Humble leadership in a loud world

In an era often dominated by forceful personalities and top-down decision-making, a panel at London Business School’s latest Think Ahead event, Leadership in 2026: Why humility matters, made a compelling case for a different model: humble leadership.

Drawing on research and real-world experience across finance, technology and global organisations, the discussion examined how leaders can balance confidence with curiosity and control with empowerment.

Dan Cable, Professor of Organisational Behaviour at LBS, presented evidence that humility is not weakness but a performance advantage. In a multi-country study conducted during the return to offices after COVID, leaders who actively listened to employees’ experiences and incorporated their insights saw 23 per cent lower quit rates and significantly higher performance. “You get a voice, not a vote,” he explained. “Listening shapes better decisions. It does not remove the leader’s responsibility to decide.”

The panel stressed that humble leadership is not the absence of direction. Rather, it is about setting a clear framework for success and then creating space within it. Rosie Bailey, a fintech founder, described building guardrails that allowed teams to experiment safely, fail fast and learn. When one AI initiative underperformed in A B testing, the team shut it down despite early enthusiasm. Two years later, improved models made the idea viable. “Freedom works best with boundaries,” she said.

Ross Bailey, an international business leader, emphasised psychological safety and accountability as complementary forces. Leaders must avoid becoming the “black hole” in meetings, where every idea bends toward the boss. Instead, defining purpose clearly and stepping back from day-to-day decisions can unlock initiative across teams.

The discussion also tackled the cultural barriers to humility. Audience polling highlighted organisational culture and fear of appearing weak as the biggest obstacles. The panel challenged the assumption that decisiveness and humility are opposites. Confidence in vision, they argued, can coexist with openness about not knowing every answer.

Practical techniques emerged. Ask a second question. Listen twice as much as you speak. Normalise learning by sharing moments when assumptions proved wrong. Above all, shift the mindset from being served by the organisation to serving those who create value.

In volatile, complex environments, the message was clear: humility is not a soft option. It is a disciplined, demanding approach to leading change and demonstrating leadership.