The 80/20 Rule of Authoritative & Coaching Leadership: Balancing Authority, Coaching, and Core Competence
- Marcus D. Taylor, MBA
- Jul 16
- 4 min read
There are countless leadership styles out there—servant leadership, transformational leadership, situational leadership, and more. I’ve studied many of them and even practiced some across different seasons of my life. But this particular blend—the combination of authoritative structure, coaching empathy, and core competence—resonates most deeply with how I lead, how I’ve been shaped, and how I show up in high-stakes environments.
This isn’t the only effective leadership model. But it’s one that has consistently worked for me—whether in military formations, car showrooms, classrooms, or boardrooms. I call it the 80/20 Rule of Authoritative & Coaching Leadership:
80% Authoritative Leadership – structure, clarity, expectations.
20% Coaching Leadership – guidance, empathy, development.
100% Core Competence – deep mastery of your craft and the ability to perform under pressure.
When a leader embodies these elements, they don’t just hit performance metrics—they build people.
The Foundation: Authoritative Structure
Authoritative leadership is often misunderstood as rigid or harsh. But true authoritative leadership is built on discipline, direction, and standards. It’s about setting a clear mission, holding people accountable to it, and modeling consistency.
In the military, this came to life during a division command maintenance inspection. I had personnel and equipment spread across several sections, so we prepared months in advance. But we didn’t just hope to do well—we followed the standard. I trained my team section-by-section using the actual inspection worksheet and the governing regulations. We reviewed everything. The clerical work was in place. The only thing left was disciplined execution.
Then, tension surfaced between two team members. Personal issues. They weren’t working well together—and the timing couldn’t have been worse. Rather than escalate or ignore it, I pulled them both aside and coached them through it.
I said, “This inspection is bigger than both of you. It’s time to set your egos down and put the mission first. I’ll help you have the conversation you need to have—after we execute.”
That redirection saved the team’s focus. We ended up scoring a 98%—not the perfect 100% we aimed for, but we owned that remaining 2% and used it to improve further. More importantly, those two team members learned how to communicate across conflict, and we resolved the tension with mutual respect post-inspection.
That’s authoritative leadership—grounded in mission, shaped by standards, and reinforced with coaching when necessary.
The Human Layer: Coaching in Real Time
The coaching side of leadership isn’t about softness—it’s about development. It’s helping someone connect to the mission when their understanding or emotions start to drift.
In car sales, where performance is visible and pressure is constant, I once coached a young salesperson who froze during a packed Saturday. The lot was full, inventory was thin, and a ready-to-buy customer was waiting.
He panicked. I could’ve barked at him or taken over the deal myself, but instead, I pulled him aside and said:
“Look—this isn't about being perfect. You’re here to learn how to listen, how to guide the customer, and how to stay calm under pressure. You’ve got what it takes, but you need to remember why you’re here.”
I coached him on his tone, his confidence, and his structure. He regrouped, walked back out, and closed the sale.
Coaching isn’t coddling—it’s about realignment. Sometimes people fall short not because they don’t care, but because they don’t fully see the vision. That’s when coaching becomes powerful—not just to solve the moment, but to grow the individual.
The Engine: Core Competence
Neither authoritative structure nor coaching leadership works without core competence. If you don’t know your job, your people won’t trust your guidance. And if you can’t perform under pressure, they won’t respect your leadership.
Core competence means mastery. It means knowing the standard, understanding your tools, managing your people, and navigating challenges with clarity. It’s the difference between guessing and guiding.
In both the military and car sales, my success was never just about personality—it was about preparation, technical accuracy, and performance execution. People followed me because they knew I knew what I was doing. That trust gave me the credibility to correct with authority and coach with confidence.
Without competence, leadership falls flat—regardless of tone or intent.
Navigating Misunderstandings
Not everyone knows how to receive coaching. Some have been coddled by leaders who gave validation without growth. Others expect their emotional needs to be addressed immediately, regardless of context. But leadership must be discerning.
There are moments to listen deeply—and moments to redirect gently.
Some people want to vent on their timeline. But when a leader doesn’t stop everything to entertain the moment, they’re labeled “toxic” or “uncaring.” That’s a flawed perspective.
A grounded leader says:
“I understand you need to talk. But this moment is about execution. I’d like to revisit this with you when we have space to work through it properly.”
That’s not evasion. That’s emotional intelligence. Leadership isn’t about pleasing every feeling—it’s about protecting the mission while nurturing the people.
Final Thoughts: Leadership Is a Rhythm
True leadership is rhythmic. You shift between command and counsel, between discipline and development, between urgency and patience.
To lead with impact:
Be firm enough to set the standard.
Be humble enough to coach when needed.
Be excellent enough to model core competence.
This 80/20 model isn’t universal, but it’s real for me. It’s guided me across military bases, sales floors, academic institutions, and nonprofit rooms. It’s not always popular—but it’s always productive.
Because at the end of the day, the goal is not just to lead people to perform—it’s to lead them to grow.
Reflective Questions for Readers
Do you lean more toward authoritative or coaching leadership?
How do you demonstrate core competence to your team?
When have you confused someone’s coaching for criticism—or vice versa?
Are you approachable when others struggle, or only when they succeed?
How do you balance urgency with emotional timing?
Comments