DICKS: Do you need to be one to be a successful leader?

For anyone who's curious, here's the best video I've found that breaks apart the idea of an "asshole": [VIDEO] Essentially, people can be dicks and non-dicks, while simultaneously being givers or takers. Nobody likes a taker, even if they're nice, because that person doesn't help one grow. On the other hand, someone can be a real dick, but in a "giving" way that helps achieve a better outcome for both individuals. In the case of Jobs, one could argue that his personality was justified not only because great work came out of it, but also because the people doing that work became the best version of themselves in the process. If someone is capable of great work and they produce good work, there's a certain kindness to telling them that's not acceptable. But saying the exact same thing to someone who's less capable can be mean.

Being pleasant is one of my personal rules/goals for life. But it is interesting to analyze great leaders who have been jerks. This 30 minute Youtube documentary on the topic is very interesting: "DICKS: Do you need to be one to be a successful leader?" [VIDEO]

I think the writer is correct: there is a meme out there that in order to be great, a leader, a trailblazer etc you have to become inevitably the arsehole. So much so, that arseholism is not just tolerated but celebrated. I wonder why the author did not feel persuaded to mention our current poster child of arseholism, the quintessential kind: Donald Trump. Here's a good video essay on the same subject by a filmmaker, Max Joseph: [VIDEO]

This reminds me of a short documentary called "DICKS: Do you need to be one to be a successful leader?" [VIDEO] tldr; You don't have to be a dick, but being a strong and passionate leader will result in making tough choices that will inevitably not make everyone happy. tldr 2; People don't want a boss who is a friend, they want a leader with a vision.