Would Your Team Choose You?

Thoughts on Warren Buffett’s Leadership Test, and the 7%

I recently read two insightful pieces on leadership that really resonated with our philosophy at WhiteWater: one from Fast Company, the other a Medium post riffing on Warren Buffett. 

Different authors, different angles, but they point at a shared truth about leadership, the same central belief our team keeps coming back to in our work, especially through our Just Lead program, and in the leadership book we’re writing: leadership isn’t complicated, but it is hard.

Strip away the frameworks, the jargon, the management models, and what really matters is at your core: I’m talking about your character, and how it takes courage, curiosity and caring to lift others up, and challenge them to be their best.  

The 7% and the One Question

The Fast Company article makes a bold claim: only 7% of leaders consistently create an environment where their team feels both that they truly care about them and (this is the kicker) that they were pushed to be better.  

When both caring and challenge are present, the impact is significant: the article notes that 43% of direct reports to high-caring/high-expectation leaders rank in the highest engagement tier, which they call “Creative Excitement.” Contrast that with just 20% of other leaders’ team members. That’s more than a two-to-one advantage! 

Buffett’s “one-sentence test” gets at the same idea from another angle: would the people who work for you choose to follow you? Not tolerate you, or comply with you, but freely choose to follow where you lead them if their paycheck wasn’t on the line? 

If the answer is no, we’ve got work to do. 

The Cost of Getting It Wrong

As I wrote in an earlier post, I recently participated in a panel hosted by our local YMCA to discuss the hidden costs of unhealthy workplaces. And what struck me, yet again, was how consistent the signals are when things aren’t working.

It shows up in dramatic gestures, including quitting, subordination, conflict, and palpably toxic vibes. But it also presents in smaller, more subtle ways, including the phenomenon of quiet quitting, people being physically present but psychologically AWOL, a chilling effect on speaking up, and office theatrics, such as the “meeting after the meeting,” where everyone says in private what they didn’t feel comfortable voicing in front of the boss. 

And then you see the more subtle, dangerous version: malicious compliance. People doing exactly what you asked (no more, no less, often creating negative unintended consequences) because they’ve stopped caring. 

All of these are symptoms of disengagement, which is performance kryptonite. 

As the Fast Company article notes: “When care and demand are applied in inconsistent bursts, rather than together, performance is subjected to a kind of tax, paid in the form of hesitation and doubt.”

“Love Tough”

Both articles reinforced some of the core ideas our WhiteWater team holds about exceptional leadership, namely that creating safety, trust, and followership isn’t just about being nice or kind; it's about cultivating what we’ve begun calling “Love Tough.”

Love Tough is the combination of two things most leaders struggle to hold at the same time: genuine care for people AND the courage to challenge them. 

Most leaders default to one or the other. You get the “nice” leader who avoids hard conversations. Everyone feels comfortable… and performance suffers. Or you get the “tough” leader who drives results but leaves behind them a trail of disengagement, burnout, and turnover.

Love Tough is the critical paradox at the core of great leadership. It essentially says: if you actually care about someone, you owe them the truth to help them grow into the best versions of themselves, for their sake and for the organization.

And to Buffett’s point, these are the leaders people will choose to follow.

Why This Is So Rare

So, going back to that fateful stat in the Fast Company piece, why do only 7% of leaders get this right?

Because it requires something most of us aren’t naturally wired for: discomfort.

It’s uncomfortable to tell someone something they don’t want to hear, admit you might be wrong, create space for disagreement, or defend someone who’s speaking an inconvenient truth. 

And yet, those are exactly the behaviours that create the kind of environment both articles are pointing to.

In the panel discussion, we discussed psychological safety. And I said something I believe deeply: if you want people to speak up, you have to defend their right to do it, especially when it’s messy, inconvenient, challenges authority, or makes you feel uncomfortable.

One of the biggest gaps I see in organizations is the disconnect between stated values and lived behaviour.

It’s the organization that claims in its marketing,  “People are our greatest asset,” and then treats them like a line item. Or it’s the boss who claims to espouse a culture of openness, only to punish people who speak honestly.

I’ve said this before, and I’ll keep saying it: If your values are your theory, your culture is your theory in practice. And your people know the difference.

The Real Test

So, back to Buffett’s question: Would your people choose to follow you?

I think the answer for most of our Love Tough leaders is yes. They are able to get that rare brand of full, psychological engagement, with people who have that “creative excitement” the Fast Company piece describes. 

Like anything that’s really valuable, it’s rare, not because it’s especially complex, but because it asks more of us than many leaders are willing to give.

So, the question is: are you one of the 7%? And if not, are you ready to be?

Would Your Team Choose You?