There are different kinds of leadership. Some people are head leaders while others are heart leaders. Head leaders tend to be all about plans, goals, and strategy. They are very analytic, and they typically address mistakes by making straightforward corrections. Their subordinates feel good when they do a good job. Heart leaders, meanwhile, tend to be all about personal encouragement, camaraderie, and vision. They are very emotive, and they typically address mistakes by focusing on opportunities for improvement. Their subordinates do a good job when they feel good.
Head leaders often come across as being cold and detached—i.e., not nice. Heart leaders come across as nice, but also as being easily taken advantage of—i.e., naive. It can be easy to manipulate a heart leader’s distaste for conflict and desire for everyone to feel included and important, but it can be difficult for a head leader to get people personally invested in something. This is perhaps why head leaders look for people who are already diligent and self-motivated, whereas heart leaders try to inspire dedication and enthusiasm in people. Each needs to get to the same place from different starting points.
In my experience, the best leadership teams have one of each type: a leader who lays down the law, and another who fires everyone up. It doesn’t necessarily matter which one outranks the other. A boss might lay down the law and walk away, leaving the assistant to say “we can do this!” Alternatively, the boss might say “go team!” and let the assistant stalk about making corrections. Some heart leaders do try to weed out analytic types to avoid the kinds of conflict they inevitably bring, however, while some head leaders fail to recognize the value of emotive types. This leads to unbalanced—and ineffective—teams.