Beyond the Task: The Leadership of Challenging the Status Quo

Some problems seem small at first—an unnecessary step in a process, an outdated rule no one questions. But how often do we stop to ask: Is this just one issue, or part of something much bigger?

The Debate: Fix One or Fix All?

Some years ago, I was part of a government department tasked with streamlining bureaucracy for businesses. One day, a company raised an issue that seemed minor but reflected an outdated system:

The company stamp.

Even as digital authentication became common, companies were still required to download the form, print it out, physically stamp it, scan it, and upload it just to submit a document. This redundant process defeated the very purpose of digitalization.

One of my officers suggested a simple fix—remove the company stamp requirement for that particular agency’s forms. The agency agreed, and the problem was solved. At least, in theory.

But then we asked ourselves: Is this a one-off case, or is this a symptom of a larger problem?

A quick check confirmed our suspicion—the company stamp requirement was still widespread across multiple agencies. We were faced with a dilemma.

Do we stop here and close the case, or do we push for a system-wide change?

Technically, our job was done. We could have moved on without issue. But businesses would still face the same inefficiencies elsewhere.

A full-scale review across agencies would take time, effort, and resources beyond our original scope. Was it worth it?

After much debate, we decided that fixing just one agency was not in the right spirit of our role. If inefficiency existed across multiple agencies, then our responsibility was not just to solve one instance of it but to push for systemic change.

Once we provided a clear rationale and alternative authentication methods, most agencies were happy to remove the company stamp requirement—many had kept it simply because no one had questioned it. The effort paid off—company stamps were largely eliminated across the public service, making processes smoother for businesses.

Clair Patterson: The Fight Against Lead

At first, Clair Patterson had no intention of changing public health policies. He was a geochemist, focused on dating the Earth’s age. To do this, he needed an uncontaminated lab, free from external lead interference.

At Caltech, he built the world’s cleanest laboratory to ensure accurate results. But in the process, he uncovered a far bigger problem—unnaturally high lead levels in the environment. His research showed that industrial activity, particularly leaded gasoline, had dramatically increased lead contamination in the air, water, and human bodies.

The Fight Against a Powerful Industry

Patterson’s discovery put him at odds with major corporations. The oil and automobile industries had heavily invested in tetraethyl lead, a fuel additive used to improve engine performance. Lead was also widely used in plumbing, paint, and consumer goods. Industry leaders dismissed his warnings, insisting that lead exposure was harmless.

But Patterson was relentless. He gathered evidence from deep ocean samples, Arctic ice cores, and ancient bones, proving that lead levels had risen drastically only after industrialization. His research made it clear: this was not a natural phenomenon—it was industrial pollution.

He had a choice: stop at keeping his lab clean, or take on the bigger fight.

He could have stayed in research, secured grants, and avoided controversy. Instead, he challenged the lead industry, refused lucrative funding, and took his fight to regulators, scientists, and the public.

Major Achievements: How Patterson Changed the World

Despite industry pushback and professional setbacks, Patterson’s persistence led to critical reforms:

• The Ban on Leaded Gasoline – His research led to the U.S. phasing out lead in gasoline by 1996. Other countries followed, reducing global lead pollution. Lead levels in human blood dropped by over 80%, preventing countless cases of lead poisoning, brain damage, and developmental disorders.
• Safer Drinking Water – His work led to stricter regulations on lead pipes and plumbing materials, reducing exposure in homes and public spaces.
• Lead-Free Paint and Consumer Goods – Many countries banned lead-based paint, previously a major source of childhood lead poisoning.

Choosing the Greater Challenge

Both Patterson’s fight against lead poisoning and our effort to eliminate redundant company stamp requirements highlight a crucial leadership lesson:

Do you stop at solving the problem in front of you, or do you take on the larger challenge that could create systemic change?

Patterson could have remained in his lab, but he chose to fight against a powerful industry. Likewise, my team and I could have moved on after fixing one agency’s form, but we decided to challenge an inefficient system.

Leadership Lessons from Patterson’s Legacy

• Go beyond the immediate goal – The best leaders recognize opportunities to make a lasting impact.
• Challenge legacy practices where appropriate – Not all traditions need to be discarded, but leaders must question which ones still serve a purpose.
• Principles matter – Patterson refused industry funding that could have compromised his integrity. Leaders must remain steadfast in their values, even under pressure.

The Impact of One Decision

It takes courage to question the status quo, especially when powerful institutions resist change. Patterson could have stayed in his lab, just as my team could have stopped at one agency’s form. But real leadership is about seeing the bigger picture, challenging inefficiencies, and making a difference beyond the immediate task.

Patterson’s legacy is a reminder that true change happens when we choose to fight battles that others ignore.