The Dungy Template

The character of a leader – and the qualities glorified by his followers – often reflect the wisdom or foolishness of a people.

For the past seven years, the state of Indiana has enjoyed its association (no matter how arbitrary) with Indianapolis Colts head coach Tony Dungy. Rather than perpetuating the truculent leadership style that defined former coaches from Indiana such as Bobby Knight or Jim Mora, Dungy elevated the virtues of personal dignity and sportsmanlike behavior. He was firm and confident while exuding inner peace and humility. 

Of course, taking the Colts to the playoffs seven years in a row never hurt his popularity. But somehow – and everyone knew it – Dungy always seemed like the right man at the helm, irrespective of his team’s performance. His success appeared more like a natural extension of his impeccable character than the result of forces far beyond his control – forces like salaries, individual talents and politics.

This is not to diminish the connection between Dungy’s outstanding abilities and the results his work undoubtedly produced. But when one begins to consider his career in Indianapolis, it is difficult to imagine him in any role other than leader, captain and coach.

Dungy embodies a rare leadership style. His demeanor on the field and in the clubhouse and his capacity to challenge players and extract their full potential indicate the essence of a natural leader. While many rise to positions of power and authority by proclaiming their convictions and credentials more loudly, Dungy asserted command with quiet confidence. While some leaders feel the need to flail their arms and make fools of themselves to attract people’s attention, Dungy let his performance speak for itself.

As Dungy himself wrote in his 2007 New York Times Best Seller “Quiet Strength,” “a good leader gets people to follow him because they want to, not because he makes them ... I never have been the type to ‘get in people’s face,’ and I never will be.”

Though Dungy is not much of a Machiavelli, his leadership style is not bereft of historical endorsement. Shakespeare’s Caesar in “Antony and Cleopatra,” for example, preferred leading Rome with cool dispassion rather than passion and caprice. While Antony embraced his destructive intensity, Caesar conducted business more like a CEO than a military hero. 

Abraham Lincoln was also noted for his thoughtful reticence. In a 2006 interview with Forbes.com, Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Doris Kearns Goodwin said of Lincoln, “(He) had a quiet self confidence ... the ability to absorb and listen well to what people were feeling and thinking.”

After spending eight years in hibernation, cool and quiet leadership is making a comeback. President Obama, like Dungy and other successful leaders, has exemplified equanimity and self possession in the face of seemingly insurmountable difficulties.

Although some will suggest the comparison between football coach and president is irreverent, the elements of leadership transcend boundaries of occupation and content. It is precisely for this reason that Obama and the ascendant generation of leaders would do well to examine Indy’s leader of the last seven years.