Lesdership Styles In D/s, Part 2

I brought Part 1 to an abrupt end with this:


"The Leader (Coach/Manager/Dom/me) has to be confident enough to be flexible enough."


Flexibility is a very tricky area. Many (including Me, on this blog, on several occasions) mention the importance of consistency, particularly in D/s interactions because the emotions are so exposed and magnified. And consistency is hugely important. How then to be "flexible" and consistent?

I see two parts to the answer: 1) to understand that consistency of strategy doesn't have to always mean consistency of tactics, and 2) to have the confidence that 1) can be implemented and that whatever misunderstandings might ensue as a result can be worked out.

Disclaimer: There are a lot of Dominants who are confident in their abilities who actually shouldn't be. I'm going to embrace a rare (for Me) "consumerist" point of view here and caution all submissives that confidence is often inversely proportional to ability and understanding, and to be very careful.

Consistency of strategy vs. consistency of tactics . . . in other words, understanding that while the destination doesn't change, there can be many roads that lead to it. The danger is that the submissive may get hung up on the change in tactics and begin to feel set adrift, unsure of the ground beneath him or her. [I don't like to draw a lot of gender differences in these things but in My experience a female submissive it seems is more likely to fall into that trap.]

What prevents that from happening is the vigilance and understanding of the Dominant. It's incumbent upon the Dom/me to be watchful for changes in the submissive's behavior that signal that either 1) the different tactic isn't working, and/or 2) the submissive feels abandoned.

And of course the Dom/me needs to be smart and at a certain point stop what doesn't work. The good Dom/me is constantly "making things up," as in . . . finding new and different ways to deliver the same message; S/He isn't tied to one approach, one tactic, while the underlying message remains totally and comfortingly consistent.

Lastly, "communication" rears its venerable head. The Dom/me has to be confident enough to admit that S/He isn't possessed of all the answers, that S/He is constantly searching for the best way to lead and to communicate, and that S/He is committed to all those improvements, short and long term.

While we all have Our leadership styles, the important thing is to realize that the one(s) we lead, their well-being and growth, are more important than holding fast to a style. And that in pursuit of that, often, many different styles are necessary.

Leadership Styles in D/s, Part 1

Sports analogies carried forward into business and real life can be overdone and certainly often are. But every now and then something that happens in the world of sports gets Me thinking about situations in D/s.

As you may or may not know, the New York Mets recently blew a large lead in the last two weeks of the season and ended up out of the playoffs. The "collapse" was historic in its proportions. And what's a good collapse without assigning blame?

Listening to sports talk radio in the wake of this debacle, hosts and callers and "experts" have various theories about who should get how much of said blame. And many want to lay a good portion of the blame on the Mets' manager, Wilie Randolph.

One thing that the Willie-blamers say is that Willie's personality is too low key. He doesn't get in players' faces; he doesn't argue much with umpires; he's not the locker-room tirade after a bad loss type.

The classic response to those who want a more fiery Willie Randolph is: "He has to be who he is. It's not his nature to be 'fiery.' "

And there, finally, is the point (I could hear your impatience).

To those who toss out the old chestnut that "That isn't Willie," I respond:

A good leader is less concerned with holding to some abstract conception of Him- or Herself and more concerned with eliciting the desired results from those S/He is leading.

Meaning, in baseball, in business, in D/s, the boss has to do what's necessary, to be who S/He needs to be, to get those being led to respond. Within the normal strictures of course of what is moral/legal/safe bla bla bla . . . let's not lose our way in Disclaimerville.

The Leader (Coach/Manager/Dom/me) has to be confident enough to be flexible enough.

More on that in Part 2.

Re-finding The Way

swan wrote:

"I know, from experience, that the solution (when I'm feeling off balance) is not to abandon the slave path that is the correct way for me, but to renew my dedication and attention to it. The place of calm and rest and security and simple freedom for my spirit, heart, and mind is found as I turn fully toward Him."


It is so much the same on the other side.

But not always so obvious. The very nature of the roles dictates, to a degree, that more often than not it's going to be assumed that the submissive has lost his or her way. Additionally, in My experience Dominants are less likely to acknowledge or understand that They might be the One "off balance"; and in fact the lessened ability to see that off-balance condition is often a reflection of the very confidence that the submissive seeks in a Dominant.

As for being able to see it more clearly, or sooner, I don't know of any remedy, expect perhaps to place sticky notes around the house that read "maybe it's You."

But once seen, the remedy is just what swan described. Renewed attention. Renewed dedication. Immersing Oneself in what led Owner and owned to each other in the first place.
Ridiculously simple, and inexplicably powerful -- somehow it jolts one with the shock of the new, no matter how many times experienced before.