Every leadership class I teach eventually arrives at the same exercise.
I ask participants to think about the best leader they’ve ever worked for and the worst. Working in small groups, they identify the traits that earned those leaders each distinction. We then fill an entire whiteboard with their answers.
Since 2024, I have saved every one of those lists.
The participants have come from agencies across the country and represent patrol officers, correctional officers, supervisors, investigators and dispatchers. What surprised me wasn’t how different the answers were. It was how remarkably similar they became.
| RELATED: What Cops Want in 2026: The reality of patrol
Regardless of assignment, agency size or rank, officers consistently identified the same behaviors that build trust — and the same behaviors that destroy it.
The exercise doesn’t produce an abstract leadership theory. It reveals what officers actually notice every day about the people they work for.
What builds credibility
The discussions about effective leadership are remarkably consistent. Certain behaviors appear class after class, regardless of where the participants work.
Officers respect leaders who own their mistakes
One of the strongest themes to emerge from these classroom discussions is accountability.
Officers consistently describe their best leaders as people who accept responsibility for their decisions, acknowledge mistakes and focus on solving problems instead of assigning blame. When leaders model accountability, they create an environment where responsibility becomes part of the organization’s culture rather than something expected only of subordinates.
Students often point out that credibility is strengthened when leaders hold themselves to the same standards they expect of everyone else.
Communication means more than giving directions
Communication appears on nearly every whiteboard.
But officers aren’t simply asking leaders to share information. They value supervisors who explain expectations, listen before making decisions and provide honest, constructive feedback.
The best leaders communicate with their people, not just to them.
Students repeatedly describe leaders who take time to explain the “why” behind decisions, creating understanding instead of simple compliance. That kind of communication builds trust long before an organization faces a difficult incident.
Fairness builds trust
Integrity, honesty and consistency frequently appear together in these discussions.
Officers consistently describe respected leaders as ethical, transparent and trustworthy. Just as importantly, they expect leaders to treat people fairly.
One of the strongest reactions in class discussions centers on favoritism. Through anonymous polling, many students describe feeling excluded when supervisors treat employees differently based on personal relationships rather than performance. Those experiences often produce frustration, disengagement and a loss of trust that can last long after the incident itself.
Fairness isn’t simply about treating everyone identically. It’s about applying standards consistently and making decisions employees believe are objective.
Competence earns credibility
Students also expect leaders to understand the profession they lead.
Competence goes beyond technical expertise. Officers respect leaders who understand the realities of the job, make sound decisions under pressure and use their experience to guide others through difficult situations.
Many students explain that they learn the most about a leader by watching how that person performs during stressful incidents. A leader’s response to adversity often says far more than any leadership presentation or motivational speech.
Great leaders develop people
Perhaps the most encouraging theme is how often officers describe leaders who invested in their success.
Students consistently remember supervisors who coached rather than criticized, provided meaningful feedback and challenged employees to grow professionally. They valued leaders who removed unnecessary obstacles, secured needed resources and prepared their people to succeed.
Rather than focusing only on today’s assignment, these leaders invested in tomorrow’s professionals.
Their influence extended well beyond the immediate task because they helped others build confidence, judgment and capability.
What destroys credibility
The discussions about ineffective leadership are just as consistent.
Certain traits appear class after class, regardless of where the participants work.
Micromanagement signals a lack of trust
Micromanagement appears near the top of nearly every list.
Students describe leaders who control every detail, second-guess routine decisions and rarely allow employees to exercise judgment. Rather than improving performance, micromanagement communicates a lack of confidence and prevents people from developing the critical thinking skills the profession demands.
Ego silences communication
Arrogance is another recurring theme.
Students describe poor leaders as individuals who believe they are always right, dismiss feedback and place their own status ahead of the team’s success. When leaders stop listening, honest communication disappears with them.
Favoritism destroys credibility
Few behaviors generate stronger reactions than favoritism.
When employees believe supervisors apply different standards based on personal relationships instead of performance, trust quickly erodes. Students consistently describe fairness and consistency as essential components of credible leadership.
Leaders who avoid accountability lose respect
Officers also recognize leaders who refuse to accept responsibility.
Students frequently describe supervisors who shift blame when problems arise but readily accept credit when things go well. Those behaviors undermine credibility because employees expect leaders to model the accountability they ask of everyone else.
Fear produces compliance, not commitment
Leading through authority alone was another recurring concern.
Students describe leaders who rely on intimidation, forced compliance or positional authority to achieve results. While those approaches may produce short-term obedience, they rarely inspire commitment, loyalty or initiative.
The strongest teams are built on trust rather than fear.
What officers really want from leadership
When I reviewed these classroom exercises together, a clear pattern emerged. Officers consistently want leaders who:
- Communicate openly and honestly.
- Treat people fairly and consistently.
- Accept responsibility for their decisions.
- Develop and support their people.
- Understand the profession they lead.
None of these expectations involve complicated leadership models or management theories. Instead, they reflect everyday behaviors that employees observe over months and years. Leadership credibility isn’t built during speeches or annual evaluations. It’s built through countless daily interactions that demonstrate consistency, humility and professionalism.
The officers participating in these exercises never described a perfect leader. They described leaders they would willingly follow into difficult and uncertain situations. They were equally clear about the behaviors that undermine leadership: ego, favoritism, micromanagement, dishonesty and leaders who refuse to accept responsibility.
That’s why I continue using this exercise.
Every class reminds me that leadership is never defined by rank alone. It’s defined by behavior.
Whether the question is spoken aloud or not, employees are continually asking themselves one simple question: Would I willingly follow this leader?
