In a Fortune commentary, former Harvard Business School dean Nitin Nohria argues that the privileges surrounding a CEO can be individually reasonable yet collectively create distance from employees and customers. His point is not that every leader becomes arrogant. The role itself can filter what reaches the person at the top.
How the bubble forms
Security, an overloaded calendar and the emotional demands of leadership can all justify assistance. Over time, however, a carefully managed environment can hide the inconvenience that other people absorb. The result is an information problem: the leader may see a polished version of company life rather than its operating reality.
What to change in the operating rhythm
Keep several channels that do not depend on the CEO’s immediate reports: direct customer conversations, frontline visits and structured conversations with the general counsel or CHRO. Ask the board to challenge exceptions made for the CEO as well as the assumptions behind strategic proposals. Nohria’s essay is a leadership argument, not a controlled study proving that a particular ritual improves performance.
Key takeaways
- A board should periodically ask whether accommodations still serve a real purpose rather than merely reinforcing status.
- The CEO needs trusted dissenting voices, including people close to customers and frontline work.
- A safe route for disagreement matters more than exhorting colleagues to “speak up”.
What this means for CEOs
For CEOs, the practical question is who can deliver uncomfortable information without paying a career price. If that group is too small, the company has a decision-quality risk, however efficient the executive office looks.