INTELLIGENCE/ORI AND ROM BRAFMAN

It’s one of the most perplexing phenomena in sports. An underdog team plays aggressively, takes chances, makes bold moves and, gains the lead. But then something changes. Now on top, the team becomes afraid of losing its lead and abandons its aggressive attack, instead playing cautiously and conservatively. Rather than focusing on winning, the team begins to play not to lose.
Without realizing it, teams fall victim to a psychological force called loss aversion. Simply put, we feel the pain of a loss more intensely than the pleasure associated with a gain. As a result, coaches and players become paralyzed by the fear of losing the lead. But playing conservatively often spells their downfall: creative teams become fearful and protective, creating an opportunity for the opposing team to catch up.
The very same loss aversion that plagues sports teams also plays out in the game of politics. And in the United States presidential race, Barack Obama is its most recent victim.
Mr. Obama was an underdog who made his mark by being bold and creative.He took risks and challenged conventional truisms to capture the Democratic nomination. But once he secured the nomination and was sitting on a comfortable poll lead over his Republican opponent, Mr. Obama started playing not to lose.
The young superstar began acting like a worried grandpa. Moving cautiously to avoid stumbling, Mr. Obama chose a safe and predictable vice presidential candidate in Senator Joseph R. Biden. Now, there’s nothing wrong with Mr. Biden. But there’s nothing exciting about him either.
Until recently, it was John McCain who was the more traditional, safe candidate. When it came to vice presidential choices, however, Mr. McCain abandoned the safe play and instead gambled with his pick. Sarah Palin is lively, unconventional and intriguing.
Pundits can argue (rightly) that she is an unknown, that her record as governor is spotty, and that her claims of achievement are merely hyperbole. Yes, the list of her faults is long. But love her or hate her, Ms. Palin is exciting . She represents the aggressive play - the type aimed at actually winning. Ironically, she embodies the same characteristics that Mr. Obama had during the Democratic primaries.
While the election campaign has yet to play out, in this round Mr. McCain was the one who was playing to win.
And that’s a potent reminder. Any of us can fall victim to loss aversion, whether it’s I.B.M. protecting its mainframe business and losing out to Microsoft, Yahoo failing to innovate its search technology and giving Google the opportunity to grab market share, or General Motors guarding its lucrative sport utility vehicle business and allowing Toyota to run away with the hybrid car market.
The challenge for any successful leader, be it in business, politics, or sports, is to avoid playing not to lose. Although it feels as if we’re playing it safe, when we let loss aversion take over, we’re handing over the victory to an opponent playing to win.

Ori Brafman and Rom Brafman are
co-authors of “Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational ehavior.” Ori Brafman, M.B.A., is an international speaker on organizational behavior and management. His brother Rom Brafman, Ph.D., is a psychologist who lectures on interpersonal dynamics. Send comments
to brafmans@nytimes.com