Be More Hicks!
leadership and authority in
James Cameron's Aliens

Guy Strelitz
4 March 2024

Today's text is Aliens from 1986. If you've not seen it, the rest of this may not make much sense to you. Pick this article back up when you've watched Alien and Aliens. They're both drop dead classics – you're in for a treat!

Aliens is a film about contrasting leadership styles. That's not what the plot's about. The plot's about Ellen Ripley, traumatised sole survivor of Alien, joining a squad of Colonial Marines to investigate why a colony on a planet she visited in the first film has gone silent. Spoiler alert for a 38-year-old film – they've been eaten by the Aliens. And soon the Marines will be too. But the film is about leadership and authority, illustrated by Lietenant Gorman and Corporal Hicks.

Lietenant Gorman

Lt Gorman is the Marines' officer. He's pompous, insecure, less inexperienced than the squad he's meant to be leading and very aware that as the sole officer present he's supposed to be 'in charge'. The squad spot it instantly and he never earns their respect: "Looks like the new Lieutenant's too good to eat with the rest of us grunts." (the first 3-8 seconds are relevant here):

Gorman believes that as officer he should have the answers and the squad should obey his orders without question:

It does not go well. The squad suffers severe losses and shortly afterwards Gorman himself is knocked out. By the time he comes round, the squad is operating without him and he's lost his authority. He never recovers it.

Gorman's has what I call fiat authority, granted by his rank. It is fragile.

Corporal Hicks

Hicks is a lowly Corporal – an NCO ranking below even Sergeant Apone, scarcely above the rest of the squad. Maybe he's just a little smarter or a little more responsible than some of them. He leads what remains of the squad after reluctantly assuming command (watch to the end of the clip):

His authority isn't granted but earned, through experience, competence and the respect. Where Gorman's fiat authority is fragile, Hicks' earned authority is resilient.

Gorman v Hicks

The two men's attitudes lead to very different actions. Gorman, when faced with an unexpected difficulty, assumes that the solution falls to him (second clip above). Sitting safely behind the lines, he makes a snap decision that endangers the squad. When the experienced and respected Sergeant Apone tries to question the order, Gorman shuts him down: "Just do it, Sergeant."

By contrast, Hicks operates collaboratively. By the time he makes a decision he's heard four different proposals, from people with a stake (their lives), with expertise and competing concerns¹. Gorman imposes his ruling without compromise. Hicks elicits a consensus from the team.

Gorman commands, Hicks leads².

Gorman, Hicks and me. And you?

At my best I've been every inch a Hicks, enabling my team to evolve solutions and ways of working. At my worst I've been something of a Gorman, insecurely throwing my weight around and perhaps being more of an impediment than a facilitator. That's probably true of a great many of us – we're at our best when we're supported from above and around, and at our worst when under pressure, out of our depth and insecure.

I've experienced both styles among my own managers too. And there's a correlation (an imperfect correlation) between when I've experienced Hicks-like trust, support and collaboration and when I've successfully extended that to my team³. I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that both behaviours tend to roll downhill, so have a multiplying effect. Which brings us right back round to the title of this piece.

Be more Hicks!