phase.
Ivey Business School's programme explicitly teaches that leadership is situational, and sometimes the best way to lead is by stepping back and letting others take the reins. This challenges ego-driven assumptions that leaders must always be in command, recognising instead that rigid hierarchy often impedes adaptive response.
Teams that excel under fire share common characteristics:
Crises that extend beyond initial emergency response—lasting weeks, months, or longer—create cumulative stress that can overwhelm even robust leaders. Sustainable crisis leadership requires attention to personal resilience:
Rather than time management alone, effective crisis leaders manage energy across four dimensions:
Leaders who attempt to shoulder crises alone typically fail. Sustainable performance requires:
The myth of the lone hero leader has caused immense damage—both to organisations that suffer when such leaders inevitably falter, and to individuals who destroy their health pursuing an impossible ideal.
Crisis management focuses primarily on tactical response to specific threats—containing damage, communicating with stakeholders, and restoring normal operations. Leadership under fire encompasses these elements whilst emphasising the human dimensions: maintaining personal composure, inspiring team confidence, making ethical decisions under pressure, and emerging from crisis with strengthened rather than damaged relationships and reputation.
Evidence strongly supports that crisis leadership can be developed through deliberate practice. Whilst some individuals may possess temperamental advantages—lower baseline anxiety, faster cognitive processing—the specific skills of crisis leadership respond to training. Programmes that combine conceptual learning with experiential challenge consistently produce measurable improvements in participants' crisis performance.
Staying calm under pressure involves both immediate techniques and longer-term conditioning. In the moment, structured breathing, deliberate muscle relaxation, and cognitive reframing ("This is a challenge I can address" rather than "This is a catastrophe") help regulate physiological arousal. Long-term practices like meditation, regular exercise, and repeated exposure to controlled stress build resilience that makes calm more accessible during actual crises.
Initial crisis communication should establish three elements: acknowledgment that a serious situation exists, assurance that leadership is engaged and taking action, and commitment to provide updates as information becomes available. Avoid premature promises about outcomes or timelines, but convey genuine concern and active response. Silence in crisis is rarely interpreted charitably.
Military leadership principles transfer effectively because both domains involve coordinating people toward objectives under uncertain, often adversarial conditions. Key transferable concepts include commander's intent (enabling decentralised decision-making), the OODA loop (rapid adaptation cycle), after-action reviews (systematic learning), and mission focus (maintaining clarity about what truly matters amidst chaos).
The most damaging pattern is retreating into isolation—hoarding information, making decisions without input, and projecting false confidence whilst privately feeling overwhelmed. This creates information vacuums, prevents access to potentially crucial perspectives, and ultimately damages trust when the leader's limitations become apparent. Effective crisis leaders instead expand their circle, communicate transparently, and acknowledge uncertainty whilst demonstrating resolve.
Meaningful development typically requires sustained effort over months rather than days. Initial awareness can emerge quickly from reading or short programmes, but building the reflexes, emotional regulation, and pattern recognition that enable effective crisis response demands repeated practice under challenging conditions. Organisations serious about crisis leadership invest in ongoing development rather than one-time training events.
Leadership under fire represents the ultimate test of whether a leader's capabilities are genuine or merely situational. When the comfortable circumstances that enabled success disappear, what remains reveals true character. Ernest Shackleton, stranded in Antarctic ice with his crew facing certain death, demonstrated that extraordinary leadership can transform impossible situations. Countless others, equally credentialed on paper, have discovered under pressure that their leadership was thinner than they imagined.
The encouraging truth is that crisis leadership capabilities can be consciously developed. Through deliberate practice, honest self-reflection, and willingness to learn from both success and failure, leaders can prepare themselves for the inevitable moments when everything depends on their capacity to remain effective whilst under fire.
Those who invest in this preparation rarely regret it. Those who assume crisis leadership will somehow emerge spontaneously when needed frequently discover, too late, that hope is not a strategy.