Peter saw no problem with a system in which he and the analysts who worked for him made so many of the company’s decisions. Meanwhile, businesses around us were adapting to a world that was changing at blinding speed. We needed to change, we needed to be more nimble, and we needed to do it soon.

The decision to disrupt businesses that are fundamentally working but whose future is in question—intentionally taking on short-term losses in the hope of generating long-term growth—requires no small amount of courage. Routines and priorities get disrupted, jobs change, responsibility is reallocated. People can easily become unsettled as their traditional way of doing business begins to erode and a new model emerges. It’s a lot to manage, from a personnel perspective, and the need to be present for your people—which is a vital leadership quality under any circumstances—is heightened even more. It’s easy for leaders to send a signal that their schedules are too full, their time too valuable, to be dealing with individual problems and concerns. But being present for your people—and making sure they know that you’re available to them—is so important for the morale and effectiveness of a company.

I suspect that many successful companies that have fallen on hard times in the past—including IBM, Sears, General Motors, Kodak, Xerox, and many others—saw perhaps quite clearly the changes in their environment. They were probably able to conceptualize and articulate the need for change and perhaps even develop strategies for it. What I think hurt the most was their inability to change highly structured, sophisticated cultures that had been born in a different world.

We found this initiation of a big new strategy push at this year three to four juncture again and again in the journeys of the most transformative CEOs. Mary Barra took charge at GM in 2014, and in her first two years largely focused on urgent shot-term issues. She had to steer the company through the tumult of a scandal that broke just three weeks after she steeped into the job: GM had failed to disclose that ignition switches in some models were causing cars to suddenly shut off, resulting in the deaths of more than 120 people.

The story speaks to how even the most talented and experienced leaders, who’ve successfullly navigated through many challenges, may overlook or misinterpret arising threats or fail to perceive them at all. That may be true even when they’ve instituted good monitoring systems, with the best data gathering and analytics, and have crackerjack strategy and operations teams supporting them. Ironically, the more success they’ve driven, the more they may be given to misreadings and slackening of vigilance.