Note: I wrote this book review for a training I am participating in.
The Dichotomy of Leadership was written by U.S. Navy SEALs Jocko Willink and Leif Babin. Previously, they wrote Extreme Ownership to prove how there are no bad teams, only bad leaders, and that each team player can take ownership of team results. In this book, however, they point out how it is possible to take too much ownership, to be too extreme. Rather, we should strive to be balanced leaders.
Dichotomy in the book title refers to two opposing extremes. Nearly every leadership quality has opposing extremes, and good leadership seeks to find the balance between them. The authors state,
“In most cases, rather than extremes, leadership requires balance.”
Following are several of the key balances from the book that I want to outline:
The Ultimate Dichotomy: Care for Individuals versus the Mission
The ultimate dichotomy a leader faces is balancing care for individuals team members with the need to send them into risks to accomplish the mission. Willink writes,
“A leader may have to send his most treasured asset—his people—into a situation that gets them wounded or killed. If his relationships are too close and he can’t detach from his emotions, he might not be able to make tough choices that involve risk to his men.”
While emotional closeness with the team and sending them into risk are opposed, I do not believe they are a dichotomy. We should be able to bond deeply with a team while still entering risk. At the same time, like Willink wrote, we need to be able to detach from our emotions and make hard decisions when needed for the good of the mission.
Micromanagement versus Hands-off Leadership
Some leaders are too hands off. They don’t give their teams specific direction. Consequently, team members do more than they are authorized to do. On the other hand, team members quickly become laid back and complacent. Because of this, leaders need to be involved closely with the team. At the same time, micromanagement is harmful to a team’s morale and overall effectiveness. Willink writes again,
“Micromanagement fails because no one person can control multiple people executing a vast number of actions in a dynamic environment, where changes in the situation occur rapidly and with unpredictability. It also inhibits the growth of subordinates: when people become accustomed to being told what to do, they begin to await direction. Initiative fades and eventually dies.”
Holding the Line versus Bending the Rules
A good leader needs to hold the line on things that matter. However, leaders should not become so rigid that they become overbearing. A leader has only so much “leadership capital,” or finite power. Sometimes they need to use their leadership capital to hold the line. But for insignificant things, they cannot afford to use their leadership capital. Instead, they need to bend the rules for things that really don’t matter. There is nothing honorable, either in the military or civilian life, to hold the line on every rule no matter the cost.
Aggressive versus Reckless
Many teams are in danger of becoming too risk averse. They are passive and do not grab momentum once they get it. In contrast, a good team takes initiative in an aggressive manner. This aggressiveness is not directed towards each other but towards opportunities.
While aggressiveness (or bold initiative to put it in more palatable language) is a positive trait, it is possible to become too aggressive. Good teams and leaders need to balance their initiative with “logic and detailed analysis of risk versus reward.” If they don’t do this, they risk taking too bold of risks and becoming reckless.
Leading versus Following
Leaders lead. At the same time, they need to be willing to follow the expertise and experience of others, even those under them. Some leaders, especially authoritarian ones, think that bending to the advice of those under them will weaken their leadership. However, this viewpoint is characteristic of a weak leader. In contrast, a strong leader doesn’t feel threatened by listening to and following the advice of those under them. When they do this well, it strengthens their leadership.
Under Planning versus Overplanning
Careful planning is critical to the success of all difficult missions. Without solid preparation, missions will fail. However, it is possible to over plan. Babin writes,
“You cannot plan for every contingency. If you try to create a solution for every single potential problem that might arise, you overwhelm your team, you overwhelm the planning process, you overcomplicate decisions for leaders. Therefore, it is imperative that leaders focus on only the most likely contingencies that might arise for each phase of an operation. Choose at most, the three or four most probable contingencies for each phase, along with the worst-case scenario. This will prepare the team to execute and increase the chances of mission success.”
Proud versus Passive
Babin writes that “humility is the most important quality in a leader.” However, it is possible to take humility to an unhealthy extreme of being passive. While a leader cannot be proud, they need to “be willing to push back, voice their concerns, stand up for the good of their team, and provide feedback up the chain against a direction or strategy they know will endanger the team or harm the strategic mission.”
In conclusion, I believe we all should strive for balanced leadership and teamwork. At the same time, focusing on balance can be dangerous. If we simply paint extremes on both sides of us to make us appear balanced, or if we avoid bold measures out of fear of imbalance, we risk becoming incompetent leaders. This again is another balance, one that is not mentioned in the book, but is a fundamental dichotomy.