In many organizations, leadership is evaluated primarily by a person’s ability to influence, rally people around a shared vision, and drive successful execution of goals. While these metrics are undoubtedly important, they often overshadow a crucial element of true leadership: the ability to acknowledge mistakes. Great leadership is not just about delivering results—it’s also about taking ownership when things go wrong.
Fred Kofman, in his book Conscious Business, explains the difference between taking the “victim” role and adopting the “player” role. Leaders acting as victims tend to blame their team member(s) when failures occur. It might offer temporary relief or help them save face, but ultimately it undermines their credibility. In contrast, leaders who take the player role examine their own choices, missteps, and blind spots. Bad leaders often respond to failure by digging through old communications or past instances to prove they had warned others—shifting blame to those who “didn’t listen.” In contrast, great leaders focus on what they could have done differently. Instead of searching for evidence to absolve themselves, they engage in honest self-reflection and use what they learn to grow both personally and professionally..
A powerful real-world illustration of taking ownership comes from the book Extreme Ownership. In one well-known incident, Jocko describes a “friendly fire” episode during combat operations. Despite the chaos and multiple contributing factors, Jocko—who was the commander on the ground—looked inward first. He examined his own decisions that might have led to the confusion and publicly accepted full responsibility rather than blaming individual team members or circumstances. This act of extreme ownership not only preserved trust within his team, but also cemented a culture of accountability and honesty.
Owning mistakes is a hallmark of mature leadership because it demonstrates self-confidence and fosters trust within the team. When people see their leader accepting responsibility—even when it’s difficult—they are more inclined to follow and support that leader. It reassures team members that if things go awry, their leader will shield them from undue blame rather than throwing them under the bus. Conversely, leaders who quickly shift blame to the same people they once praised erode team morale and credibility, making it far harder to rally everyone around future initiatives.