Here is an excerpt from an article written by Hung Dao, Selina L. Lehmann, Oguz A. Acar, and Dirk Deichmann for MIT Sloan Management Review. To read the complete article, check out others, sign up for email alerts, and obtain subscription information, please click here.
Illustration Credit: Andy Carter/Ikon Images
* * *
Innovators who create an extreme success often don’t repeat it — and the way organizations manage the person after the win is partly to blame. Here’s how to do better.
Innovation leaders often know how to manage success well. A fairly good idea is recognized, a strong contributor is rewarded, and the lessons from the win are carried into the next team project. In many cases, that is exactly the right organizational response.
But, sooner or later, most organizations have a different kind of success altogether — a next-level idea and success tied to one person: the engineer behind a product that changes the trajectory of a business unit; the scientist whose patent is embedded across product lines; the designer whose solution unlocks a long-stalled project. After a breakthrough like this, CEOs and managers often respond in the same way they would to any success, but with the volume turned up: more reward, more recognition, more autonomy, and a push toward the next big idea.
It’s the obvious response to exceptional success. Yet, the next big idea rarely comes. Our research suggests that this is because extreme success is not simply a bigger version of ordinary success. It can fundamentally change how innovators see themselves and how they respond to the people around them.
Drawing on both archival and experimental data, our research shows that innovators who deliver one extraordinary hit are strikingly unlikely to repeat it, and the way organizations manage them after the win is part of the reason why.1
The Stress of Exceptional Success
Why is extreme success particularly counterproductive for innovators? Our hypothesis was that the strengths that help someone produce a breakthrough are not always the same as the strengths necessary to sustain innovation over time. Why?
First, exceptional innovators may be highly skilled at solving hard problems, but they are not necessarily leaders who instinctively build teams or recognize and draw on the strengths of others. After an extreme success, the exceptional innovator may come to attribute the achievement mainly to their own talent and hard work and assume that they can do it again on their own. As a result, they may undervalue what a team can contribute and overestimate the costs of coordination. Consequently, even though their earlier success often attracts collaborators, they may see less need to work with others on the next idea.
Second, extreme success can inflate how innovators see their own status in the organization.
* * *
Here is a direct link to the complete article.
References
1.H.M. Dao, S.L. Lehmann, O.A. Acar, et al., “Not All Success Is Created Equal: The Innovation Costs of Extreme Success,” Research Policy 55, no. 1 (January 2026): 1-16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2025.105343.
2.K. Bregu, “Overconfidence and (Over)Trading: The Effect of Feedback on Trading Behavior,” Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics 88 (October 2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2020.101598; and S.L. Lehmann, M. Beretta, H.M. Dao, et al., “Are You Judging Me or My Idea? How Feedback Impacts Future Idea Success in Web-Based Idea Management Systems,” Journal of Product Innovation Management 42, no. 6 (November 2025): 1019-1043, https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12778.