“One of the most important, and most difficult, parts of my job is to strike the delicate balance between being too assertive and not assertive enough.”
Fact: a team’s performance decreases under too much pressure from its leadership.
It is also true that a team may underperform without enough pressure from the leader…but honestly how often do you see under-motivated military leaders? Our challenge is usually in scaling back assertiveness and pressure so that our teams can perform their best.
Tommy Lasorda summarized it well: “I believe managing is like holding a dove in your hand. If you hold it too tightly you kill it, but if you hold it too loosely, you lose it.”
Similarly, knowing WHEN to apply assertiveness is a skill of great leaders. They read the environment and anticipate when their teams will need pressure and when to back off. It’s a common belief that military leaders must be constantly assertive, Type-A, and intense. But doing so can be counterproductive to achieving unit goals.
http://blogs.hbr.org/2010/05/12-things-that-good-bosses-bel/


Consider commanders you’ve seen that set out “Command Philosophies” containing lofty goals and the challenge to reach ill-defined levels of “x” capability. These documents may chart a path but they’re not what the junior leader will rely on when he’s trying to do his part to reach those goals.

Powell’s advice is clear wisdom for those seeking competitive career goals. It’s wise to remain stoic about the outcome, particularly if the goal is highly-selective. Becoming psychologically-tied to a career outcome can easily cause one to:
General Colin Powell warns against letting the job overcome who we are, because one day the titles and responsibility will drift away, then what are we left with?
Are you being intentional about your influence? How often do you communicate lessons, values, and positive examples?