According to Forbes, retired U.S. Navy Captain David Marquet transformed the USS Santa Fe from the worst-performing submarine in the fleet to the best by implementing psychological distancing techniques rather than traditional command-and-control leadership. Marquet’s approach, detailed in his book “Distancing: How Great Leaders Reframe to Make Better Decisions,” involves three specific modes: being someone else, being somewhere else, and being sometime else. He demonstrated these techniques with a medical company team that privately wrote down pricing decisions for a new skin cream, revealing significantly more variability in perspectives than the CEO anticipated. Marquet emphasizes that distancing requires energy but helps leaders overcome cognitive biases and ego-driven decision-making, ultimately leading to clearer thinking and better outcomes across both professional and personal contexts.
Table of Contents
The Neuroscience Behind Why Distancing Works
What Marquet describes as psychological distancing aligns with established neuroscience about how our brain processes information under stress. When we’re emotionally invested in decisions, the amygdala hijacks our prefrontal cortex—the center for rational thinking. This biological response served our ancestors well when facing physical threats, but it creates significant problems for modern leaders making complex decisions. The brain’s natural tendency to confirm existing beliefs (confirmation bias) and justify past decisions (escalation of commitment) becomes amplified under pressure. Distancing techniques essentially create cognitive space that allows the prefrontal cortex to re-engage, reducing emotional reactivity and enabling more objective analysis.
Applications Beyond Corporate Leadership
While Marquet’s examples focus on organizational leadership, these principles have far-reaching implications across multiple domains. In healthcare, doctors using distancing techniques might reduce diagnostic errors by considering alternative explanations they’d otherwise dismiss. In education, teachers could better understand student struggles by mentally stepping into their perspectives. Even in personal relationships, the ability to view conflicts from “somewhere else” or “sometime else” could transform how we navigate disagreements. The universal applicability stems from distancing addressing fundamental human cognitive limitations rather than specific professional challenges.
The Practical Challenges of Implementation
Despite the clear benefits, several significant barriers prevent widespread adoption of distancing techniques. Organizational cultures often reward decisive, confident leadership that appears certain rather than reflective. The mental energy required for consistent distancing—what Marquet compares to a workout—conflicts with the reality of decision fatigue that leaders face daily. There’s also the risk that distancing could be misinterpreted as detachment or lack of commitment, particularly in cultures that value visible passion and conviction. Leaders must navigate these perceptions while building the mental muscle for effective distancing.
How Technology Could Enhance Distancing
Modern tools could potentially amplify distancing effectiveness if designed thoughtfully. AI systems could prompt leaders to consider decisions from multiple perspectives before finalizing choices. Virtual reality might create literal “somewhere else” environments where leaders can practice viewing challenges from different vantage points. Data visualization tools could help teams see the full spectrum of opinions—like Marquet’s pricing exercise—without the social pressure of group dynamics. However, these technological aids must complement rather than replace the fundamental cognitive work, as the value comes from the mental shift itself.
Building Distancing as a Leadership Competency
The most effective approach treats distancing not as a occasional technique but as a developed competency. Organizations could incorporate distancing practice into leadership development programs, using case studies and simulations to build the mental muscle. Regular reflection exercises, perhaps using third-person journaling as Marquet suggests, could make distancing a habitual practice rather than a crisis tool. The ultimate goal isn’t occasional perspective-taking but developing what might be called “cognitive flexibility”—the ability to fluidly move between different mental vantage points depending on the situation’s demands.
The Difficulty of Measuring Impact
One challenge with distancing approaches is quantifying their effectiveness. Unlike more tangible leadership interventions, the benefits of psychological distancing manifest in avoided mistakes, better team dynamics, and more innovative solutions—outcomes that are often difficult to attribute directly to specific techniques. Organizations wanting to implement these approaches would need to develop new metrics beyond traditional performance indicators, possibly focusing on decision quality, team psychological safety, or innovation metrics that capture the broader benefits of clearer thinking.
