# Aggressive Outcomes By:: [[Brian Heath]] 2022-11-20 Many people think that leadership requires aggression despite the plethora of counterarguments in religion, stories, and leadership books. Serve others, eat last, sacrifice your own needs for the group, find common ground, there is no I in team, and work [[together]] are all common mantras that are not aggressive but passive and collaborative. So, why does aggression inevitability come to define most ideal leaders in organizations? I think it comes down to organizational structures that reward all actions over thinking, charisma over experience, and compliance over self-actualization. Doing something, even when it is wrong, is strong and bold. Thinking is weak. Owning the room is inspiring. Highlighting recurring issues is depressing and annoying. Embodying corporate values above all else is admirable and desired. Doing what is best for you and your family is selfish. All of these common organizational values highlight aggressive traits, so it is no surprise that aggressive and sociopathic individuals often find their way to the top. Then we wonder where are all the good people. Turns out organizations think [[Good People|they are chumps]]. Be more aggressive to climb the ladder, lose yourself, and perpetuate the bullshit. Act is solidarity to make genuine connections, find a purpose, and build something better. #### Related Items [[Aggressive]] [[Leadership]] [[Solidarity]] [[Management]] [[Organizational Analytics]]