[xepriot]

Neuroticising over how to word your commands (polite requests) is slave mindset, and such a person who does this is not a 'leader'. What makes a leader is not how you word things. But almost nobody walking around in corporate america has an inspiringly authoritative personality, and you can't make yourself into one very easily, so retarded articles like this are the best they can do.

If you are a leader, then when you simply say 'go do this', the follower actually wants to do it and does not care about how carefully you handle their feelings.

[happytoexplain]

>If you are a leader, then when you simply say 'go do this', the follower actually wants to do it and does not care about how carefully you handle their feelings.

Nope, communicating with humans is the same art whether you think you are a leader or not. Some cultures have a strong sense of hierarchy, which in their business interactions is expressed in the petty, demeaning game of "act like a sycophant insect to those above you and treat those below you as pawns to be commanded", which has the same effect as what you're describing, but civilized people tend to reject that.

Edit: Note that this is not a defense of the article, which starts off incorrect at sentence one. It's easy to confuse the concept of a command hierarchy, like a military, and a cooperation hierarchy, which is the way a healthy business operates (though this is perhaps the minority of businesses, because a command hierarchy is more effective if your employees mostly don't give a shit or are miserable or incompetent, any of which problems may or may not be their fault).

[financltravsty]

Not all humans are equal. Some still retain the spirit of wonder and awe -- dare I say zest -- that allows them to find inspiration. Whether that is through internal or external means, they still can be impelled to act by the right stimulus.

To be civilized is to bend to genteel sensibilities; and nothing inspiring ever comes from that. Logically sound, rational, and convincing sure; but never inspiring.

[xepriot]

you demonstrate the slave mindset. you cannot imagine and so reject the possibility of an individual with the charismatic power to make those below him not feel like insects yet at the same time not neuroticise or even consciously attend at at all to how he comports himself. These individuals are not rare, either - but you cannot see them properly, likely because of the same resentment which causes you to describe followers, again, as 'insects'.

This understanding is not available to your 'concepts' or however you want to terminologize your gay taxonomy of hierarchies. either you get it - you get that people instinctively want to have someone above them to respect, and even admire (love), while they obey - or you don't.

[throwaway914]

I agree. You don't dispense vitriol, but people are way more willing to follow instructions from a perceived leader than we tend to believe. It's not worth splitting hairs to finaggle every word to sound delicate and kind. If you assume authority, and you aren't outright malevolent, you can usually tell someone:

I need you to take out the trash.

[xepriot]

You have to (nonverbally; perhaps with your whole personality) get them to understand and agree that it is good for them to take out the trash, and to trust your intentions, and that your leadership generally is also good and worthy of trust