On February 8, 2009, Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger sat with Katie Couric for an episode of 60 minutes (CBS, 2009). He was there to discuss his miraculous landing of U.S. Airways Flight 1549 onto the Hudson River in New York City, New York. The airplane had only been in flight for 90 seconds when Captain Sully noticed that birds were hitting the windscreen and being sucked into the engines (CBS, 2009). Within three and a half minutes, Captain Sully knew he had to make an emergency landing(CBS, 209). With the lives of 150 passengers and the plane’s crew members in his hands, Captain Sully made some quick decisions that led to a safe landing on NYC’s Hudson River.
Captain Sully has the individual attributes of general cognitive ability, or intelligence, as demonstrated in his rapid perceptual processing of the problem the birds were causing as they flew into the plane’s engine; reasoning skills that led him to troubleshoot for mechanical alternatives; and creative and divergent thinking capacities and memory skills that enabled him to quickly find a place to land and recall the protocol for such a landing (Northouse, 2012). General cognitive ability is a biological skill, but crystalized cognitive ability explains his acquired skills. His ability to problem solve so effectively is because he acquired intellectual ability over time (Northouse, 2012). His motivation to land the plane safely came from the third attribute in the model which requires a leader to “be willing to tackle complex organizational problems” (Northouse, 2012). Captain Sully appears to have the fourth attribute of personality that contributed to his successful landing. His management of the emergency demonstrates “openness, tolerance for ambiguity, and curiosity may affect a leader’s motivation to try to solve some organizational problem. Or, in conflict situations, personality traits such as confidence and adaptability may be beneficial to a leader’s performance” (Northouse, 2012).
The outcome of Captain Sully’s leadership skills was a safe landing. The skills model describes leadership outcomes such as effective problem solving and performance. It is clear that Captain Sully effectively resolved the problem and performed well. He managed to land the plane without injuring any of the passengers or crew members. In fact, in my research of this incident I was unable to find evidence that he caused any additional damage to the plane in his landing.
Captain Sully had 30 years of experience as a pilot. In his interview he said that he thinks all of his work and training up to the point of the flight were to prepare him for that moment (CBS, 2009). He didn’t doubt himself once; he was certain he could land the plane safely. When his body wanted to physiologically react to the situation, he focused on the task and kept calm. He said it was easy to keep calm (CBS, 2009). He was self confident and demonstrated a great deal of technical and conceptual knowledge during his interview. Northouse describes this high level of proficiency in our textbook, “Career experience helps leaders to improve their skills and knowledge over time. Leaders learn and develop higher levels of conceptual capacity if the kinds of problems they confront are progressively more complex and more long term as they ascend the organizational hierarchy (Mumford, Zaccaro, Connelly, et al., 2000 as cited in Northouse, 2012).
The external environmental influence of the failed engine event “provide[d] a unique challenge” (Northouse, 2012). This is a fact that is part of the skills model but out of the leader’s control (Northouse, 2012). Instead of allowing the challenge to negatively impact him, he recruited his skills and valiantly brought the plane to a safe landing against all odds. Captain Sully is a hero and a great leader. His handling of U.S. Airways Flight 1549 is a great example of how leaders use the skills approach to solve problems and lead effectively.
Northouse, P. G. G. (2012). Leadership: Theory and practice, 6th Edtion (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Thank you for this post Ericka! It seems not long ago when Captain Sully was made a hero for his leadership choices. The decisions he made was in a matter of seconds which proved to all of us, his skills approach to leadership resulted in saving lives. The problem solving and performance that Sully modeled closely mirrors Mumford et al. (2000), comprising of three components: Individual attributes, which are his traits, and I would say that his instincts to quickly assess the problem stemmed from his individual inborn attributes that contributed to his competencies. Knowing the mechanical workings of the aircraft and how to make an emergency landing reflects a general cognitive ability. Sully’s quick response and determination to make the best decisions that would avoid a catastrophe event exhibited his trait of willingness through motivation, which led him to make the right choices. The manner in which Sully responded to an emergency situation further demonstrated behavioral flexibility and social judgement skills.
The outcome of the incident shows us that with his career experiences and environmental influences, Sully successfully applied his leadership traits and skills to ultimately achieve the end results that landed the plane to safety.
Hello Ericka,
This is a great story that shows how a leader with the necessary skills can take control of a situation in order to achieve the desired outcome. Captain Sully has a long career with a lot of experience which enabled him to overcome the obstacles that were put in front of him and helped him land his aircraft. The things that make Captain truly remarkable is that he was able to stay calm under pressure. There are many other captains out there that if put in the same type of situation would not have been able to accomplish what Captain Sully did. What skills did Captain Sully posses that made him so remarkable. According to the Skills Model (Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, Jacobs, & Fleishman, 2000; Yammarino, 2000) there are several different skills that enabled Captain Sully to land the plane. Some of the skills that Captain Sully possessed are General Cognitive ability, motivation, personality, problem solving skills, and knowledge. These are the skills that enabled Captain Sully to make the decisions he did on that day.
References:
Mumford, M.D, & Zaccaro, S.J, Harding, F.D., Jacobs, T.O. & Fleishman, E.A., (2000). Leadership skills for a changing world: Solving complex social problems. Leadership Quarterly, 18, 154-166.
Hi Ericka,
This is a great example of how skills approach can be applied to leadership. I believe that he demonstrated all the aspects of “three-skill approach” that Northouse (2016) mentioned. According to Northouse, the three-skill approach involves “technical skill” which represents knowledge and proficiency in a specific area of work (p. 44). Captain Sully said that he was trained to land into the water, and he calmly applied the skill to the situation. Second one is “conceptual skill” which concerns “the ability to work with ideas and concepts” and “creating a vision a strategic plan” (Northouse, 2016, p. 45). Captain Sully excellently demonstrated under the extreme condition. He only had one minute to make decision for the strategy to safely land in the water, and he successfully completed. Third is “human skill” which is the ability to work with people (Northouse, 2016, p. 44). When he heard the flight attendants giving the first instruction to the passengers, he said he “felt comforted by that” (CBS, “60 minutes: I was sure I could do it”, 2009) It shows the trust between the leader and followers. Captain Sully also commented “My entire life up to the moment have been a preparation to handle that particular moment” (CBS, “60 minutes: I was sure I could do it”, 2009). This statement struck me the most because despite his long career as an accomplished pilot, it shows that he has strived to continue to improve his skills over the years rather than simply becoming over confident with his skills.
I remember when this incident happened and the comment Captain Sully made at that time. Everyone praised him as a hero, but he said that “I am not a hero. I just did what I had to do”. I remember it as a modest comment. The video clip you posted was so interesting that I watched other two videos. In the interview with Katie Couric, she asked the same question about how he feels when people call him a hero. His answer was:
“I don’t feel comfortable embracing it, but I don’t want to deny it…I don’t want to dismiss their thankful feeling toward me by telling that they are wrong. I’m beginning to understand why they might feel that way. Something this episode has captured people’s imagination. I think they want good news. I think they want to feel hopeful again. And I can help that way, I will” (CBS, “60 minutes: An emotional reunion”, 2009).
He has become a great leader through learning and training as the skills theory explains, but this episode demonstrated his leadership traits of “intelligence, self-confidence, integrity, determination and problem solving” as well (Northouse, 2016, p. 23). Thank you for sharing the story again.
References:
CBS. (2009). 60 Minutes: An emotional reunion. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xw0gQj9w9vY
CBS. (2009). 60 Minutes: I was sure I could do it. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZ5HnyEQg7M&t=603s
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice, Seventh Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Hello Ericka!
What a great story. Thank you for refreshing this memory to me. Such a critic situation definitely challenges a leader. According to Katz I try to figure out which skills were more demanded from Captain Sully’s when managing this situation. According to the interview I will say that the technical and the conceptual, as at the moment he had to maintain microfocus in the proficiency of his moves, plus the outcome of these.
with this in mind a new idea comes to my head. What happens with leaders of organizations that are faced with extreme situations? Do they still practice empathy? or they only apply their technical knowledge along with strategies to make it into a safe landing? Making it into a “safe landing” at the expense of layoffs or reduced benefits etc is it good?
I am personally puzzle by my own questions because I say to myself that the survival of the organization at the expenses of a few is better than a tragic crash that will mean the end of everyone, but maybe a change in the philosophy and values will help us find new avenues so that we get no victims.
Leadership is not easy, it cannot be predicted, nor constricted to a textbook definition, but we are doing the right thing. Taking perspective and questioning ourselves so that it does not takes us by surprise.