Why Musk’s "algorithm" is really a leadership mindset

Elon Musk’s five-step “Algorithm” is more than an engineering trick – it is a ruthless way for leaders to question, delete and simplify before they touch automation.

Article link: https://open.substack.com/pub/johanosteyn/p/why-musks-algorithm-is-really-a-leadership?r=73gqa&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true

Audio summary: https://youtu.be/25G3wACF7bA

Follow me on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/johanosteyn/

I write about various issues of interest to me that I want to bring to the reader’s attention. While my main work is in Artificial Intelligence and technology, I also cover areas around politics, education, and the future of our children.

In another article, I explored how Elon Musk’s obsession with automation nearly broke Tesla’s factory. Here, I want to shift focus. The real value in Walter Isaacson’s biography is not just the colourful stories, but the simple framework Musk calls “The Algorithm”. It reads like an engineering checklist: question every requirement, delete any part or process you can, simplify and optimise, accelerate cycle time, and only then automate. 

The more I work with executives in South Africa and elsewhere, the more I see it as a leadership mindset. It is about how leaders think, what they reward and what they are willing to kill off, long before they buy an AI platform or robotics solution.

CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND

Most large organisations already speak the language of efficiency. They reference the Toyota Production System, Lean, Six Sigma, and continuous improvement. Toyota’s relentless focus on waste elimination has influenced global manufacturing for decades. In the digital era, companies like Netflix and Amazon have done something similar in their own way: Netflix deleted the physical DVD model and rebuilt around streaming; Amazon endlessly trims friction from the customer journey before using AI and automation to scale it.

Musk’s Algorithm sits squarely in this tradition, but with a sharper edge. It insists that requirements must have a person’s name attached, so they can be challenged. It makes deletion a celebrated act, not a guilty secret. It puts simplification above cleverness, and it leaves automation for last.

When he pushed engineers at SpaceX or Tesla  to install products themselves, count screws and remove unnecessary steps, he was not just tweaking a process; he was modelling a way of thinking that says nothing is sacred just because “we have always done it this way”.

INSIGHT AND ANALYSIS

Seen in this light, The Algorithm is less about rockets and cars and more about culture. A leader who truly lives step one – question every requirement – creates an environment where people are allowed to say, “Why do we do this at all?” In many corporations, especially in regulated sectors, that question is quietly discouraged. Requirements hide behind phrases like “compliance wants it” or “head office insists”, with no named owner and no scrutiny.

Step two – delete any part or process you can – is even more revealing. Do promotions, bonuses and public praise go to the people who add new projects, new reports, and new controls? Or are leaders willing to commend those who remove an approval layer, kill a redundant project or shut down an outdated system? If deletion is never rewarded, the algorithm dies on the first hurdle.

This is why jumping straight to step five, automation, is so attractive and so dangerous. Buying an AI solution lets leaders look decisive without facing the uncomfortable questions about legacy processes, political interests or outdated risk controls. The result is what I often call “digital theatre”: impressive tools layered on top of unexamined requirements.

IMPLICATIONS

If we treat The Algorithm as a leadership discipline, its application becomes much broader. A bank executive can apply it to a credit process, but also to board reporting and internal governance. A public sector leader can use it to challenge forms, queues and approvals that punish citizens without improving safety or accountability. A school principal can ask which rules genuinely support learning, and which just create paperwork for teachers.

For African organisations, this mindset is vital. We do not have an infinite budget to burn on failed automation projects. Our reality is a mix of world-class systems and fragile infrastructure, modern regulations and historical inequalities. Leaders who embrace questioning, deletion and simplification can free up scarce resources and build processes that are robust in local conditions, not just impressive in a global vendor’s slide deck.

CLOSING TAKEAWAY

Musk’s Algorithm should not be left to the engineers in a corner; it belongs in the hands of every leader who has the power to create or remove work. It reminds us that the bravest decision is often to stop doing something, not to digitise it. If we can build cultures where requirements are owned and challengeable, where deletion is rewarded, where simplicity is admired, and automation comes last, then AI and advanced technology will have something worthy to amplify. That is the kind of leadership mindset our organisations need – and the kind of thinking I hope we will pass on to our children as they inherit a world saturated with automation.

Author Bio: Johan Steyn is a prominent AI thought leader, speaker, and author with a deep understanding of artificial intelligence’s impact on business and society. He is passionate about ethical AI development and its role in shaping a better future. Find out more about Johan’s work at https://www.aiforbusiness.net