Leadership is a Constant Experiment

Leaders who act like scientists win. Instead of selling certainty, the author argues that you should treat every leadership move as a hypothesis, try a tiny change, watch the outcome, and iterate. Small, frequent experiments keep the team moving while protecting ego, because you only need to be learning, not always right.

The piece gives concrete examples: a weekly "what did we learn" ritual, cutting planning cycles, and testing a new planning process on a single sub-team before rolling it out. In that trial the team uncovered hidden handoffs and confusing documentation, allowing a quick fix without a costly rescue operation. Sharing the failure publicly reinforced a culture where mistakes become data, not indictments.

By framing uncertainty as data collection, the author links leadership to the same batch-size reduction mindset engineers use. Experiments generate directional signals that shrink uncertainty, letting leaders make grounded decisions faster than a certainty-driven leader who stalls while polishing a plan. The result is higher team performance and healthier psychological safety.

Ultimately, the article shows that curiosity-driven leadership creates a growth engine: teams start asking "what will make the work better?" instead of "what does the leader want?". This shift accelerates delivery, improves morale, and builds a culture where everyone feels safe to experiment and learn out loud.