If you now believe you've caught me out with a typo in the headline, I might fall victim to the halo effect. This leads you to perceive me as incompetent in other areas as well, simply because of my spelling. The halo effect is a widespread and often unnoticed form of misjudgment that also manifests itself in project work.
I'm afraid I have to disappoint you. "Halo" is not a typo, but the English word for halo or halo. Admittedly, I make typos very often. You are only spared the ordeal of my spelling and punctuation deficiencies because my articles are proofread by patient spelling gurus like Sabine Pagler, who thus protects me from the consequences of the halo effect. It was first described by Edward Thorndike.
Thorndike observed that people tend to inappropriately project general impressions onto specific characteristics. For example, good-looking people are often spontaneously perceived as more intelligent, charming, capable, etc. You might object: "Nonsense! I know plenty of attractive dimwits and unassuming geniuses." True, but how would you assess these individuals before they speak or demonstrate through their behavior what they are capable of, or lack thereof?
The halo effect isn't limited to individuals; it also applies to companies and projects. When a company or project performs exceptionally well, this aura of success, in our perception, extends to other aspects of the company or project: its culture, the brilliance of its leadership, its methods, its processes, or its brand. In the light of success, everything shines, glitters, and sparkles. Legends and anecdotes quickly begin to proliferate. The mystique surrounding the people to whom we attribute this success transforms them into heroes. Incidentally, "nimbus" is the Latin word for halo or halo. People love heroic tales. In the business world, these are the "from garage to multibillion-dollar corporation" stories—essentially Cinderella for managers, or, for those educated by Disney, Cinderella for managers.
Clever authors and consultants know that these modern fairy tales can be easily sold disguised as success guides, retrospectively analyzing and describing the "steps to success." However, this retrospective view is usually distorted by the halo effect, because in the light of success, many things glitter that are not gold. Furthermore, the focus tends to be solely on what is visible in the spotlight of success. While success factors are identified, it is neglected to examine how often they fail to produce the desired result in other cases: Would the same team or project manager be equally successful in other projects? Cause-and-effect chains are also constructed where, upon closer examination, it is not clear which came first: Is the project manager seen as a genius because of their success, or was their genius the cause of the success? Factors such as the risks taken or fortunate circumstances beyond the control of those involved are conveniently overlooked.
I fear that many of these retrospective success analyses rest on shaky statistical ground because the data considered are neither representative nor free from the influence of the halo effect and other distorting effects. And there are many of those!
How can an analysis of a handful of success stories lead to a universally valid statement about recipes for success? Since the complex reality of markets, companies, and project work cannot be transformed into a plausible, comprehensible recipe for success, ruthless simplification occurs. Eventually, a story emerges that is easy to tell and conveys the comforting feeling that success is simply a consequence of persistently pursuing the distilled recipe for success: a halo myth.
However, the halo effect also works in reverse, even if that doesn't do justice to its name.
Woe betide the hero who stumbles on his path to success and falls into the dirt. Poof, the aura vanishes, and there he lies on the ground: just an ordinary person! Then he can be mercilessly torn to shreds. He is, in effect, punished for having been given a halo and allowed to bask in its reflected glory for a while.
Now the hero becomes a scapegoat, and the halo turns into horns. In extreme cases, this person is practically demonized. And when someone has been saddled with horns, the perception of their qualities also changes: courage becomes recklessness, self-confidence becomes megalomania, charisma becomes an illusion, and so on. The supposed hero must now be sacrificed as a scapegoat to maintain the fairytale illusion of a recipe for success.
I find fairy tales and stories wonderful, and it's a great art to tell them so well that they awaken vivid images in our minds. Isn't it marvelous to let your imagination run wild in such an inspired way?
When making important decisions and assessments, we should be able to distinguish between fiction and reality. But how is that possible? I'm certainly not going to give you a recipe for success, but at best offer a perspective: Resist the myths of heroes and scapegoats, because they are two sides of the same coin. An illusion that gets us nowhere in projects. Instead, consider, for example, together with colleagues, customers, and users, the events in the projects alternately from the perspective of potential success and that of equally conceivable failure. Consider what opportunities and risks can be derived from these different perspectives and how you can influence them.
And then you make your decisions with the awareness that the effect of any measure can be influenced by factors that are currently unpredictable. That's certainly closer to reality than halo myths.
The halo effect in projects: The fine line between glorified hero
and the demonized scapegoat is often narrower than one assumes
(Image: foto art Elisabeth Wiesner)
I'd be happy to send you more detailed information about the halo effect and other management illusions. Just send an email with the subject line "Halo" to denkanstoss@microconsult.de That's enough.
Peter Siwon
EN 
DE