Breaking the Echo Chamber: The Corporate Value of the 11th Man

Captain Valentin Savitsky’s hand was shaking over the launch button. He was facing the biggest decision in his life. All his years of hard Soviet training flashed before his eyes. He has been preparing for this moment his entire life. It was extremely hot in the submarine; oxygen was running low in dear contrast to his emotions… Oh, those were flying sky-high. US Navy depth charges were exploding next to his cockpit, shaking the core of his bases and his beliefs. His lieutenants were looking for him anxiously for direction: What will we do about it? And the worst part? Moscow was nowhere to be reached. It was one of the do-or-die moments. At his command was the most powerful arsenal of soviet warfare: a nuclear torpedo capable of destroying an entire enemy fleet and igniting the third world war simultaneously. The stakes have never been higher. The lack of communication with his superiors meant only one thing: the war had already started, and Moscow was under siege, making him the savior of the last resort.

If there had ever been a time in history to fall back to your processes and fail-safe guidelines, that would have been it. According to his Standard Operating Procedures, a nuclear launch of that sort required a unanimous three-person vote from the senior officers on board. All he had to do was to convince his two highest-ranking lieutenants in the troop to unleash hell.

Political Officer Ivan Maslennikov did not hesitate: The go-ahead was granted at lightning speed. The fate of the earth hinged on the third and fleet officer Vasili Arkhipov. What unfolded afterward wrote the book on arguably one of the most fundamental yet wildly undiscussed governance concepts: the critical wisdom of the 11th man.

The 11th Man Rule states that if ten people in a decision-making group agree on a particular course of action, the 11th person has the duty to disagree and challenge the consensus, even if they personally think it’s correct. Their role is to explore alternative possibilities, prevent groupthink, and ensure all risks are fully considered.

And in his true 11th-man fashion, and although the term was not coined as such at the time, Vasily played the devil’s (no pun intended) advocate: He stood firm and argued that a lack of communication with leadership might be a technical issue rather than a confirmation of war and total annihilation. In addition, if mistaken, launching a nuclear response could escalate the conflict beyond the point of no return. He thought that rushing into action without proper and sure confirmation of their doubts may lead to more problems than solutions.

The year of that incident was 1962, at the height of the Cuban missile crisis, and what just unfolded was eventually known as the Soviet Submarine incident.

For those of you sitting at the edge of your seats, waiting for the official ending of that story, just remember that we are still here, and none of us remember a Soviet-American nuclear war in the 1960s. This means that Vasily eventually got his way, and thank God he did.

Lessons

1. The perils of emotional decision-making

Emotions are at the core of what makes us human. However, many biases stem from them, and obliviousness to these biases can lead to disastrous outcomes. In many historical and corporate occurrences, fear, excitement, greed, envy, overconfidence, or group loyalty caused individuals and teams to ignore red flags and rush into bad decisions.

• Emotional momentum should never outweigh structural analysis
• Leaders must pause to think, acknowledge & detach from emotions, and assess situations objectively
• Encouraging dissenting voices within teams can eliminate our blind spots and counterbalance emotional oversight

2. Things may not be as they appear

In many occurrences, something that may appear clear-cut from the surface could be hiding latent defects that require another critical look. The common wisdom that ignorance is bliss does not apply in the corporate environment. In this context, ignorance is the silent killer.

• Scrutinize assumptions. Appearances may be wildly deceiving
• The most dangerous risks are the ones hiding in plain sight

3. The information you have may not show the full picture

For the sake of urgency and efficiency, leaders may sometimes be pressured to act with whatever information is available rather than wait to get the full picture. Those who assume they fully understand a setup without further investigation risk misjudging its threats or even opportunities.

• Assume that more information leads to better decision-making
• When under pressure, question if urgency is real or self-imposed
• Do not just act for the sake of acting

4. Seek to play the devil’s advocate in the face of certainty

Nassim Nicolas Taleb said: “The more certain someone is about the future, the more you should doubt them”. Certainty often leads to intellectual arrogance and prevents individuals from seeking learning.

• Certainty prevents curiosity and evolution. Question everything, even when consensus is strong
• Recognize that emotions, incomplete information, and urgency can distort judgment
• Be willing to be the lone voice of reason—even if sometimes, you are the only one advocating for yourself

5. When in doubt, revert to your procedures

In complex situations, decisions oftentimes seem impossible under the existing format. Leaders may need to create makeshift solutions or cut corners to reach the result using the path of least resistance.

• Procedures were conceived on calmer days based on the best practices & lessons learned. Trust the process and abide by them
• What seems like a time hindrance, or an additional layer delaying decision-making may be the necessary protection you need to shield yourself and your institution

The 11th Man is not about being contrarian for the sake of it: it’s about ensuring that critical decisions are made with 360-degree-SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) awareness.

Real applications in the corporate world

In the corporate world, where decisions impact the institution's sustainability, structured dissent is not just valuable but essential. A dissenting voice can prevent failures, enhance decision-making, and protect organizational integrity.

1. Governance: Strengthening Boardroom Decision-Making

Imagine a corporation considering a high-stakes merger with a promising tech startup. The financials look strong, and the executive team is eager to proceed.

The 11th Man in Action

A dissenting board member raises concerns about:

• Overstated revenue projections of the target institution
• Unverified regulatory risks in key markets
• Cultural misalignment that could derail integration

Instead of rushing approval, the board initiates an independent due diligence review, uncovering undisclosed liabilities and intellectual property disputes. The merger is either renegotiated or abandoned, preventing a costly failure.

2. Risk Management: Preventing Corporate Scandals

A financial institution is about to launch a new high-revenue investment product. Executives are focused on growth, but a risk manager notices that the product’s risk disclosures are vague and could mislead investors.

The 11th Man in Action

The risk manager escalates concerns to the Compliance Committee:

• If released without transparent risk warnings, the institution could face regulatory fines and lawsuits
• Executives resist, fearing delays and lost revenue
• The risk manager persists and demands a legal review

A thorough compliance check identifies misleading clauses, leading to revisions that protect the institution from lawsuits.

3. Internal Audit: Detecting Financial Fraud

A multinational institution reports record-breaking profits, impressing investors. However, an internal auditor reviewing revenue recognition notices inconsistencies in the accounting records.

The 11th Man in Action

• The auditor suspects revenue inflation and raises concerns
• The finance team dismisses it as “standard accounting practice.”
• The auditor persists and escalates findings to the Audit Committee

A forensic audit confirms revenue manipulation, leading to early intervention before regulatory action.

4. Compliance: Avoiding Regulatory Violations

A tech institution is about to partner with a third-party vendor to process customer data. The deal promises cost savings and efficiency.

The 11th Man in Action

• The Compliance Officer discovers the vendor lacks proper data protection protocols
• The executive team is focused on closing the deal quickly and dismisses the concern
• The officer refuses to approve, citing GDPR and data security risks
• An independent review finds that partnering could result in a multi-million dollar fine

The institution selects a compliant vendor instead, avoiding a potential regulatory disaster.

5. Finance: Preventing Reckless Financial Decisions

A CEO proposes a highly leveraged expansion that requires significant debt financing. The executive team supports it, citing aggressive growth targets.

The 11th Man in Action

The CFO challenges the expansion plan, arguing:

• Debt servicing costs could strain cash flow
• Economic downturn risks are not factored in
• Expansion timelines are overly optimistic

A revised analysis confirms liquidity risks, leading to a more gradual and financially sustainable approach.

6. Strategy: Avoiding Corporate Overreach

A retail corporation plans to expand aggressively into a foreign market with little understanding of consumer behavior.

The 11th Man in Action

A strategy analyst warns that:

• Market research is insufficient
• Competitor failures in the same region were ignored

Executives are eager to expand, dismissing risks as “manageable.”

The analyst insists on a pilot phase, leading to the discovery that consumer demand was vastly overestimated. The institution adjusts its strategy, saving millions in potential losses.

Building a Corporate Culture That Embraces the 11th Man

The corporate world often values and rewards speed, confidence, and aggressive decision-making, but without structured dissent, institutions are vulnerable to avoidable failures.

• Encourage Open Dialogue: Create a culture where stakeholders feel safe when challenging decisions.
• Implement Risk Review Committees: Ensure major decisions undergo independent and thorough risk assessments.
• Use Data to Validate Decisions: Require fact-based rationalizations for high-impact strategies.
• Reward Ethical Leadership: Recognize stakeholders who identify and prevent risks.
• Strengthen Risk Management, Internal Audit, and compliance Functions: Empower independent internal control teams with the authority to intervene when needed.

Throughout history, we have narrowly escaped numerous catastrophic global disasters thanks to a mix of governance, oversight, and, perhaps most crucially, sheer luck. Time and again, opportune timing rather than flawless decision-making has tipped the scales in our favor when it mattered most.

But as Artificial Intelligence enters the equation, I can't help but wonder: Will it reinforce stability or tilt the balance of power in unforeseen ways? If history has taught us anything, it is that technological developments, no matter how promising, inevitably find their way into the hands of those with malevolent intent.

Let’s hope that luck remains on our side when the next critical moment arrives.