In leadership and personal growth, we often focus on tackling what we perceive as the “enemy“. We identify extremes to avoid, the behaviours and mindsets we absolutely do not want to embody. However, what often trips us up isn’t the obvious “far enemy” but rather the “near enemy” – a subtle imposter of the qualities we want.
The concept of the near enemy comes from Buddhism, where it describes a state of mind that appears similar to a desired quality – but actually undermines it. Unlike the far enemy, which is its clear opposite, the near enemy is deceptive. It masquerades as a virtue, leading us to believe we’re on the right path when, in reality, we’re stuck.
The trap of the near enemy
For example, if collaboration is our goal, the far enemy is siloed working – clearly the opposite of collaboration. It’s easy to identify and guard against (at least in theory!). But the near enemy is more insidious: co-dependency. It might seem and feel like collaboration – but will ultimately prevent truly collaborative and accountable behaviour from taking root.
Similarly, in leadership, it’s tempting to define ourselves by what we’re not. “I am not a bully,” someone might say. But the absence of bullying doesn’t automatically make someone inclusive or collaborative. If the focus is solely on avoiding arrogance or dominance, the near enemy might take hold: being overly nice, failing to set boundaries, or avoiding conflict altogether.
A real-world example
Take Lisa, a leader in the arts who prides herself on not being the “arrogant bully” stereotype often associated with her industry. Her commitment to avoiding this extreme has made her overly accommodating. She struggles to hold boundaries, takes on a parental role with her team, and grows frustrated when they behave like children. Her fear of embodying the far enemy – arrogance – has trapped her in the near enemy: overcompensation that prevents her from being a constructive and balanced leader.
Common near enemies in leadership
The near enemy shows up frequently in leadership development work:
- Endurance: Appears as resilience but can tip into overwhelm, inefficiency, or burnout.
- Co-dependency: Feels like connection but corrodes true collaboration.
- Pity: Resembles compassion but reinforces separation.
- Hypervigilance: Seems like attentiveness and consideration, but stems from mistrust.
- Over-accommodation: Can masquerade as inclusivity but undermines necessary boundaries.
Leadership models and the near enemy
Leadership models, while useful in their clarity, can push us towards the near enemy, by reducing the subtleties of human interaction to black-and-white extremes.
Transformational, performance-driven leadership was lauded until scandals like Enron highlighted its potential dangers. Charismatic leadership came under scrutiny in the wake of movements like #MeToo, which exposed how unchecked charisma can enable abuse of power.
While we don’t want to emulate these outcomes, we need to be careful not to overcompensate in our avoidance of them – by swinging too far in the opposite direction.
For example, servant leadership is a popular model at the moment, but it carries its own near enemy: failing to take up authority. Leaders focused solely on serving may neglect direction, structure, and accountability – leaving teams without the guidance they need.
Similarly, “authentic leadership” is another popular framework, but its near enemy is poor emotional regulation or weak interpersonal skills. Being “authentic” doesn’t mean abandoning self-awareness or social boundaries.
The absence of bad ≠ the presence of good
In organisations, avoiding negatives – burnout, toxic behaviour, unhelpful culture – is often mistaken for achieving positives. But alleviation isn’t prevention, and the absence of bad isn’t the same as the presence of good. A workplace that isn’t toxic isn’t necessarily thriving. Without intentionally cultivating virtues like resilience, compassion, or strong leadership, organisations risk creating cultures rooted in fear or formulaic thinking.
Breaking free from the near enemy
To avoid being trapped by the near enemy, leaders and organisations must pause, reflect, and ask deeper questions:
- What behaviour am I avoiding, and why?
- What purpose is this behaviour or mindset serving?
- Is my approach still effective, or has it become counterproductive?
Growth comes from recognising when we’ve overcorrected or fallen into familiar but unhelpful patterns. By moving beyond avoidance, and deliberately cultivating the qualities we want to embody, we can create environments that are intentional and productive.