Published 14 March 2025 in Leadership • 8 min read • 
Audio available
A client said recently with a sigh: “It’s like the world suddenly suspended the rules and went on fast-track.” Since the global “vibe shift” of Donald Trump’s presidency, he noted that his colleagues were moving ever faster: “We feel the swells of geopolitics on the shop floor. We are trying to keep up, but it feels like we are constantly falling behind.” He is not alone. Many professionals and political leaders are experiencing an acceleration in decision-making and power dynamics that seem to dissolve conventional constraints.
Leadership behavior is evolving, too. The executives I work with report seeing leaders emulate what they observe in dominant political figures. As one remarked: “We see world leaders behaving as if checks and balances don’t apply to them. It’s infectious and reshapes our ideas of what acceptable and effective leadership looks like.”
Reactions to these shifts are deeply divided. For some, values like mutual respect, moderation, and attention to the greater good appear to be fading, replaced by egoism, maximalism, and a survival-of-the-fittest mentality. Others welcome the change and note that a rebalancing of corporate leadership is taking place. “I can’t wait to get out of the pronoun debate, the greenwashing, and the endless virtue signaling and get back to business,” one executive declared. Another summed up the facts: “It’s simple: the laws of speed and power have shifted. The only question is how to adapt.”
What should one do when those in positions of authority behave in ways that contradict widely accepted norms of civility, empathy, and ethical leadership? How should one navigate a world where leaders who attempt to mediate and build bridges are ridiculed, undermined, or emotionally overwhelmed?
The political leaders of Denmark, Mexico, Panama, Canada, and Ukraine have all had to navigate these rapid shifts in the face of a turbulent new American presidency. Each has had to contend with extreme demands, rapid context-switching, and a stark departure from conventional norms.
As defined by economist Albert Hirschman’s classic concept, when faced with a decline in the value of a relationship, individuals can choose one of three paths:
Each will mean trade-offs. The price of resistance has increased but so has the risk of passive acquiescence. If you meet unreasonable demands from all-powerful leaders, defiance feels untenable, and deference feels intolerable. Forget the moral high ground. The only path forward is to engage and maximize your influence by building enough power and clout to respond effectively and understand the psychology of omnipotent leaders.
“The leader who speaks first defines the terms of the debate making it harder for alternative views to gain traction. Get there first, and shape their first impressions and baseline understanding.”
Omnipotent leaders see themselves as exempt from the norms of ethical or socially acceptable behavior due to a heightened sense of self-importance and entitlement. The mission (or rather their mission) justifies most, if not all, means to an end. Such leaders often exhibit moral licensing, believing past good deeds justify present transgressions. A tell-tale sign is excessive risk-taking and skirting formalities and rules of procedure.Â
In rare cases, omnipotence is associated with underlying and chronic pathological personality traits such as narcissistic personality disorder. More often, omnipotence is an emerging and transient psychological state. Leaders may become “high on their own supply” and exhibit omnipotent traits following significant recognition or a victory rush, such as winning an election, receiving extensive media praise, or achieving a major career milestone.Â
Omnipotence can also be understood within the broader framework of leadership overconfidence and hubris. The hubris syndrome is a condition wherein prolonged power and success lead to narcissistic tendencies, overconfidence, and diminished capacity for critical self-reflection. Research indicates that CEOs often become less altruistic and more self-serving after ascending to their role, exhibiting behaviors that prioritize personal gain over collective welfare, frequently coupled with condescending attitudes toward subordinates and colleagues.Â
How can mere mortals – and perhaps conventional and earthbound leaders and collaborators – respond when faced with power dynamics and styles that defy conventional norms of engagement? Three key approaches can be employed:
First, understand that theatrics matter. These leaders often frame interactions as symbolic victories rather than substantive discussions. As psychologist Robert Cialdini notes, the principle of commitment and consistency suggests that once a leader has taken a public stance, they are likely to defend it at all costs. Therefore, positioning negotiations as grand, strategic events while subtly steering outcomes can be an effective means of achieving objectives without confrontation.
Second, a common mistake in dealing with such leaders is excessive deference or sycophancy. While flattery may yield short-term gains, it ultimately reinforces erratic behavior. Instead, a more effective approach is identifying and acknowledging legitimate strengths while subtly redirecting discussions toward constructive outcomes. Sometimes, your biggest problem is that you don’t have a seat at the table, even if you feel you have the right to be there. So, defining yourself as a main character and getting noticed is a necessary step.
Third, Ronald Heifetz’s theory of leadership as thermostat-setting applies to all-powerful leaders. This idea suggests that effective leadership is about regulating the emotional and strategic temperature in the organization – ensuring that tension is neither too low (leading to complacency) nor too high (leading to chaos). However, dialing down the temperature is rarely an effective option, as omnipotent leaders thrive on drama and high-stakes narratives. The challenge is not to eliminate the drama but to regulate its intensity – ensuring that negotiations and decision-making remain within manageable thresholds.
Key takeaway: Don’t think you can subvert the drama; play your part in it instead. Rather than challenging an omnipotent leader head-on, anchor your ideas as a natural plot in the leader’s vision, define yourself as a main character, and shape the narrative early. Whoever speaks first sets the stage.
Ego-driven leaders exhibit distinct behavioral patterns. Some operate with low self-awareness yet hold an insatiable appetite for power. Their reactions to perceived ego threats can be volatile, making it essential to engage with emotional intelligence. Maintaining a stable emotional stance while avoiding reactionary responses prevents unnecessary escalation. Omnipotent leaders are often very tied to their person – the public and/or private narrative about who they are. Playing into the persona rather than appealing to reason is an effective strategy.
Understanding defense mechanisms is also critical. Leaders operating under stress often resort to immature defense mechanisms such as projection, denial, or aggression. Recognizing these tendencies allows for strategic positioning – acknowledging their authority while maintaining personal integrity.
These tendencies often surface in a psychologist’s practice when leaders struggle with criticism. For example, a senior executive might express frustration that “No one appreciates how much pressure I’m under.” Instead of challenging this defensiveness, a psychologist might say, “You’re carrying a lot, and it makes sense that you want your team to recognize that. Have you found ways to help them see the bigger picture?”
Key takeaway: Frame feedback to omnipotent leaders that align or complement their self-image. Validate their leadership before steering the conversation toward constructive insights. Add new adornments to the omnipotent leader’s self-image. Not with hollow compliments but by reinforcing those grains of character that may in fact support your cause.
“A well-timed escalation can signal to others that resistance is valid, encouraging them to step forward. When leaders see that opposition is organized, they may reconsider their stance to avoid losing credibility.”
Understanding that power-driven leaders construct their own reality is crucial. Omnipotent leaders are supreme candidates for what Daniel Kahneman calls “priming”. The first analysis, interpretation, or version of events often shapes how others perceive the issue. I observe this often in executive teams: the leader who speaks first defines the terms of the debate, making it harder for alternative views to gain traction. Therefore, get there first and shape their first impressions and baseline understanding.
If you get there second or third, the initial reaction is to reject and attempt to correct a jarring worldview. This is useless and likely counterproductive. Omnipotent leaders’ worldviews are deeply personal and often resistant to external influence. Think of it as confirmation bias taken to the extreme. People are more likely to be influenced by those who validate their perceptions rather than challenge them outright. Omnipotent leaders see challenges as disloyalty.
In such environments, prepare for rapid “context-switching” and decision-making that prioritizes dominance over deliberation. As in clinical psychology, you do not need to like or agree with an individual to engage with them effectively. Instead, focus on creating a good enough rapport so you can work together. This means finding something that connects you both and avoiding confrontation and critique. The most skilled negotiators I have worked with can create a feeling of sympathy and understanding even with people most others shun.
The last resort is “escalation and full fight mode”. Rarely have I seen this strategy work, even though it feels good in the moment. It should only be used if nothing else works, and it is more effective if done in conjunction with other leaders. The concept of cognitive dissonance suggests that when people encounter information that conflicts with their worldview, they either double down or adjust. A well-timed escalation can signal to others that resistance is valid, encouraging them to step forward. When leaders see that opposition is organized, they may reconsider their stance to avoid losing credibility.
All-powerful leaders care deeply about their public image. If escalation makes their actions or decisions look unreasonable in the eyes of stakeholders, they may shift course to protect their reputation. Sometimes, escalation is necessary to show that an alternative future exists. It’s about making “the unthinkable thinkable”, as one of my clients put it. A well-timed escalation can expand perceived options and make compromise seem the more rational choice.
Key takeaway: Speed matters – shape the story before they do. Build rapport by finding even the smallest points of agreement. If escalation is inevitable, don’t go for it alone.
In a world where power dynamics are accelerating and all-powerful leaders set the tempo, the challenge is not simply to resist or comply but to navigate strategically and psychologically. For some, the level of cynicism, cold-hearted realism, and brinkmanship required to deal with omnipotent leaders has a bitter taste. Isn’t playing their game their way a declaration of moral failure?
Perhaps there is something larger at stake. In an era where the price of speaking truth to power has risen, the ability to engage effectively with dominant personalities will determine not just individual success but the broader trajectory of leadership in the years to come.
Companies pursuing ESG goals increasingly face a backlash from shareholders who fear a drop in financial performance. Changes to corporate governance may be needed to restore trust on both sides of the...
Audio available
Audemars Piguet CEO Ilaria Resta is placing circular leadership at the heart of her transformation strategy – bringing a bold, human-centered approach to one of Switzerland’s most storied watch brands, blending tradition...
Business schools have a responsibility to develop leaders who can navigate complexity without compromising on values. As corporations pull back from DE&I commitments under political pressure, David Bach argues that now is...
This episode takes you behind the scenes of a recent gathering led by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development together with IMD, where David Bach sat down with two sustainability leaders....
Explore first person business intelligence from top minds curated for a global executive audience