An Interview with Eugene Sadler-Smith, Professor of Organisational Behaviour at Surrey Business School who talks with Rachel Hubbard, Senior Partner in the Board Practice at Saxton Bampfylde, and Co-Vice Chair at the University of Surrey. Together they explore how data insight is making the role of non-executive leadership even more valuable in the Board room, in today’s complex and fast-changing landscape.
Rachel: Eugene thank you for your time sharing your research and insight into business leadership. We share your passion for the opportunity of leaders to develop their skills to have significant impact in the organisations they serve.
Q: You have spent many years undertaking research and training leaders in how they make good decisions. We are all impacted by the potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to give us quantities of data to analyse and help our decision making, as leaders what do you see as the contribution good non-executives can bring to decision making?
Eugene: Technology, particularly AI, is transforming all aspects of work, including how boards function and how leaders make intelligent decisions. To understand how AI impacts boards, it helps to take a step back and consider what we mean by intelligence in the first place. In my view, it is the ability to navigate through complex environments to achieve a goal.
For boards, intelligence is crucial because they operate in volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) environments and it’s their leadership intelligence, borne of learning and experience, that helps them to navigate these kinds of environments. But intelligence itself is multifaceted. Over the years, researchers have identified several forms of intelligence that leaders require: traditionally we think of cognitive intelligence, but we also have the emotional, social, practical, and moral intelligence added to which we now have what I term intuitive intelligence.
My focus has been on the new idea of intuitive intelligence with the aim of adding it to the suite of intelligences that can enhance how leaders and boards operate in uncertain environments.
Rachel: You’ve spent years researching decision-making and training leaders. Could you elaborate on how artificial intelligence intersects with these various forms of intelligence?
Eugene: Intelligence in decision-making involves processing data, converting it into knowledge, and using that knowledge effectively. Board members are fundamentally decision-makers, and the essence of good leadership boils down to the quality of the decisions that are taken based traditionally on data but increasingly on AI.
When we examine decision-making scientifically, through the lenses of psychology and neuroscience, we see two fundamental types of human intelligence at work: analytical intelligence and intuitive intelligence. Analytical intelligence involves conscious, logical, and deliberate thinking, while intuitive intelligence is more unconscious and instinctive.
Artificial intelligence adds a new layer to this framework. It supports decision-making by processing vast amounts of data, identifying patterns, and offering insights. But we get the best outcomes when we adopt a hybrid approach: combining human analytical and intuitive intelligences with artificial intelligence.
It’s not about choosing between human and artificial intelligence but understanding how to integrate them effectively. AI can process and analyse data at a scale humans cannot match, but humans bring creativity, ethical judgment, empathy and intuition to the table.
Rachel: Can we delve deeper into intuitive intelligence as some people might be sceptical, although we might see this as being where non-executives really can add value.
Eugene: Intuitive intelligence is distinct from but complements our analytical intelligence. Analytical thinking is conscious and deliberate, while intuitive thinking is unconscious but equally impactful. It’s not a contradiction, intuition involves a form of unconscious thinking that is fast and automatic.
This distinction between conscious and unconscious processes is crucial. Daniel Kahneman, in his book Thinking, Fast and Slow, popularised this idea. He described two systems of thinking: System 1 (which is fast and intuitive) and System 2 (which is slow and analytical). Effective decision-making requires mastery of both systems. Leaders need to understand when to rely on intuition and when to lean on analysis.
Unfortunately, our educational and corporate training systems often prioritise analytical intelligence, leaving intuitive intelligence under-developed. This is in spite of the fact that every leader I have ever discussed it with has experienced and been influenced by their intuition at some point, and usually in big decisions. This imbalance is a missed opportunity for business schools and corporate training because intuition, when used appropriately, can be a powerful decision-making tool. It allows leaders to navigate ambiguity and make rapid decisions in situations where data is incomplete, or time is limited as well as bringing in the insight of other impacts beyond the data available. And don’t think intuition is some kind of God-given gift; it’s a skill and like any skill it can be developed.
Rachel: How can organisations and particularly Boards balance these intelligences effectively?
Eugene: Organisations need to recognise the value of intuitive intelligence and invest in its development. This means creating training programs that help leaders understand and refine their intuition. Intuition, when unchecked, can lead to biases and errors, so it’s essential to use it wisely.
Balancing analytical and intuitive intelligence with AI’s capabilities creates a robust decision-making framework. By integrating these intelligences thoughtfully, boards can navigate complexity, embrace innovation, and make decisions that drive long-term success.
When I think about intuition in boardrooms, I frame it in terms of two key aspects: solving and sensing. The analytical mind, what psychologists call System 2, is good at solving problems. Historically, humans have relied on tools, from abacuses to AI, to enhance our solving capabilities. These tools have often surpassed our innate abilities in this regard, and AI is the latest tool that we’ve developed to augment our System 2. However, intuition operates differently. It is rooted in what psychologists such as Daniel Kahneman call System 1, which evolved not as a solving system but as a sensing system. This system -our ‘intuitive mind’ – enables board members to read complex situations, perceive social dynamics, and chart a course into an uncertain future. While analysis is vital, intuition complements it by offering a sense of direction, as an often-overlooked leadership skill.
Contrary to popular self-help advice to “just follow your intuition,” unexamined intuition can lead to poor decisions. Developing intuitive intelligence takes time and experience. You can’t graduate with an executive MBA and immediately become an intuitive executive. Research and neuroscience tell us that building intuitive expertise, what Nobel laureate Herbert Simon described as “analysis frozen into habit”, requires several years of accumulated experience, and developing intuitive intelligence is a long-term process. An executive’s ‘intuitive expertise’ allows them to quickly recognise patterns and act on them without reanalysing everything from scratch. They do this by pattern recognition. This is why intuitive expertise can be so vital in an organisational structure around decision making at the most senior level – and bring this to bear with an executive team who have got so close to the processes and the data generated and have to take big decisions in uncertain circumstances where there might be little in the ways of the odds for success of a decision – but nonetheless they need to act.
Rachel: Can you expand on how intuition complements analysis for board members, particularly in high-stakes decisions?
Eugene: Intuition allows board members to sense opportunities and risks that may not be immediately evident through analysis. For instance, a seasoned board member might recognise parallels between a current merger and acquisition proposal and a previous one that went poorly. This recognition draws on the ability to recognise patterns based on their accumulated experience: it can act as a warning signal.
But on the other hand, intuition can signal positive opportunities, for example noticing weak signals in the environment that others overlook but when put together by an intuitive executive might herald a breakthrough or new opportunity.
Intuitive intelligence is about sensing the “approach” and “avoid” signals in situations. Positive intuition can prompt action toward a beneficial deal, while negative intuition might encourage caution. Importantly, this sensing often operates at a subconscious level, manifesting as “knowing without knowing how or why” and when asked executives will often reply that they “just know.”
Rachel: Perhaps a reason why you need NEDs with different experience, and perspectives around the table! You mentioned that intuition isn’t enough on its own and requires interpretation. How does this play out in a group setting like a boardroom?
Eugene: That’s a crucial point. One individual board members intuition in isolation isn’t sufficient because other board members can’t directly experience their intuition. For intuition to inform group decisions in an informed, open and intelligent way, it must be articulated and interpreted.
Often, intuition is hard to express literally. Many leaders describe their intuitions using metaphors, a “gut feeling” or sensing that “things don’t stack up.” While these expressions aren’t precise, they help others understand and engage with the intuitive insights being shared.
This process of opening up the closet, admitting to intuition, and expressing it treats intuition as ‘data’ and transforms it into a starting point for dialogue and collective sense-making. By articulating and scrutinising intuitions, board members can challenge, refine, and align their perspectives, ultimately leading to more informed decisions. It can be the beginning of a process of organizational learning.
Rachel: How can board members and leaders develop this skill of intuitive intelligence?
Eugene: Developing intuitive intelligence requires a long-term commitment to learning from experience in a systematic and structured way. It’s about building a reservoir of knowledge and expertise through exposure to diverse situations over time. This depth of experience allows intuition to become informed and reliable. It’s a process than must be managed rather than left to chance.
One of the first steps is to open up the closet so to speak and get intuitions out into the open. Leaders who aren’t used to doing this can practice articulating their intuitions, even if it feels imprecise at first and start with the small stuff to build confidence in using intuition to take decisions. Encouraging open dialogue about intuitions in the boardroom fosters a culture where these insights can be examined collectively.
Finally, leaders should be aware that intuition isn’t the endpoint, it’s a means to spark conversations and make sense of complex situations together. The ultimate goal is to blend intuition and analysis to navigate uncertainty effectively, it is essential to recognise that intuition is a tool, not a shortcut. In the hands of an experienced and reflective leader, it becomes a powerful asset for sensing direction, identifying risks, and seizing opportunities. By combining informed intuition with robust analysis and open dialogue, boards can enhance their ability to make strategic decisions in a complex, fast-changing and uncertain world.
Rachel: As head-hunters, we often look for gifted leaders who bring cross-sector expertise to boardrooms. A key aspect we observe is their ability to apply intuition effectively. Could you share your insights on the role of intuition in decision-making for a Board?
Eugene: Yes, and it’s worth unpacking the idea of uncertainty a little more and distinguishing between risk and uncertainty when discussing decision-making. Risk involves situations where probabilities can be quantified, like knowing the odds of rolling a six on a dice. In these cases, a problem-solving approach using data and analysis is appropriate because things can be quantified. However, intuition is different: it evolved to deal with, and it thrives in, uncertainty, where probabilities can’t be assigned because there are few if any precedents to go on. For example, consider Jeff Bezos’s decision to launch Amazon Prime. The data analysts at Amazon warned against it, as the numbers didn’t support the idea. Yet, Bezos recognised this was an uncertain situation, one without historical precedent, and relied on executive judgment informed by intuition. He used his intuition to navigate the uncharted loyalty program territory, a decision which has led to setting up of one of the most successful loyalty programs in history. In his own words Bezos said that “if you can make a decision with analysis you should do so. But it turns out in life that your most important decisions are always made with instinct, intuition, taste and heart.”
Rachel: What are some of the common downsides of intuitive decision-making, and how might boards mitigate these?
Eugene: While intuition is excellent for sensing patterns, this strength can also become a weakness. The intuitive mind can identify patterns where none exist, leading to stereotypes. To mitigate these downsides, boards should recognise when intuition is being misapplied: Use data-driven approaches for problems involving quantifiable risk; be aware of unconscious biases that might influence decisions, and balance intuition with objective measures: in recruitment, for instance, supplementing intuitive judgments with assessments, CVs, and structured interviews to avoid making quick and easy decisions based on unhelpful stereotypes.
Rachel: What strategies can leaders adopt to ensure their intuition is fair and unbiased?
Intuition is automatic, it operates below conscious awareness, which makes it prone to biases like stereotyping or prejudice. To counteract this, leaders should do all they can to challenge their intuition for inbuilt bias; evaluate the source – is the feeling based on genuine expertise, or is it a product of wishful thinking, bias, or prejudice, and asking if you are seeing patterns where none exist.
Developing “intuitive intelligence” involves being critical of one’s initial reactions and distinguishing between valid intuitions and biases. Training in unconscious bias and decision-making frameworks can also help leaders make fairer and more inclusive choices.
Intuition has its place, especially in uncertain situations where analysis alone cannot provide answers. The challenge is ensuring it’s applied judiciously, avoiding its pitfalls, and complementing it with data and deliberative thinking. By doing so, leaders can make well-rounded decisions that are informed yet innovative. A good non-executive has the vital role of bringing their ‘informed intuition’ to the organisation’s decision making table.
Rachel: Your most recent book, Trust Your Gut, talks about building intuitive muscle power. Can you share how leaders, particularly in boardroom settings, can develop this skill?
Eugene: Trust Your Gut is built around the concept of intuitive intelligence, which is the ability to notice and understand your intuitions and then use this knowledge to make better decisions in both professional and personal contexts. The book outlines seven steps to build this intuitive intelligence, and the first is about developing intuitive muscle power.
Intuition isn’t magical or mystical, it’s a skill, much like building muscle at the gym. Developing intuitive muscle power involves consistent practice and learning from experiences. But rather than relying on trial and error, this learning can be guided and structured through techniques like coaching, mentoring, and getting feedback.
Some strategies include practicing outside of your comfort zone, stress testing your intuitions, and engaging with a devil’s advocate to challenge and refine your thought processes. For example, one useful technique is the “pre-mortem.” Imagine you’ve decided based on intuition, fast forward and visualise it failing. What could have caused this failure? This helps to uncover potential pitfalls and refine your decision-making.
Another key is to evaluate outcomes. If you make an intuitive decision, follow up to assess its results. This helps to informed intuition over time. When we take an intuitive decision we need to know if it was a good or bad judgement call.
Rachel: For a board chair who leads decision-making alongside an executive team, how can they strike the right balance between analytical and intuitive insights?
Eugene: One critical risk for leaders, especially chief executives, is hubris, overconfidence in their instincts without considering alternative perspectives. This can lead to building echo chambers in which their intuitions don’t get challenged and ultimately to poor decision-making.
To counter this, leaders need a system of checks and balances. A devil’s advocate or a supportive non-executive chair and Board can provide this. They challenge assumptions, stress test intuitive insights, and ensure decisions are considered holistically.
One simple yet effective tool I recommend is what I call the ‘traffic light’ model. If both intuition and analysis say “yes,” that’s a green light, proceed confidently. If both say “no,” it’s a red light, don’t do it. But the tricky part is the amber light: when intuition and analysis don’t align. That’s when leaders must stress-test their intuitions (when intuition says ‘yes’ but their analysis says ‘no’) or recheck their data (when the data says ‘yes’ but their intuition says ‘hang on a minute’).
Another useful practice is to “sleep on it!” If I have an intuition about something, I let it sit overnight. The next day, I re-examine it. If it still feels compelling, it might be worth acting on. If not, I’m often relieved I didn’t jump in too quickly! On the other hand if it sticks around that might be assign that it’s trying to tell me something important.
Boards are critical for providing external perspectives and stress-testing decisions. Non-executive directors bring diverse experiences and intuitions to the table. Their role is to challenge and refine the executive team’s thinking, ensuring decisions are robust. It is very important they don’t get into the detail and miss their chance to bring that objectivity.
Good governance thrives on this interplay. The historical practice of a single person holding both the chair and CEO roles often created risks. Separating these roles fosters healthier dynamics and prevents the over-reliance on one person’s intuition. The key is to recognise that intuition, when unchecked, can lead to hubris. Boards must safeguard against this by ensuring diverse perspectives are integrated and executives’ intuitive insights are rigorously tested.
Rachel: The complexity of today’s world, amplified by AI, makes these human elements even more crucial. Where do you see your research heading next?
Eugene: I see two pressing areas for exploration. First, we need to deepen our understanding of the neuroscience of intuition. It’s a biological, neural process, not something abstract or imaginary.
Second, and perhaps more urgent, is understanding how human intuition can interface with artificial intelligence. AI is poised to handle many analytical functions, leaving intuition as a domain where humans can truly add value. The Board room is a really important example of this.
The future of work might emphasise intuitive leadership. As AI takes over data-driven tasks, leaders will need to maximise their intuitive intelligence to make sense of complex, ambiguous situations and add a uniquely human perspective. Exploring how intuition and AI can complement each other is a frontier we must navigate thoughtfully.
Key Takeaways
- Build intuitive expertise and seek feedback: Engage in diverse experiences that’ll help you to develop pattern recognition skills, deliberately learn lessons from experience, and seek guidance from trusted experts in your field.
- Notice and interpret your gut feelings: Pay attention to your gut feelings, hunches and vibes, express them creatively (e.g., as stories, images or metaphors), and reflect on what they may be telling you.
- Know when to trust your intuition: Use intuition in uncertain situations where experience matters but rely on analysis where there are calculable risks or in areas outside your expertise.
- Act intelligently on your gut feelings: Discuss your intuitions with others to clarify what they might mean, be open to advice and criticism, and trust your intuitions if they stand up to scrutiny and stick around.
- Practice, practice, practice: start with small stuff, keep developing intuition through learning, practice, guidance and feedback, continuously improve your intuitive intelligence over time.
Eugene Sadler-Smith is a professor at Surrey Business School Prof Eugene Sadler-Smith | University of Surrey
His most recent book, Trust your Gut: Trust your Gut: Go with your intuition and make better choices