The Downside of Results-Oriented Cultures
By Amirali Nourbakhsh, Level 52 Associate
Over the years, I’ve worked with numerous organizations that take great pride in being “results-oriented.” On paper, this sounds like a great value: it’s clear, measurable, and focused on performance. But time and time again, I’ve seen how an obsession with results backfires, often making individuals blind to obvious solutions. One of the most striking challenges I’ve observed is tunnel vision—an overly narrow focus on achieving specific outcomes that blinds a person to the bigger picture. It’s not uncommon for leaders to push their employees so hard for results that creativity, innovation, and even basic problem-solving skills are adversely impacted.
During a period of drastic economic changes, a sales team was abruptly tasked with generating 10% more revenue than planned. Leadership responded by pressuring the team to sell more, driving them into a panic mode that led to missed targets and chaos. Meanwhile, a rival company facing the same national economic conditions analyzed their options and chose to raise prices—a strategy the first company ruled out as impossible in their overfocus on what they believed to be results. The rival company met their targets and exceeded expectations, demonstrating how tunnel vision can blind leaders to simpler, more effective solutions that might be right in front of you.
What Causes Tunnel Vision?
In many of my coaching sessions, I found that tunnel vision isn’t a lack of intelligence or effort—it is the brain's natural reaction to pressure. When employees face high-stakes in results-driven environments, their stress levels spike. This triggers the production of cortisol which weakens the brain’s executive functions, responsible for creativity, perception, collaboration, and higher-order thinking.
During the early days of COVID-19, I witnessed this dynamic play out in a few organizations. Faced with unprecedented uncertainty, one client company of mine panicked and started drastic downsizing—not only unnecessarily, but without an effective communication plan. Although they intended to let go of only four employees, their failure to communicate this left the rest of the team fearing they might be next. The high-performing employees, the very ones the company needed the most, began to feel insecure and resigned and joined rival companies. This is the essence of tunnel vision: stress narrows focus to immediate survival, driving reactive decisions over thoughtful, long-term strategies. In these moments, innovation and adaptability were abandoned in favour of sheer survival, often at the expense of future growth and stability.
The Ripple Effects of Tunnel Vision and the Role of Thinking Styles
Tunnel vision doesn’t just limit immediate decisions—it creates a ripple effect that permeates an organization. As stress levels rise and the focus narrows, teams often fall into patterns that stifle creativity, discourage risk-taking, and foster a reactive mindset. These effects go beyond individual performance, shaping the culture and long-term trajectory of the organization.
One of the most significant casualties of tunnel vision is the balance between divergent and convergent thinking, two critical cognitive processes in problem-solving. Divergent thinking, the ability to generate multiple ideas and explore creative possibilities, is essential for innovation and adaptability. It allows teams to think expansively, consider alternative perspectives, and identify opportunities that may not be immediately obvious.
However, under stress, divergent thinking is one of the first casualties. Neuroscience shows that cortisol, the hormone released during stress, inhibits the activity of the brain's prefrontal cortex, the region responsible for higher-order thinking and creativity. As a result, teams under pressure default to convergent thinking, focusing narrowly on implementing a single solution. While convergent thinking is critical for execution, relying on it exclusively can lead to hasty, poorly thought-out decisions and missed opportunities for innovation.
Divergent and Convergent Thinking in Business
As an example of the difference in the two thinking styles, imagine a marketing team tasked with launching a new campaign for a product.
Divergent Thinking: In the initial brainstorming session, the team generates a wide range of ideas, from traditional ad placements to experimental social media trends, sponsorships, and even guerrilla marketing tactics. No idea is dismissed, and the focus is on creativity and exploring all possibilities.
Convergent Thinking: After gathering ideas, the team narrows their focus. They analyze which strategies align best with the brand’s goals, budget, and target audience. Eventually, they select a combination of social media and influencer marketing, which they execute with precision.
This balance ensures the team starts with expansive, innovative ideas (divergent thinking) but also zeroes in on the most effective and practical approach (convergent thinking) to achieve their objectives.
Breaking Free from Tunnel Vision
Tunnel vision may seem like an unavoidable consequence of a results-driven culture, but by fostering balanced thinking, psychological safety, and a focus on root-cause analysis, leaders can break free from its limitations. True success lies in creating environments where teams can think expansively, act decisively, and achieve sustainable outcomes that align with both immediate goals and long-term growth.
