Your CFO just delivered the numbers. Revenue is down. Costs are up. The comfortable margins that funded your “customer-friendly” pricing are gone.
Every consultant says the same thing: raise prices quietly. Bury the increases in contract renewals. Add fees where customers won’t notice. Whatever you do, don’t make it obvious.
Roberto Setúbal had a different idea.
As CEO of Itaú Unibanco, Brazil’s largest private bank, Setúbal faced a crisis that killed the industry’s traditional revenue model. Instead of hiding new fees in fine print, he did something radical: he announced transparent retail banking fees on national television when no other bank charged them.
The banking establishment thought he was insane. Customers would revolt. Competitors would steal market share. The board questioned his judgment.
Instead, something unexpected happened. Customers accepted the fees. They were tired of hidden charges and appreciated the honesty. Setúbal’s transparency gamble worked because he understood a principle most leaders miss: radical transparency beats appeasement.
This wasn’t unique to Brazilian banking. Winston Churchill learned the same lesson during World War II. While other leaders projected false confidence, Churchill brought political rivals into his war cabinet meetings. He shared bad news openly. He institutionalized dissent instead of surrounding himself with yes-men.
Conventional wisdom said this would weaken his leadership and fragment the war effort. Instead, it created sharper decisions and broader legitimacy during the nation’s darkest hour.
Both leaders used the same strategic constraint: they eliminated the option to hide behind comfortable illusions.
Most people get this story wrong. They think there’s such a thing as “too much information.” They worry about losing clients, damaging reputation, or appearing weak. This stems from deep insecurity about what happens when people see how the business really works.
But here’s what they miss: customers and stakeholders prefer dealing with leaders who communicate clearly, even when the truth is uncomfortable. The alternative—discovering hidden agendas later—destroys trust permanently.
What made Setúbal’s approach work wasn’t just transparency. It was the detailed explanation that came with it. Instead of just announcing fees, Itaú showed customers exactly where their money went and why the changes were necessary. They simplified the entire fee structure and eliminated hidden charges.
This level of detail was counterintuitive. Most leaders think customers don’t care about business operations. But when you explain your constraints honestly, people understand. They can see things from your perspective. They know that what they see is what they get.
The constraint of radical transparency forced both Setúbal and Churchill to be precise about their reasoning. You can’t hide behind vague justifications when everything is open to scrutiny. This pressure creates better decisions and clearer communication.
Today’s business leaders are making the exact opposite mistake. AI companies dance around data usage policies instead of explaining exactly how customer information gets used. Tech companies announcing massive layoffs blame “AI disruption” instead of admitting they miscalculated hiring during the boom years.
They’re protecting their image at the cost of their credibility.
The irony is that people already know the truth. They know companies overhired. They know AI isn’t the real reason for layoffs. They know their data gets used in ways they don’t fully understand. The defensive communication just makes leaders look dishonest on top of incompetent.
Setúbal and Churchill understood that leadership power comes from declaring hard truths, inviting scrutiny, and holding a principled line under uncertainty. This approach realigns expectations, concentrates effort on what matters, and shapes the environment rather than yielding to it.
The choice every leader faces is the same: do you want to control the narrative or control the outcome? You usually can’t do both.
Radical transparency is a constraint that forces you to make decisions you can defend in public. It eliminates the comfortable option of hiding behind spin and forces you to solve real problems instead of perception problems.
Most leaders think customers can’t handle the truth. The reality is that customers can’t handle being lied to.
What would you explain differently if everyone was watching?