History is crowded with CEOs who have flamed out in very public ways. Yet when the reckoning arrives, the same question often lingers: How did this person keep getting promoted? In corporate America, the phenomenon is known as “failing up,” the steady rise of executives whose performance rarely matches their trajectory. Organizational psychologists say it’s not an anomaly. It’s a feature of how many companies evaluate leadership.
At the core is a well-documented bias toward confidence over competence. Studies consistently show that people who speak decisively, project certainty, and take credit for wins—whether earned or not—are more likely to be perceived as leadership material. In ambiguous environments, boards and senior managers often mistake boldness for ability. As long as a leader can narrate failure convincingly—blaming market headwinds, legacy systems, or uncooperative teams—their upward momentum may continue.
Another driver is asymmetric accountability. Senior executives typically oversee vast, complex systems where outcomes are hard to tie directly to individual decisions. When results are good, credit flows upward. When results are bad, blame diffuses downward, and middle managers, project leads, and economic conditions become convenient shock absorbers. This allows underperforming leaders to survive long enough to secure their next promotion.
Then there’s the mobility illusion. In many industries, frequent job changes are read as ambition and momentum rather than warning signs. An executive who leaves after short, uneven tenures can reframe each exit as a “growth opportunity” or a strategic pivot. Recruiters and boards, under pressure to fill top roles quickly, often rely on résumé signals, like brand-name firms, inflated titles, and elite networks, rather than deep performance audits.
Ironically, early visibility can also accelerate failure upward. High-profile roles magnify both success and failure, but they also increase name recognition. An executive who runs a troubled division at a global firm may preside over mediocre results, yet emerge with a reputation as a “big-company leader,” making them attractive for a CEO role elsewhere.
The reckoning usually comes only at the top. As CEO, the buffers disappear. There is no one left to blame, and performance is judged in the blunt language of earnings, stock price, profitability, or layoffs. The traits that once fueled ascent, such as overconfidence, become liabilities under full scrutiny.
The central lesson for aspiring CEOs is that the very system that rewards confidence, visibility, and narrative control on the way up often masks weak execution until the top job strips those protections away. Future leaders who want to avoid “failing upward” must deliberately build careers grounded in verifiable results and direct ownership of outcomes because at the CEO level, there is no narrative strong enough to substitute for performance.
Ruth Umoh
ruth.umoh@fortune.com
Smarter in seconds
Big biz buy-in. Anthropic is all in on ‘AI safety’—and that’s helping the $183 billion startup win over big business
Old guard upgrade. How the bank founded by Alexander Hamilton is transforming for the future of finance
Pressure test. Inside the Fortune 500 CEO pressure cooker: surviving is harder than ever and requires an ‘odd combination’ of traits
Rank racing. The one-upmanship driving CEOs
Leadership lesson
Anthropic’s Dario Amodei on when a startup gets too big to know all employees: “It’s an inevitable part of growth.”
News to know
Investors are questioning OpenAI’s profitability amid its massive spending while increasingly viewing Alphabet as the deeper-pocketed winner in the AI race. Fortune
Trump warned that Netflix’s $72 billion bid for Warner Bros. Discovery could face antitrust scrutiny, suggesting it would create an overly dominant force in streaming. Fortune
An etiquette camp is trying to help Silicon Valley shed its sloppy image by teaching tech elites how to dress and behave as their influence grows. WaPo
IBM is reportedly in advanced talks to buy data-infrastructure firm Confluent for about $11 billion, bolstering its AI data capabilities. WSJ
Even as women reach top roles in politics and business at record levels, public confidence in their leadership is stagnating or declining. Bloomberg
Terence “Bud” Crawford, the undefeated 38-year-old boxing champion, has earned more than $100 million and even turned Warren Buffett into a fan. Forbes
Big Tech leaders now warn that artificial intelligence is advancing to the point where it could begin replacing even CEOs, reshaping the very top of corporate leadership. WSJ
