Leadership in Crisis: The Art of Balancing Centralization and Decentralization

When the familiar world around us begins to change at an unprecedented pace, the issue of effective team management becomes critical. Addressing this topic in the “Leadership Podcast” – a joint project of the Center for Leadership of UCU and “Radio SKOVORODA” – was only a matter of time.

That moment came on April 18, 2025, with the release of the fifth episode. And following its host and the Executive Director of the Center for Leadership of UCU, Andrew Rozhdestvensky, we invite you today to once again dive into the turbulent waters of crisis Leadership. To draw from them knowledge about effective management approaches in an era of change. And to place your own personal “comma” in the ancient dilemma faced by every manager: “To centralize not to decentralize”! We wish you an inspiring and productive reading!

Crisis and the Management Dilemma: Centralize or Decentralize?

Traditional logic teaches: during a crisis, command must be centralized in order to quickly coordinate actions. Having a strategic plan, ensuring the speed of decision-making and implementation, and minimizing panic seemingly turn this approach into a universal tool for facing challenges.

But what should one do when the crisis is not only prolonged but also multifaceted – be it a full-scale war, a pandemic, or economic turbulence? When the scale of the challenges is disproportionate to the capabilities of a single (even extremely talented) individual? And when micromanagement literally exhausts those who have chosen the difficult path of sole Leadership? It is precisely then that a less obvious, but extremely effective approach comes to the rescue – decentralization.

“You can adjust your approaches over the course of different projects, but if you are entering a long marathon, […] then, undoubtedly, decentralization will occupy a large portion of your time. Otherwise, you will simply burn out…”,

emphasizes Andrew Rozhdestvensky.

Command and Control vs. Mission Command: Two Management Strategies

Civilian life and the military sphere have influenced each other for millennia. Innovative technologies, unconventional approaches, and management methods – these are just a few examples of traits that have been successfully borrowed by representatives from one domain for use in another. And the management strategies that the host decided to introduce to his audience are no exception. After all, they have proven their effectiveness where risk is a key concept – on the battlefield.

Command and Control is an example of an ancient approach to Leadership in both armies and business:

• through clear (usually sole) orders;
• maintaining a strict hierarchy;
• with full control over execution.

A certain counterweight to this is Mission Command – a NATO model based on the autonomy of units. In this model, the commander’s task is limited to formulating intent and final objectives, while subordinates independently determine the ways to achieve these goals within previously set boundaries.

The principle of Mission Command owes its origin to the military genius Napoleon Bonaparte (1769–1821) – the “Emperor of the French” and an outstanding statesman and military leader of his time. He was among the first to not only dare to do the unthinkable – allow his officers to make decisions on the battlefield – but also to turn this into a tradition within his army. This approach significantly accelerated the reaction cycle and played a decisive role in victories over a very strong but more conservative opponent – the Prussian army.

The Prussians, having drawn conclusions from their defeats, conducted a systematic analysis of their mistakes. They adopted the methods of the French army – thus laying the foundations for the military doctrines of the 20th century. And already at the beginning of the 21st century, the Mission Command approach in NATO armies proved its effectiveness in countering guerrilla forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is to the examination of this approach that, following the Executive Director of the Center for Leadership of UCU, we will devote the next chapter of our story.

The Laws of Effective Decentralization: 7 Principles of Mission Command

To ensure that the decentralization of processes does not descend into managerial chaos, it is essential to adhere to several clear principles:

1. Competence. Successful improvisation is impossible without a high level of basic competence among each team member. This is the foundation without which any freedom of action turns into a disaster.

“If you don’t know how to play the saxophone, no amount of improvisation will save you”,

our colleague draws an analogy.

2. Mutual Trust. Improvisation within a team is only possible in the presence of deep trust between its members. Such trust creates an environment where people are ready to support each other’s initiatives rather than engage in mutual criticism or sabotage.

“Trust is not an abstract idea. It is a real organizational phenomenon that can and must be measured and developed”,

the host affirms.

3. Shared Information. Each team member must understand what their colleagues – or, by military analogy, adjacent units on the battlefield – are doing. Horizontal communication (peer-to-peer) must be developed no less than vertical communication.

To achieve this, the researcher suggests a few simple yet effective tools:

• Short, regular meetings (up to 40 minutes);
• Continuous real-time updates of the situational context.

4. Commander’s Intent. A leader must formulate a clear intent: what exactly must be achieved. It is important for this to be a brief statement (literally one paragraph in length) that grants the team freedom in choosing the tools for achieving the objective.

“The [fundamental difference from the centralized approach is that] the commander’s intent serves as a guide, not a detailed script”,

adds Andrew Rozhdestvensky.

5. Mission Tasking: The 6W Method. For each team member to clearly understand their task, it is important to answer six key questions, known in NATO practice as the “6W”:

• What? – What needs to be done?
• Who? – Who must do it?
• When? – When must it be done?
• Where? – Where exactly must it happen?
• Which? / How? – By what means must it be achieved? What assets, resources, and methods are required?
• Why? – Why is it important?

The last question – “Why?” – is particularly crucial. Understanding the higher purpose allows the team to adapt to challenges by changing methods without losing sight of the goal.

However, this approach is not the only one. Its “civilian” equivalent is the well-known “S.M.A.R.T.” goal-setting framework, which stands for:

• Specific – Clear definition of tasks.
• Measurable – Measurability of performance indicators.
• Assignable – Clear assignment of responsibility.
• Realistic – Realistic nature of the set goal.
• Time-related – Clear time constraints for task completion.

Despite their visual differences, both approaches are suitable for successful use in both civilian and military spheres. It is up to you, as a Leader, to decide which method is more appropriate for the specific conditions.

6. Disciplined Initiative. Initiative can be both a blessing and a curse for any organization.
Creative, proactive individuals within a team can significantly strengthen your position. However, uncontrolled initiative – disproportionate to a subordinate’s competence level or extending beyond their authority – can seriously undermine management processes and even threaten the very organizational structure.

“In this sense, it is important to remember that worse than a fool is only an “initiative fool”…”,

the researcher quotes German General Erich von Manstein (1887–1973).

Monitoring the manifestations of such initiative is your undeniable key to the successful development of both your organization and your team members.

7.     Risk Perception. An important skill for an effective team is the ability to manage risks:

• Through the identification of risks.

A powerful tool for such identification is SWOT analysis, and an adapted version of its application will be presented below:

• Through planning options for risk avoidance.

Our contemporary, psychologist Gary Klein, developed in 2007 the PreMortem technique – a “premortem” analysis of a potential decision or choice. He drew the idea from medical autopsies, where doctors determine the cause of death after a patient’s passing. In the case of PreMortem, the sequence is different: the essence of the technique is to imagine that your plan has already failed. This “fact” is all you know under the task conditions. The final objective is to search for the causes that led to this (so far imagined) disaster.

According to the author, this technique helps to uncover potential vulnerabilities in what may seem like a perfect plan. Humans are often prisoners of cognitive traps – one of which is the reluctance to recognize flaws in decisions they believe in. Forcing yourself to imagine the worst-case scenario helps to eliminate excess overconfidence.

By preparing your colleagues for potential risks using the described methods, you will be able to build a team of individuals who are not afraid to take responsibility for their decisions.

Emotional Intelligence and Empathy: Essential Qualities of the Modern Leader

Returning to his ongoing conversation with the “Leadership Podcast” audience, Andrew Rozhdestvensky chose two questions that fit perfectly into the theme of the episode: “What is the importance of emotional intelligence for a Leader? How can it be developed?” and “Is empathy important in team management?”

In response, the researcher emphasizes: emotional intelligence is, first and foremost, about awareness of our own emotions, the experiences of others, and the ability to manage them.
A crisis, in particular, is an environment that demands empathy from a Leader – the ability not only to inspire the team but also to share and endure difficult emotions alongside them.

“[In the previous episode] I repeatedly spoke about what a Leader must be like in times of crisis. Various points, many points. But there is a point number 0, without which nothing else happens. And that is Human-Centricity. We are emotional beings. Often, our relationships are built not only on reason but on shared emotions and support. And without empathy, a team’s normal functioning is simply impossible”,

the host summarizes.

Is Leadership a Lifestyle?

Another myth our colleague debunked concerns the common perception of Leadership as a “lifestyle”.

“Leadership is not a lifestyle. It is just one of the roles we are willing to take on. And you have the absolute right to step out of it at any moment – [for instance,] if you have exhausted your resources. Thus, Leadership is certainly not a lifelong obligation”,

he said.

At the same time, many challenges prevent people from embracing this role. The main challenge is the fear of responsibility. Another is the lack of genuine desire to change the world for the better – on any scale. Thus, if you possess this drive and are not afraid to take responsibility for your decisions, you are already on the Leader’s Path. All that remains is to take the next step along it.

Final Thoughts

What are the key takeaways from the fifth episode of the “Leadership Podcast”? According to its author, Leadership during times of trial is the art of balance. It involves not only making difficult decisions but also fostering a special organizational culture – one where the team can improvise, adapt, and act independently.

The right balance of centralization and decentralization, the cultivation of competence and trust, the understanding of risks, and the ability to work with emotions – all these elements define true Leadership today. As Ukraine’s recent experience shows, flexibility, trust, and strategic clarity are the qualities that sustain teams even in the darkest times – because they teach the most important thing: believing in your own capabilities.