In partnership with
Hi {{first_name}},
I recently had some team changes.
New people joined. Good people. Talented people.
And within a few weeks, I started hearing feedback that I was "too aggressive."
They were used to leaders who made decisions collectively, gave feedback gently, and measured success by how people were developing — not just what they delivered.
I operate differently.
Not better. Not worse. Just different.
I make calls quickly. I give feedback directly. I share expectations upfront. And I drive hard for outcomes.
For a minute, I didn't know what to do with this.
Because here's the thing: style differences are common. Every leader has a different approach. Every team has different expectations.
What makes them dangerous isn't the actual difference.
It's how they're interpreted.
Become An AI Expert In Just 5 Minutes
If you’re a decision maker at your company, you need to be on the bleeding edge of, well, everything. But before you go signing up for seminars, conferences, lunch ‘n learns, and all that jazz, just know there’s a far better (and simpler) way: Subscribing to The Deep View.
This daily newsletter condenses everything you need to know about the latest and greatest AI developments into a 5-minute read. Squeeze it into your morning coffee break and before you know it, you’ll be an expert too.
Subscribe right here. It’s totally free, wildly informative, and trusted by 600,000+ readers at Google, Meta, Microsoft, and beyond.
Unplugged Truth
When someone says you're "too aggressive," what they're usually saying is: "Your style doesn't match what I'm used to, and I don't know how to read you yet."
That's not a character flaw on either side.
But if you don't address it, it doesn't stay neutral.
It festers.
People start filling in the gaps with assumptions. "She doesn't care about development." "She's not a people person." "She only cares about results."
None of that might be true. But silence lets people write their own story about you.
And once that story hardens? It's hard to undo.
I was stuck between two bad options:
Option 1: Adapt silently.
Soften my feedback. Slow down my decisions. Make everything more collaborative even when speed matters.
But that felt like walking on eggshells. And honestly? It felt fake.
Option 2: Stay the course.
Keep operating the way I always have. Hope my results speak for themselves. Let people figure it out.
But that felt like ignoring a problem and hoping it goes away.
Neither option felt right.
So I talked to my mentors. And they gave me a different framework.
Sh*t That Helped
Here's what my mentors told me — and what actually worked.
1. Get specific about what's different.
"Aggressive" is vague. It doesn't tell you what to fix.
So I asked: Is it my decision-making? My feedback tone? What I define as success?
Each one points to a different conversation.
If it's decision-making, I need to explain why I move fast and when I'll slow down.
If it's feedback tone, I need to clarify that directness isn't criticism — it's efficiency.
If it's success metrics, I need to explain how development and delivery work together, not against each other.
You can't address a mismatch if you don't know what's actually mismatched.
2. Consider the business situation.
Different leadership styles show up in different phases of growth.
Early-stage? You need speed and scrappiness.
Scale-up? You need process and clarity.
Transformation? You need decisiveness and focus.
Before I assumed this was just a personality clash, I explained the environment.
"We're in a fast-moving phase right now. I'm optimizing for speed and clarity because that's what the business needs. That might feel different than what you're used to, but it's intentional."
Context doesn't erase the difference. But it removes the assumption that you're just being difficult.
3. Have the conversation so people don't draw the wrong conclusions.
I didn't wait for this to blow up.
I addressed it in a team meeting. Not defensively. Not apologetically. Just clearly.
"I know my style might feel different than what you're used to. I move fast, I'm direct, and I focus hard on outcomes. That's not about being harsh — it's about being clear. If something I do feels unclear or off, ask me. I'd rather clarify in the moment than have you fill in the gap with assumptions."
It wasn't a long speech. It wasn't dramatic.
But it gave people permission to ask instead of assume.
4. Don't show two versions of yourself.
This was the hardest one.
I wanted to soften myself to make people comfortable. To prove I wasn't "too aggressive."
But my mentors were clear: If you code-switch to manage perception, you're not leading. You're performing.
Your job isn't to make everyone comfortable.
It's to be clear, consistent, and fair.
People can adapt to a direct leader. They can't adapt to a leader who's one way on Monday and another way on Friday.
Stay consistent. Clarify intent. But don't change who you are to manage how people feel about it.
Closing Thought
Style differences aren't the problem.
Unexplained style differences are.
If you lead in a way that feels different from what your team is used to, that's not a flaw. But if you don't explain your approach, people will write their own story about why you operate the way you do.
And that story is rarely accurate.
You don't need to apologize for how you lead.
But you do need to clarify it.
Here's what I'm asking myself now: Where am I code-switching to avoid being misunderstood? And what assumptions is my team making about my leadership that I haven't addressed?
What about you? Where are you adapting silently instead of clarifying directly? Hit reply and tell me. I want to know what leadership style mismatches you're navigating.
Talk soon,
Dina