In the two weeks before this unprecedented television trial of an embattled President of a war-torn country, there was an interesting article in Newsweek entitled “If You Think the U.S. Will Abandon Ukraine Now, You Don’t Know Donald Trump.” The article focuses primarily on three supposed strands of Trump’s leadership style.

In this first of my series of posts, I begin with a summary of what I consider to be the main argument of this January article. I then explore this within the context of my approach to, and characteristics of, selfless leadership and how this plays into negotiating styles.

This will then be followed up by a series of other post articles that will (1) consider the paradox of Trump’s Leadership – is he a Selfish or an Adaptive Leader? (2) redefine transactional leadership in this Trumpian context and compare this to the notion of selfless leadership, and (3) look at Trump’s use of power and unpredictability and ask whether this is effective or destructive. Two further posts in this series will (4) explore Trump’s media dominance as a leadership mechanism through his approach to influence and self promotion as a global leader and, finally, (5) ask if leaders can learn from Trump and what lessons we can take from this.

The overall aim is to take this unprecedented watershed in public leadership and draw on three opportunities that are presented:

1. Even if Trump is a selfish leader, what lessons can be applied to leadership development?

2. How can leaders balance pragmatism with selfless leadership, learning from Trump’s current absence of balance?

3. Offer practical takeaways from my approach to Selfless Leadership in relation to how leaders can navigate power while staying ethically grounded.

 

---

What is the main argument of the Newsweek article? Remember, this was published two weeks before the televised difficult conversation.

In the article, the authors, drawing from their acquaintance with Trump and recent observations in Eastern Europe, argue that Trump’s recent shifts in stance towards Russia and Ukraine are consistent with what they describe as his pragmatic leadership style. They highlight three key aspects of Trump’s approach: his lack of ideological rigidity, focus on personal positioning, and adaptability to changing circumstances.

Sonnenfield and Tian (Newsweek, January 29, 2025) assert that Trump’s leadership is transactional, where decisions are made based on immediate benefits rather than adherence to a fixed ideology. Their perspective suggests that Trump’s evolving positions on international matters, such as the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, are strategic moves aligned with his leadership style, rather than abrupt policy changes. In this first post, I will consider the articles’ main arguments and consider this against the comparative backdrop of selfish versus selfless leadership.

Selfish -v Selfless Leadership

First, I briefly outline the vital differences between selfish and selfless leadership.

Selfish leaders prioritise their interests over those of their team or organisation. This approach often leads to a lack of trust, reduced morale, and decreased productivity among team members. Such leaders may focus on personal recognition and advancement, neglecting the development and well-being of their subordinates. This behaviour can result in high employee turnover and a toxic work environment. In contrast, selfless leaders, often associated with the concept of servant leadership, prioritise the needs of their team members and organisation above their own. They focus on empowering others, fostering a collaborative environment, and promoting personal and professional growth within their teams. This leadership style enhances trust, engagement, and overall organisational performance. Selfless leaders are characterised by empathy, humility, and a genuine desire to serve others.

On the global stage, the diversity of approaches is even more critical. Analysing leadership through the lens of selfish versus selfless behaviour, we can consider the following impacts:

Selfish Leadership	Selfless Leadership
Isolationist Policies: Choosing to disengage from international responsibilities can reflect a self-centred approach, neglecting global stability and alliances.	Global Responsibility: Engaging in actions that promote international peace and stability, even when there is no direct benefit, exemplifies selfless leadership.’Payback’ for resources already provided under a different administration goes against these principles.
Prioritising Personal or Political Gain: Leaders focus on actions that enhance their own status or cater to specific voter bases, potentially at the expense of broader ethical considerations.	Upholding International Commitments: Leaders demonstrate support for allied nations, such as Ukraine, and showcase a commitment to collective security and democratic values.

The differences from the two approaches have significant consequences for those who are affected by the style of leadership:

	Selfish Leadership	Selfless Leadership
Impact on Team Dynamics	Selfish leadership can lead to disengagement and conflict within teams	Selfless leadership promotes unity and cooperation.
Organisational Outcomes	Organisations led by selfish leaders result in leader dependence and risk averseness in which destructive consent emerges.	Organisations led by selfless leaders often experience higher employee satisfaction, increased innovation, and better retention rates often supported by constructive dissent.
Personal Development	Selfish leaders are more interested in their own growth and, as part of that journey, will put the organisation needs well above those who deliver the outcomes.	Selfless leaders invest in the growth of their team members, leading to a more skilled and adaptable workforce.
Long Term Success	Selfish leaders might achieve short-term gain but rarely give as much attention to the longer term. Often, by the time that the longer term consequences of the toxic leadership style are most acutely felt, the selfish leader has long left.	Selfless leaders contribute to sustainable success and a positive culture but will still include Quick Wins along the way to maintain momentum. The best of selfless leaders have a long lasting legacy that outlasts their tenure.

.

In the context of selfish versus selfless leadership and negotiation styles, I offer what I draw as nuanced insights into Trump’s approach compared to what we understand through the various ideological views of leadership thinking and practice. I explore this through the three characteristics considered by Sonnenfield and Tian; Trumps’ apparent lack of ideological rigidity, his focus on personal positioning, and his approach in adapting to changing circumstances.

Selfish vs. Selfless Leadership through Pragmatism and Adaptability

The Newsweek article highlights Trump’s recent shifts in stance regarding Russia and Ukraine, reflecting his pragmatic leadership style, supported by adaptability which, the authors suggest, leads to a focus on prescribed outcomes over rigid adherence to ideology. However, such pragmatism can be perceived as self-serving if it prioritises personal or national interests over collective well-being. In contrast, selfless leadership emphasises empathy, ethical considerations, and the greater good, often requiring a balance between pragmatism and principled stands. I would argue that pragmatism and principles are two sides of the same (integrated) leadership style.

In exploring this article, I suggest that selfish versus selfless leadership revolve around pragmatism, personal positioning, and adaptability—all central to Donald Trump’s suggested leadership style. I offer four observations, which are summarised as follows. Trump’s leadership style, as analysed in the article, reflects pragmatism over principle, where adaptability is used strategically rather than ethically; leadership reversals as a reflection of consistency, demonstrating a transactional rather than value-driven approach; the role of influence and power dynamics, where unpredictability serves as a tool for persuasion and control; and the absence of ethical anchoring, where decisions are often driven by personal or political calculations rather than a commitment to broader societal or global well-being.

I unpick these further.

Selfish Leadership View	Selfless Leadership View
Pragmatism Over Principle
The article highlights that Trump is not bound by ideology but instead driven by pragmatism—adjusting his stance based on changing circumstances.
Pragmatism without a moral compass can indicate self-serving leadership, where decisions are made based on personal or political gain rather than ethical considerations. Adaptability is self serving.	Adaptability and pragmatism can be valuable leadership traits when used for greater good rather than self-preservation. A selfless leader would adapt to serve a higher purpose, such as global stability or human rights, rather than personal advantage.
Leadership Reversals as a Reflection of Consistency
The article suggests that Trump’s policy flip-flops are not contradictions but rather consistent with his leadership style, which is transactional rather than value-driven.
This type of leadership often prioritises short-term advantages, leveraging relationships or narratives based on what is most personally beneficial at a given time rather than long-term ethical commitments.	A leader genuinely committed to selflessness might change course if new information or changing realities necessitate a shift in strategy—but that change would be transparent, principled, and guided by a higher purpose, not self-interest.
The Role of Influence and Power Dynamics
Trump’s leadership style often relies on leveraging power, using unpredictability as a lever to increase his influence over allies and adversaries and persuade them to his way of thinking.
Using unpredictability and shifting positions as a power tool can foster distrust and create unstable alliances, particularly in critical areas like international diplomacy	A selfless leader, while adaptable, would prioritise trust-building, stability, and long-term relationships over short-term gains.
The Absence of Ethical Anchoring
The article suggests that Trump’s reversal on Ukraine and Putin stems not from deep-seated values but from personal and political calculations.
This supports the argument that selfish leadership is often tactical rather than principled, inward-looking rather than outward-serving and self-serving rather than collaborative. Selfish leaders will often deal with a wicked problem by using tame solutions on the basis that they know how to solve the problem (when wicked problems cannot be solved by one person or one institution alone).	A selfless leader is not swayed by personal gain but remains committed to ethical imperatives—even when it’s difficult. Selfless leaders face wicked problems head on and acknowledge that the answers are not yet known.

.

Final Takeaway: Selfish vs. Selfless Leadership in Action

Trump’s so-called pragmatic, transactional approach to leadership is a classic case study in how selfish leadership operates—making decisions that serve personal, political, or power-based objectives rather than principled commitments, putting down ideas that do not fit with individual and political goals, or their proponent when put forward without invitation. We are already seeing the extent to which he and his ‘team’ are removing officials who disagree with their policies, replacing them with politically agreeable substitutes.  A selfless leader, by contrast, would make the same adjustments if they genuinely believed it was in the best interest of the greater good—not as a means of personal advantage or retribution.

How do we deal with selfless leaders and their Toxic Allure when we face them?

Ultimately, authentic selfless leadership is about consistency in values, trust-building, and making tough decisions for the benefit of others—not just strategic reversals based on changing conditions or changing unsupportive appointees. Conflict and difficult conversations can be helpful, but only if they are invited within an atmosphere of constructive dissent and as a means of negotiating through integrative processes and mechanisms that promote collaboration instead of competition driven by firmly entrenched positions.

 

I will follow this up in my next post, but I will begin that process by highlighting some brief examples of how to deal with a selfless leader who is toxic and focused on self-interest but often has an allure to followers.

• • First, understand that dissent is a vital monitoring force within organisations, but only if it is constructive. If you are facing a selfish leader, tact and subtlety may help you express your views, but do it objectively and, if possible, provide evidence and potential solutions.  The risk is that it can be career limiting, but, hopefully, if this is the case, it will only last as long as that person directly influences you! These characters do not want to adopt a problem but are often keen to pick up on other people’s good ideas. A word of caution—do not expect them to credit you with the idea!

• • Draw on the principles of safety in numbers. This may not be a short-term solution, but prioritise the growth and well-being of team members by fostering a culture where their needs are paramount. This approach not only enhances individual development but also contributes to the organisation’s success.

• • In alignment with my suggestion about constructive dissent, focus on this in your leadership role. Encourage open dialogue and critical thinking within your team. Leaders can drive innovation and prevent groupthink by valuing diverse perspectives and creating a safe environment for dissenting opinions. It might just filter up the hierarchy!

• • Align your actions with core values and ethical standards and focus on these when engaging with your toxic senior. Leaders who consistently demonstrate integrity build trust and set a positive example for their teams. This can be infectious, and, again, who knows? You might just persuade your boss!

• • Start as you mean to carry on: Create an environment where employees feel safe to express their ideas and concerns without fear of retribution. Such a climate enhances engagement and leads to better decision-making.

In Conclusion

This analysis of the Newsweek article explores Donald Trump’s leadership style. It reveals a leader who prioritises pragmatism over principle, transactional consistency over value-driven transformation, power dynamics over trust-building, and strategic adaptability over ethical anchoring. His self-focused, position-based approach reflects a leader who navigates complexity through personal and political calculation rather than broader societal or global well-being. While this leadership model has proven effective in consolidating influence and mobilising supporters, it raises critical questions about the long-term impact of leadership driven by self-interest rather than collective progress.

In the second post of this series, I will examine Trump’s leadership style and behaviours through the lens of progressive leadership frameworks, particularly my LINKS360 and Leadership3 models. These frameworks emphasise leadership adaptability, ethical decision-making, and collaborative problem-solving—elements often absent in transactional leadership. By analysing Trump’s approach against these more holistic and future-focused models, we can explore what leadership in a rapidly changing world should look like and whether Trump’s style aligns, contradicts, or challenges these progressive paradigms.

A final few words of encouragement:

​Expressing your ideas, even in challenging environments, is a testament to your courage and commitment to positive change. As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. profoundly stated:

 

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

 

 

 

By sharing your insights, you not only stand up for your beliefs but also inspire others to do the same, fostering a culture where innovation and integrity prevail over fear and complacency