The Leadership Paradox: How to Be Both Forceful and Encouraging

Ever had a boss who pushed so hard it felt suffocating? Or one who was so nice that nothing ever got done?

We’ve all seen both types of leaders—the ones who drive performance at any cost, leaving employees burned out and disengaged, and the ones who are so encouraging that they avoid accountability, letting mediocrity slide.

The best leaders don’t choose between?forceful and encouraging—they master?both.

I’ve seen this firsthand in my work with leaders at every level. Those who create thriving cultures set?high standards while also?empowering their teams. They push people to achieve more than they thought possible, but in a way that builds trust, not fear.

This balance isn’t just about leadership style—it’s the difference between?a culture that drives sustainable performance and one that breeds dysfunction.

So how do you get it right?

The False Choice Between Strength and Support

Many leaders fall into one of two traps:

The Forceful but Discouraging Leader

This leader demands high performance but neglects psychological safety. They set clear standards, enforce accountability, and push hard for results—but without encouragement, their team operates in fear, disengagement, or quiet compliance rather than true commitment.

Example:?Early in his career, Steve Jobs was known for setting incredibly high standards but often crushed morale. It wasn’t until he balanced high expectations with the right support that Apple flourished.

The Encouraging but Ineffective Leader

This leader builds strong relationships, offers praise, and creates a positive environment—but avoids tough conversations, fails to challenge poor performance, or hesitates to make difficult decisions. The result? A culture of comfort rather than excellence.

Example:?Research by Gallup found that?67% of employees say they lack meaningful feedback.?Encouragement without accountability leads to stagnation.

Both approaches?fail?because they rely on an either/or mindset. The best leaders do both.

The Constructive Leadership Model: Strength + Support

The highest-performing cultures, as studied by?Human Synergistics, combine?achievement-oriented leadership (driving results) with humanistic leadership (developing people).

Here’s how great leaders?master the balance:

Set High Standards, but Provide the Tools to Meet Them

• Weak leaders?lower the bar when people struggle.
• Strong leaders?keep standards high but ensure employees have the skills, support, and resources to succeed.

Example:?Alan Mulally at Ford turned the company around by setting?rigorous performance expectations?while fostering a culture of trust and collaboration.

Insist on Accountability, but Coach Instead of Punish

• Weak leaders?let poor performance slide to avoid discomfort.
• Strong leaders?hold people accountable with clear feedback while offering guidance and development.

Example:?Satya Nadella at Microsoft?transformed a toxic internal culture?by insisting leaders be accountable for collaboration while coaching them to embrace a growth mindset.

Push for Results, but Recognize and Celebrate Progress

• Weak leaders?focus only on what’s next, ignoring wins.
• Strong leaders?balance urgency with recognition, reinforcing what’s working while driving continuous improvement.

Example:?Google’s research on high-performing teams found that?leaders who regularly recognize progress boost engagement by 69%.

Be Direct and Honest, but Lead with Empathy

• Weak leaders?avoid tough conversations or sugarcoat the truth.
• Strong leaders?communicate candidly while showing understanding and care.

Example:?Netflix’s famous?"no rules" culture?thrives on direct feedback—but it’s balanced with?generous severance for employees who no longer fit the role, ensuring honesty doesn’t feel like punishment.

Demand Excellence, but Create Psychological Safety

• Weak leaders?tolerate mediocrity to maintain harmony.
• Strong leaders?encourage risk-taking and learning while expecting high performance.

Example:?Google’s?Project Aristotle?found that?psychological safety is the #1 predictor of high-performing teams—not talent, IQ, or resources.

This approach aligns with?research-backed leadership models?that drive engagement and performance.

Leadership That Changes Culture

A?forceful yet encouraging leader?is exactly what organizations need when driving culture change. Cultural transformation doesn’t happen through?force alone?(which creates resistance) or?encouragement alone?(which lacks urgency). It requires?leaders who push for change while creating an environment where people feel safe, supported, and empowered to embrace it.

This is where most culture change efforts fail. Leaders either?push too hard, triggering fear and quiet defiance, or they?soften too much, leading to complacency and lack of urgency. The solution is?dual leadership—high challenge, high support.

Leaders who master this balance create cultures where people:

• Feel empowered to take ownership
• Are motivated by both challenge and recognition
• Trust leadership and the direction of the organization
• Embrace change rather than resist it

The Best Leaders Are Both

If you want to build a culture of performance and engagement,?don’t choose between forceful and encouraging leadership—be both.

• Be?bold enough?to challenge people.
• Be?empathetic enough?to support them.
• Be?tough enough?to hold the line.
• Be?human enough?to build trust.

I’ve seen this balance transform teams and entire organizations. It’s not easy, but it’s what separates?good leaders from great ones.