The reality is, that sometimes we appreciate how the person acts, and sometimes we don’t.

This is just as true for someone who is in a leadership position.

Some of them also find a way to establish a position of leadership others accept. Their peers might think of them as good leaders. Their team members might think of them as good leaders. It’s part of the recipe to be followed.

These leaders have an authority that is being accepted.

When a leader is not being accepted by his team, he is only perceived as an authority. In that case, it is his status that is perceived and his power that is felt.

When working with someone who is only exercising authority the reaction may be to complain about bad leadership as well as searching for ways to get around that authority. Simply avoiding it rarely is a successful strategy, that would be a denial of reality. The subdued reaction rarely will be a satisfying strategy, that would be a denial of self.

The curious and factual approach may be the better solution. It means to find as many ways as possible to understand the objectives and constraints that authority figure is dealing with. It requires one to make oneself aware of one’s predictions of what will happen and remember that they are assumptions. It also invites one to put one’s evaluation of that authority figure aside any time there is an interaction with them.

Proceeding this way would be a just as useful reality check with someone we appreciate. But the reminder is often more useful when someone triggers a dislike or anxiety.

It’s there to remember the reality of the situation one is in and one’s ability to get the best out of it.