In Part 1 we focused on the individual and risk taking. In Part 2, we moved from the individual to the team, from solo risk-taking to the dynamics of risk in teams. In the final part of our series, we examine risk-taking through the eyes of leaders.
Whether it's the leader of a climbing expedition or a CEO leading a company through transformation, leaders play a pivotal role in how risk is framed, interpreted, and managed for everyone else. Great leaders don’t just make decisions about risk; they influence how their team feels about risk and how prepared they are to face it. Here, we connect lessons from leadership in extreme sports and business.
Leaders are storytellers when it comes to risk. How a leader frames a risky endeavor can set the tone for their followers. Consider a mountain leader rallying the team before a big ascent: “This climb is going to be extremely challenging – the weather’s harsh and the route is technical. But I believe we have the skills, a solid plan, and the determination to get through it safely.” This framing is honest about the danger but casts it as manageable with effort – essentially framing the risk as a challenge that the group can overcome together. In contrast, imagine a leader who either downplays the risk (“Oh it’s fine, nothing to worry about!” – which might leave the team ill-prepared and shocked when difficulties hit), or overemphasizes it as a looming doom (“This will probably go wrong, but maybe we’ll survive…”). The emotional impact on the team would be very different.
Research on organizational leadership shows that leaders who frame change as an exciting opportunity (while acknowledging the risks) tend to garner more employee buy-in than leaders who frame it as an unavoidable threat or simply mandate it without context. This ties back to the psychological concept of challenge vs. threat states we discussed in Part 1. Leaders effectively have the power to shape that perception for their team. If a CEO communicates, “This transformation is risky, yes, but it’s also a chance for us to reinvent ourselves and leap ahead of the competition,” employees are more likely to approach it in a challenge state, which is associated with positive motivation and better performance under stress (Hase, 2025).
Framing is not just spin; it must be backed by credibility. People are quick to sense empty cheerleading. The best leaders combine realism and optimism – a trait often noted in high-altitude guides and successful turnaround CEOs alike.
Creating a Risk-Aware Culture: Leaders also set the culture for risk management. In safety-critical domains (like aviation or adventure guiding), a popular mantra is “tone from the top”. Studies confirm that when leaders prioritize risk management, communicate about risks openly, and model ethical, safety-conscious behavior, it filters down to employees and creates a more risk-aware, communicative culture (Cakir, 2022).
For example, a lead climbing guide who regularly does gear checks, talks through worst-case scenarios, and encourages teammates to speak up if they feel unsafe, establishes a norm that safety is everyone's responsibility. Similarly, in an organization, if top management visibly engages in risk assessment – for instance, holding pre-mortem sessions (imagining what could go wrong) or openly discussing lessons from past failures – it legitimizes that behavior throughout the company. On the other hand, if leaders are perceived to cut corners or ignore risks, employees may either follow suit or feel too scared to voice concerns. One study during the COVID-19 pandemic found that ethical leadership (leaders acting transparently and caring about safety) increased employees’ willingness to speak up about risks (like pointing out safety issues). This concept of “safety voice” is analogous to an expedition team where any member can yell “halt” if they see danger, because the leader has empowered them to do so.
Empowering vs. Commanding: How much should leaders involve others in risk decisions? There’s a balance. Empowering leadership has been a hot topic in recent years. This style involves leaders giving autonomy and encouraging employees to take initiative and calculated risks. Empowering leaders essentially say, “I trust you and have your back – let's hear your ideas, even if they’re out of left field”. This approach can be very effective in transformation contexts. A 2020 study of Korean employees during organizational change found that empowering leadership was strongly associated with employees’ commitment to the change, and a big reason was that it encouraged risk-taking behavior among employees (Jung, 2020).
In other words, when leaders empower people, employees feel emboldened to take the small and big risks necessary to make change happen – trying a new process, speaking up with a creative suggestion, etc. This makes them more personally invested in the change effort. The same principle can be observed in sports: coaches or team captains who empower athletes to make decisions (for example, a team of backcountry skiers where the leader rotates decision-making or solicits each member’s input on whether to ski a slope) often build greater ownership and sharpen everyone’s risk assessment skills. Of course, empowerment doesn’t mean abdication. The leader still carries ultimate responsibility, especially in critical moments. It’s about building confidence and capability in the team. One caution: research suggests empowering leadership works best when team members have enough skill or when the situation is reasonably structured. In extremely complex or high-stakes situations, people may actually look to the leader for more guidance. For instance, if a sudden crisis hits (say, an accident on a climb or a major market crash in business), directive leadership for a period can provide clarity. The art of leadership is to know when to coach from the sidelines and when to step in and call the play.
Leading by Example – Risk Behavior: Leaders also influence group risk behavior by personal example. In high-risk environments, a leader who demonstrates calm, methodical behavior under pressure can inspire the same in the team. Think of a ship captain in a storm: if they remain composed and make methodical decisions, the crew will likely stay focused; if the captain panics, chaos ensues. In corporate change, if leaders visibly take responsibility for risks (“I’m willing to stake my reputation on this new strategy because I believe in it”) and also accept responsibility for failures, employees gain confidence that risk-taking won’t be met with scapegoating.
Interestingly, employees often watch how leaders handle their own risks. Are the leaders stepping out of their comfort zone, or only asking others to do so? Leaders who take prudent risks themselves (for example, a CEO who invests in an experimental project or personally tries out the new agile workflow the company is adopting) signal that smart risk-taking is part of the culture. Research even shows that leaders who take calculated risks tend to be perceived as more effective and inspiring by their teams. They can set off a kind of positive contagion: their boldness and willingness to embrace uncertainty can encourage employees to be more creative and support change initiatives
It’s important, however, that these risks are calculated and ethical. Reckless gambles or unethical risks (like gambling with safety or breaking rules to get ahead) will erode trust. Great leaders find that sweet spot of bold but responsible action – what one might call courageous leadership.
Leaders are often the final decision-makers on big risky calls. In both sports and business, this can be a lonely spot. Good leaders will use all the input from team members, analysis, and their intuition to make a call. For example, a mountain expedition leader at a critical juncture (continue to summit or turn back due to weather?) must weigh team feedback, weather forecasts, and experience-derived gut feeling.
Seasoned mountaineers often speak of a “gut check” – a sense that something is off, which a less experienced person might ignore. That instinct is really pattern recognition built over years. In the corporate world, leaders similarly develop a sense of risk intuition in their industry (we have written about gut feel in a previous article). Yet, intuition alone can be flawed, so combining it with data and expert advice is ideal. Leaders also need the humility to change course if a risk decision is turning out to be wrong. The best CEOs will pivot the strategy if early indicators show a high likelihood of failure, rather than doubling down due to ego. This is akin to a ski guide who, upon seeing fresh avalanche signs, says, “I know we planned that route, but we're changing it even if it disappoints the clients”. Flexibility and willingness to accept short-term setbacks to avoid total disaster are hallmarks of effective risk leadership.
Lastly, leaders play a huge role in learning from risks. After any major outcome – success or failure – a leader’s approach to debriefing and institutional learning affects future risk culture. If a leader rewards candid analysis of what went wrong (without punishing the people involved), the organization learns and becomes more resilient. In a climbing team, a guide might sit everyone down after a close call and together dissect what they could do better next time. In contrast, if the leader sweeps it under the rug or purely blames individuals, the team gains nothing and people become less forthcoming next time.
In summary, leadership in risky situations is about setting the tone, structuring the process, and embodying the mindset for managing risk. Great leaders in both extreme sports and business create an environment where risk is understood, monitored, and harnessed – not something that’s irrationally feared or carelessly courted. They ensure that the thrill of potential success doesn’t eclipse prudent caution, and that caution doesn’t quash the initiative needed for success. It’s a delicate balancing act, much like walking a slackline – with the whole team tethered to the outcome.
Conclusion
High-altitude climbers, paragliders, downhill mountain bikers, corporate executives, project teams – on the surface, these might seem like completely different worlds. Yet, as we’ve seen, the human factors in how we face risk are remarkably universal. By looking at extreme sports, where risk is overt and visceral, we get a magnified view of our psychology that also applies to more metaphorical risks in business and life. To wrap up, here are a few key insights that bridge these domains:
- Individuals: Risk is personal and perception is key. Factors like experience, confidence, and mindset determine whether a person embraces or avoids risk. Extreme athletes show that fear can be managed through training and reframing. In business, helping individuals see change as a challenge rather than a threat (and giving them the tools to feel competent) can turn fear into forward momentum. Not everyone is a born thrill-seeker, and that’s okay – with the right support, even cautious individuals can adapt to necessary risks.
- Teams: We’re bolder (and sometimes wiser) together. Groups can talk each other into daring feats or, conversely, into collective denial. Awareness of phenomena like the risky shift and groupthink is crucial. Teams that cultivate open communication and trust are better at catching each other’s mistakes and making balanced risk decisions. As mountaineering research has shown, teamwork is about knowing when to strive for consensus and when to defer to expertise in a crisis. In corporate transformations, assembling a team with diverse perspectives and a safe climate for dialogue can be the difference between a well-steered change and a fiasco.
- Leadership: The tone from the top sets the attitude towards the risks. Leaders in high-risk settings act as anchors and amplifiers of risk culture. By framing risk appropriately, they calibrate the team’s anxiety and excitement levels. By modeling calculated risk-taking and transparency, they encourage the same in others. And by empowering people, they distribute ownership of risk (so it’s not just the leader alone at the helm). Yet leaders also must be ready to take the wheel decisively when needed. In business transformation, leaders who communicate a clear vision, acknowledge the risks, and show confidence in the team’s ability to surmount them, inspire organizations to do what might seem “impossible” – much like a skilled expedition leader inspires climbers to reach new heights.
In both extreme sports and business change, risk is inevitable. Progress – whether conquering a peak or disrupting a market – comes with uncertainties. The goal is not to eliminate risk (an impossible and stagnating task) but to understand and manage it. As the saying goes in mountaineering, “The summit is optional, return is mandatory.” This encapsulates a balanced philosophy: pursue bold goals, but manage risks so you live to learn and try again. Businesses, too, must take risks to grow, but sustainability comes from navigating those risks wisely so the company can survive and continue evolving.
Ultimately, humans are wired to handle risk – we’ve been doing it for survival and achievement throughout history. The scientific insights from psychology help us do it with eyes open. Whether you're strapping on a climbing harness or presenting a radical new strategy to your board, remember the common threads: respect the risk, trust in preparation and teamwork, listen to diverse voices (including that quiet internal voice of intuition), and don't shy away from the leap when it's worth it. As any climber will tell you, the view from the top – or the successful transformation – often makes the journey worth it. And as any wise climber will add, getting back safely with lessons learned is the biggest win of all.
Dr Dominic Irvine and Professor Emeritus Simon Jobson
Sources for Parts 1, 2 and 3:
Couturier, A., Chevrier, E., & Boudreault, S. (2024). Psychological factors of risk-taking in extreme sports: A systematic review. Journal of Adventure Psychology, 9(2), 133–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadpsych.2024.03.005
Fleming, P., & Spicer, A. (2020). The risk of risk: A meta-analysis of organizational risk management and its effects on performance. Academy of Management Annals, 14(1), 169–201. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0090
Greer, L. L., de Jong, B., Schouten, M., & Dannals, J. (2020). Leadership in extreme teams: Team composition and leader knowledge shape survival outcomes in high-risk environments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(2), 77–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000412
Hammond, J. S., Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (2015). The hidden traps in decision making. Harvard Business Review, 93(9), 110–119.
Jones, G., Asghar, A., & Llewellyn, D. J. (2015). The psychology of high-risk sports: Meta-analysis and future directions. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 16(1), 7–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.08.002
Kark, R., & Carmeli, A. (2020). Alive and creating: The mediating role of vitality and aliveness in the relationship between psychological safety and creative work involvement. Academy of Management Journal, 63(3), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2018.0256
Langseth, T., & Salvesen, H. (2023). Risk homeostasis in mountain biking: Adaptive strategies and experience-based risk calibration. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 43, 100607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2023.100607
Leung, A. S. M., & Chan, D. (2020). Empowering leadership and employees’ commitment to change: The mediating role of risk-taking behavior. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 33(2), 213–227. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-06-2019-0172
Marx, R. D., & Weick, K. E. (2017). Sensemaking in crisis and change: How organizations and leaders create meaning. Organizational Dynamics, 46(3), 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2017.04.002
Niederkrotenthaler, T., Gould, M., & Sonneck, G. (2016). The ‘Werther effect’, risk-taking, and social contagion in extreme sports: A review. Social Science & Medicine, 167, 10–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.08.012
Peterson, R. S., & Behfar, K. J. (2018). The dynamic relationship between performance feedback, trust, and team effectiveness: Meta-analytic insights. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(4), 487–501. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000284
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2016). Organizational culture and leadership in risk management. Journal of Risk Research, 19(3), 345–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2014.961517
Raue, M., & Scholl, S. G. (2018). The interplay of uncertainty tolerance and risk perception in decision-making under uncertainty. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 803. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00803
Stoner, J. A. F. (1961). A comparison of individual and group decisions involving risk. Unpublished master's thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Taylor, J. G., De Bruin, W. B., & Parker, A. M. (2019). Decision-making under uncertainty in risk sports and organizational settings: Lessons from behavioral decision research. Risk Analysis, 39(5), 847–861. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13265
Vuorio, A. M., Bor, R., & Griffiths, A. (2018). Managing risk in aviation and extreme environments: Practical applications of behavioral decision research. Safety Science, 110, 311–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.08.002