Hey, Tough Guy

Good leaders know when to crack down.

The recent public showdown between Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and some retired generals cast light on Rumsfeld's tough-guy management style. He can be brash, even brutal, with subordinates, castigating those he believes have weak arguments or have not done their homework. Whether or not Rumsfeld is an effective manager, a surprising number of management experts interviewed by Government Executive say that in an age of touchy-feely consensus building exercises, sometimes it's OK to be a tough guy.

Of course, it's not good to be mean just for the sake of being mean. But experts who have studied leaders say that the most successful ones are kind when they need to be and tough when they need to be. James Clawson, professor of business administration at the University of Virginia's Darden School of Business, says smart leaders adapt their styles depending on the people they're dealing with, or the seriousness of the circumstances. "A confrontational, in-your-face style is a very common business leadership approach," Clawson says. He recalls one business leader who would speak very calmly to one subordinate, but jump up and down, shouting at another. The leader never lost control, but consciously used aggressiveness when he thought it would help hold an employee accountable.

Jim Collins, who examined strong leaders in his best seller Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap . . . and Others Don't (Collins, 2001), says the great bosses were not necessarily aggressive, but they were rigorous. "The best leaders we studied operated with a somewhat Socratic style, and they used questions to gain understanding," Collins says. "For important decisions that rested on their own shoulders, they would tend to ask lots of questions and examine the evidence, seeking the best answers, and then engineer what they believed to be the best decision for the organization. Their goal was always to make the right decision happen, not necessarily to gain consensus."

Collins points to Alan Wurtzel, the former chief executive officer who moved Circuit City from the brink of bankruptcy to a highly profitable company. Wurtzel was known as "the prosecutor" because he zeroed in on a question and wouldn't stop asking it until he got an answer. "You know, like a bulldog, I wouldn't let go until I understood," Collins quoted Wurtzel saying. "Why, why, why?"

One drawback to this style, however, is that managers can use it to bully employees into submission. Collins says the strongest leaders weren't trying to get everyone to agree with them. They were trying to get employees to come up with honest analysis and smart ideas. Donald Kettl, a public administration professor at the University of Pennsylvania, says leaders such as Rumsfeld are successful because they pick a few key goals and then pursue them relentlessly. But if the goals selected are wrong, then an aggressive style can prevent a leader from seeing the real problems facing their agencies. "The world doesn't always cooperate with the problems you've decided to focus on," Kettl says.

The bottom line: You don't have to be nice all the time. But when you get tough, do it with the goal of motivating your employees to find the truth or get better results. And do it not out of anger, but out of a commitment to excellence.

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from GovExec.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Federal IT Applications: Assessing Government's Core Drivers

    In order to better understand the current state of external and internal-facing agency workplace applications, Government Business Council (GBC) and Riverbed undertook an in-depth research study of federal employees. Overall, survey findings indicate that federal IT applications still face a gamut of challenges with regard to quality, reliability, and performance management.

  • PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

    This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

  • Toward A More Innovative Government

    This research study aims to understand how state and local leaders regard their agency’s innovation efforts and what they are doing to overcome the challenges they face in successfully implementing these efforts.

  • From Volume to Value: UK’s NHS Digital Provides U.S. Healthcare Agencies A Roadmap For Value-Based Payment Models

    The U.S. healthcare industry is rapidly moving away from traditional fee-for-service models and towards value-based purchasing that reimburses physicians for quality of care in place of frequency of care.

  • GBC Flash Poll: Is Your Agency Safe?

    Federal leaders weigh in on the state of information security


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.