The Courage Deficit: Why Your Smartest Leaders Are Your Most Stuck

In 1999, the S&P 500 peaked. Then it took 14 years to gradually recover by 2013.

Today? Goldman Sachs sounds crazy forecasting 3% returns for 2024 to 2034.

But we’re currently seeing the highest price for the S&P 500 compared to earnings since the dot-com boom.

So, maybe that’s why they’re not alone; Vanguard projects about 5%.

In fact, now just about everything seems priced near all time highs. Equities, gold, crypto, etc.

But billionaires have long diversified a slice of their portfolios with one asset class that is poised to rebound.

It’s post war and contemporary art.

Sounds crazy, but over 70,000 investors have followed suit since 2019—with Masterworks.

You can invest in shares of artworks featuring Banksy, Basquiat, Picasso, and more.

24 exits later, results speak for themselves: net annualized returns like 14.6%, 17.6%, and 17.8%.*

My subscribers can skip the waitlist.

Skip waitlist

_{*Investing involves risk. Past performance is not indicative of future returns. Important Reg A disclosures: masterworks.com/cd.}

Here's a pattern I see constantly:

The most intelligent leaders in the room are often the most stuck.

They have the clearest analysis. The most thorough research. The best-articulated concerns.

And they can't pull the trigger.

I call this the Courage Deficit — the gap between knowing what to do and being willing to do it.

And counterintuitively, intelligence often makes it worse.

Intelligence creates sophisticated delay tactics.

Average performers procrastinate obviously. They miss deadlines. They avoid tasks.

Smart performers procrastinate elegantly. They call it "due diligence." They call it "being thorough." They build beautiful frameworks for why they shouldn't act yet.

Same avoidance. Better packaging.

Analysis becomes a hiding place.

The smarter you are, the more scenarios you can imagine. The more risks you can identify. The more reasons you can articulate for waiting.

This looks like rigor. It's often just fear with a spreadsheet.

Success raises the stakes.

High performers have farther to fall. They've built reputations, accumulated status, created expectations.

The fear isn't failure from zero. It's failure from a height. That's scarier.

Perfectionism masquerades as standards.

"I'm not ready" sounds like integrity. "I want to get this right" sounds like excellence.

Often, it's just fear of being seen before you're polished.

When leaders have courage deficits, organizations pay the price:

Decisions slow down. Everything requires more analysis, more buy-in, more certainty.

Innovation stalls. New ideas die in committee because no one will champion them through uncertainty.

Talent leaves. High performers get frustrated waiting for decisions that never come.

Competitors win. While you're analyzing, they're acting.

The courage deficit isn't just a personal problem. It's an organizational tax.

How do you know if your leaders have a courage deficit?

Listen for the disguises:

• "I need more data" (translation: I'm scared to decide with uncertainty)
• "The timing isn't right" (translation: I'm scared to start)
• "Let's be strategic" (translation: I'm scared of looking impulsive)
• "I want to get alignment first" (translation: I'm scared to lead without consensus)
• "We're not ready yet" (translation: I'm scared of visible failure)

Watch for the patterns:

• Decisions that keep getting "tabled"
• Initiatives that stay in "planning phase" indefinitely
• Leaders who analyze brilliantly but act rarely
• Teams waiting for permission that never comes

Ask the hard question:

"If you had to decide today, what would you choose?"

If they answer immediately, they don't have an information problem. They have a courage problem.

1. Make fear speakable.

Most cultures punish admissions of fear. So fear goes underground, disguised as analysis.

Create space for leaders to say "This scares me" without judgment. When fear is speakable, it's addressable.

2. Set decision deadlines.

Open-ended analysis is a trap. Every significant decision needs a date by which it will be made.

Not revisited. Made.

3. Reward action, not just outcomes.

If you only celebrate decisions that work out, you incentivize delay. Leaders will wait for certainty to avoid being wrong.

Celebrate the act of deciding. Celebrate leaders who move despite uncertainty.

4. Distinguish reversible from irreversible.

Most decisions are two-way doors. You can course-correct.

Help leaders see that "wrong" is usually fixable. The cost of delay often exceeds the cost of a mistake.

5. Model courage at the top.

Leaders watch leaders. If the executive team delays, analyzes endlessly, and avoids hard calls, everyone else will too.

Courage is contagious. So is cowardice.

Here's a conversation framework for addressing courage deficits:

Step 1: Name the pattern.

"I've noticed we've been analyzing this decision for three months. I want to explore what's really going on."

Step 2: Create safety.

"There's no wrong answer here. I'm genuinely curious what's making this hard."

Step 3: Ask the honest question.

"If you had to decide today, what would you choose?"

Step 4: Surface the fear.

"What's the worst case if that decision is wrong?"

Step 5: Reality-test the fear.

"How likely is that? And if it happened, how would we handle it?"

Step 6: Set the deadline.

"Let's decide by Friday. What information would you need by then?"

Most fears shrink when spoken. Most decisions clarify when deadlined.

A tech company brought me in because their product launches kept slipping.

The analysis was always thorough. The roadmaps were beautiful. But nothing shipped on time.

When I interviewed the leadership team, I heard the same thing from everyone: "We want to get it right."

Sounded noble. Was actually fear.

The real issue: Two years earlier, they'd launched a product that flopped publicly. It was painful. Embarrassing. Careers were affected.

Since then, the implicit culture had become: Don't ship until you're certain.

But certainty never comes. So nothing shipped.

The fix wasn't better project management. It was addressing the courage deficit directly.

We named the fear. ("We're scared of another public failure.")

We reality-tested it. ("What would actually happen? How would we recover?")

We created permission to fail. ("Shipping something imperfect is better than shipping nothing perfect.")

We set immovable deadlines. ("This launches March 1. What needs to be true for that to happen?")

Within six months, they'd shipped more than in the previous two years.

The roadmaps didn't change. The courage did.

If you're reading this as a leader, ask yourself:

• Where am I using analysis to avoid action?
• What decision have I been "thinking about" for too long?
• What would I do if I wasn't afraid?

If you're reading this as someone who develops leaders, ask:

• Where are our smartest people our most stuck?
• What fears are we not allowed to speak?
• How are we rewarding delay disguised as diligence?

The courage deficit is expensive. But it's also optional.

You can close it. Your organization can close it.

But only if you're willing to name what's really going on.

Fear dressed as analysis is still fear.

Call it what it is. Then act anyway.

I facilitate the honest conversations your leadership team needs to have but hasn't. This is Stage 1 work - creating the safety and structure for radical honesty. Includes comprehensive assessment, facilitated diagnosis session, and action planning.

"The Stage Most Leaders Skip: Why Organizational Honesty Is the First Step to Getting Unstuck"

A keynote that gives your organization permission - and a framework - for radical honesty. Perfect for leadership summits and annual kickoffs.

A comprehensive diagnostic of where your organization is blocked, starting with Stage 1. Includes anonymous team survey, leadership interviews, and written recommendations.