Are You a Wartime Leader, a Peacetime Leader, or Something Even Better?

Leading a company – especially a startup – is often compared to leading an army. Most of the videos and articles I’ve seen on this topic take a CEO’s behavior and compare it to either a wartime or peacetime leader.

The goal? Figuring out which set of characteristics serves a company better.

Here’s how that split breaks down:

Wartime leaders include people like Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill – often perceived as underdogs, they have to fight for their country’s very existence. In terms of a CEO, this would be someone like Elon Musk – a leader with big goals, high stakes, unshakeable determination, and an uneasy relationship with the media.

On the other end of the spectrum, peacetime leaders don’t have to fight for their existence. Instead, they have time to think through their decisions. They have more resources to deploy. They have time to seek out allies and build a consensus. If Elon Musk is a wartime leader, a peacetime leader is the CEO of a well-established competitor like Ford or Chevy.

If Elon Musk is a wartime leader, a peacetime leader is the CEO of a well-established competitor like Ford or Chevy.

Now, I’m all for bringing military history into the conversation. And I do think there’s a clear difference between a wartime leader and a peacetime leader.

But the more I think about it, the more I’m convinced this isn’t the way we should be looking at it.

Let me show you what I mean.

What Makes a “Wartime” Leader?

In war, you have to make hard decisions. You have limited resources when it comes to staff, time, equipment, and budget. Sometimes you have to MacGyver a solution using only what’s at hand. That’s also why you have to be willing to break the rules. If it wins the battle (and saves your company), the ends justify the means. No detail is too small to obsess over because every outcome hinges on the smallest of margins.

If you’re a wartime leader, you’re street smart. You’re there to win, not to make friends. If you see a threat, you’ll respond forcefully. You’re always planning, always recalibrating, and always trying to figure out who or what may need to be sacrificed next.

If you’re a wartime leader, you’re street smart. You’re there to win, not to make friends.

The result?

Wartime leaders are usually great at motivation. They earn their team members’ respect by being right there with them in the trenches. They understand urgency, and as a result, are usually intense, driven, pragmatic, and don’t have time for fluff.

What Makes a “Peacetime” Leader?

The biggest difference here is that a peacetime leader has the luxury of time and resources.

You don’t have to break the rules - if you don’t like them, you can work to change them. Also, because you’re not under fire all the time, you can afford to delegate. While you’re still responsible for making short-term gains, you also have time to create long-term goals: how will you leave a mark on the industry? What do you want your company culture to say about your values?

While you’re still responsible for making short-term gains, you also have time to create long-term goals: how will you leave a mark on the industry?

You’re also usually book smart, thanks to the resource of time. Chances are, you went to the “right” college and got to know the “right” people. You solicit your employees’ opinions and take them into consideration. You’re empathetic, considerate, and have big plans for the future.

But Real Life Doesn’t Always Work Like That

When it comes to actual leaders, either in business or in the military, they rarely fit neatly into either type.

Take my favorite general, Black Jack Pershing, for example. Most people would describe him as a wartime leader – he sweated the small stuff, giving soldiers hell for something seemingly insignificant like an unbuttoned button. Why? Because he knew an undisciplined army was way more likely to falter on the battlefield, resulting in more casualties. But when he was ordered to put down a revolt in the Philippines (1909-1913), he did it in part by improving labor laws, recruiting locals to help with law enforcement, and finding the cash to help build schools. That’s the kind of consensus building that’s usually associated with a peacetime leader.

Personally, as a real-life CEO, I’m about 60% war and 40% peacetime.

Personally, as a real-life CEO, I’m about 60% war and 40% peacetime.

Like a wartime CEO, I’ll do what it takes to win and have a tendency to let a battle mentality define my game plan. But like a peacetime CEO, I’ll do it with a contingency plan and buy-in from as many team members and industry leaders as possible.

I’m curious to see what you think your percentage is – let me know in the comments.

Is There a Better Model?

So we’ve established that real-life leaders are rarely 100% wartime or 100% peacetime.

But there’s another chapter in this story.

Wartime leaders usually become peacetime leaders out of necessity – no war lasts forever.

But peacetime leaders rarely become wartime leaders. It’s usually an accident of history that puts them in that position. That’s why I think wartime leaders are more likely to be successful in both positions than peacetime leaders.

Does that mean I’m suggesting wartime leaders are more successful in business?

I don’t think a business can succeed with a wartime-only mentality. And while an established business might get by with a peacetime-only mentality, I don’t think it will innovate or inspire. Some problems need to be knocked out like an enemy on the battlefield. Others need the deep thinking and stakeholder input you can really only achieve in a peacetime situation. That means true leaders need the complete package to succeed.

But I think there’s an even better way to analyze leadership qualities.

I’m proposing we step back from the war analogy and look to Sun Tzu for the win:

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

Evaluating leaders based on wartime or peacetime characteristics means we’re evaluating what they did. Evaluating them based on Sun Tzu’s advice means we’re looking at why they did it…and I think that’s more valuable and more interesting.

===============

Thank you for reading! Click here to check out my other LinkedIn articles.

ABOUT RYAN

Ryan Pinney is an eleven-year MDRT member with eleven Top of the Table qualifications. Recognized for using innovative technologies to drive insurance sales, streamline the application process, and speed up underwriting, Ryan leverages his experience in social media and online marketing to help agents and agencies create their online presence and profit from it. Utilizing the same principles and technology his firm provides to agents, his agency sold thousands of policies direct-to-consumer over the internet last year. Ryan was named one of the inaugural NAILBA ID Twenty Award winners, one of AdvisorToday’s 2015 “4 under 40” Financial Advisors, and one of LifeHealthPro Magazine’s “24 Most Creative People in Insurance.” He is a Past President of NAIFA Northern California, and served as the U.S. Chairperson for the MDRT Member Communications Committee. He is also a regular contributor to financial publications such as Bankrate.com, Yahoo! Finance, Fox Business News, and PinneyInsurance.com.