Dr. Sanja Cancar-Todorovic is a business executive, author, and keynote speaker with over 25 years of leadership across telecom, finance, and technology. She leads global initiatives on Microsoft’s Cloud Operations + Innovation Supply Chain team, focusing on sourcing, capacity planning, and AI data center integration for Hyperscale and Colocation projects. Holding a DBA, eMBA, Master of Management, and an Honours BA in Law and Political Science, her expertise spans supply chain, third-party risk, AI in business, and transformational leadership. In 2025, she was recognized as Changemaker of the Year and Woman of the Year runner-up.
The business environment is not designed for predictability, and setbacks are not exceptions; they are part of the operating model. Even the most well-structured strategies, negotiations, and decisions will, at times, produce outcomes that fall short of expectations. While it is easy to rationalize setbacks as redirection in hindsight, in real time they often trigger emotional responses that can override even the most disciplined thinking.
This is where leadership is tested.
Emotional awareness is human; emotional control is a discipline. The ability to remain composed, deliberate, and strategically grounded, particularly when outcomes deviate from plan, is an underappreciated executive capability. In high-stakes environments, emotional reactions such as frustration or urgency can feel justified, even necessary. In reality, they often erode influence, compromise decision quality, and weaken negotiating positions. The true cost is not the moment itself, but the downstream impact on credibility, relationships, and long-term outcomes.
The question, then, is not whether emotions arise, but how leaders manage them without losing strategic control.
A recent recommendation led me to revisit Winning Through Intimidation by Robert J. Ringer. Despite its title, the book is not about dominance. It is about awareness. Specifically, the risk of operating with naïve assumptions in environments driven by self-interest, power dynamics, and perception.
In executive decision-making, optimism is often positioned as a strength. However, unchecked optimism can create blind spots. Assuming alignment of intent, underestimating counterpart motivations, or overlooking hidden risks can lead directly to the very setbacks that trigger reactive decision-making. In this sense, being naïve (not complexity), is often the root cause of avoidable disruption. For those operating in negotiation-intensive environments, this should sound familiar. We are trained to assess risk, define alternatives (BATNA), and prepare for multiple scenarios. Yet even with this discipline, setbacks can feel personal. That tension, between professional rigor and human response, is precisely where leadership maturity is defined.
Ringer’s core premise remains highly relevant: intimidation, in its many forms, is a constant in business. It presents through confidence, authority, urgency, and perceived power. However, these signals are often strategic constructs rather than indicators of true leverage. The moment a leader recognizes this, and refuses to react emotionally, is the moment control is re-established. What is visible in any negotiation or interaction is rarely the full picture. Underlying motivations, constraints, and risks often remain unspoken. Leaders who rely solely on surface-level signals are more susceptible to both strategic missteps and emotional reactions when outcomes shift unexpectedly. This is why rigorous scenario planning and disciplined skepticism are not signs of pessimism, but of preparedness.
Ultimately, executive effectiveness is less about rhetoric and more about control of the situation, the narrative, and critically, oneself. This requires deliberate planning, clarity on alternatives, and a disciplined approach to managing both adversity and success. Composure is not situational; it is a consistent signal of strength. Even in positive outcomes, overextension or visible eagerness can undermine positioning.
If there is a single principle that emerges, it is this: unmanaged assumptions lead to avoidable setbacks, and unmanaged setbacks lead to emotional decision-making.
Avoiding naïve trust is not about cynicism. It is about strategic awareness. In an environment defined by speed, uncertainty, and constant change, the capabilities developed in negotiation-heavy roles, risk assessment, scenario planning, and understanding power dynamics, must extend beyond formal deal-making. They are, in effect, leadership capabilities. I wrote this article for three reasons: to ground myself as I work through a few thorny challenges, to reinforce for experienced leaders the importance of applying these disciplines more broadly (and not just during negotiations), and to pass these insights along to people who haven’t had the same training but deserve the same advantages. Understanding how power, perception, and self-interest operate is not optional, but foundational. Setbacks will occur. The differentiator is the ability to remain prepared, composed, and forward-moving in spite of them.