The Dichotomy of Leadership | Jocko Willink | Leif Babin |

2020-04-04に共有
Jocko Willink and Leif Babin together served in the U.S. Navy Seals for decades. In the book “extreme ownership”, they shared their stories, their experience and lessons learnt while serving in the U.S. Navy Seals.

Every leader must walk a fine line. That’s what makes leadership so challenging. Just as discipline and freedom are opposing forces that must be balanced, leadership requires finding the equilibrium in the dichotomy of many seemingly contradictory qualities, between one extreme and another.

A good leader must find balance in following dichotomies of leadership

A good leader must be:
• confident but not cocky;
• courageous but not foolhardy;
• competitive but a gracious loser;
• attentive to details but not obsessed by them;
• strong but have endurance;
• a leader and follower;
• humble not passive;
• aggressive not overbearing;

The Dichotomy of Leadership: Balancing the Challenges of Extreme Ownership to Lead and Win

#JockoWillink #LeifBabin #TheDichotomyofLeadership #extremeownership

コメント (8)
  • @thePlum
    Great recap! I definitely need to read this one! 🙌 Jocko is the best.
  • Interesting info! I really appreciate it! Keep up the good work! 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾
  • @Zawazuki
    This was stellar, man! Keep it up! Liked
  • @cgtsang
    Love this style of videos. Where is that accent from? :)
  • this assumes leadership goes only one way? i get that deomcracy dosnt work in the fast paced live or die navy seal scenario... but idk about thinknig of business environments in strictly the same way.... alot more time for group input , collective decision making in business environments. maybe ask the team if their willing to put up with a worker that learns slow instead of just canning him based on what you think? maybe they add more then shear material productiveness.maybe thier morale boosters and because you are removed them from the labor environment as the boss , its harder to see this ... and giving your team a little agency might make them a better team maybe?
  • Sounds like the 1st explanation is just a variant of the 2nd explanation. In both cases 1 person on the team underperformed. In the first case it was the leader in the 2nd case it was someone else. So I don't see any real value in this discussion beyond "cut loose the slacker".