One of these balancing acts is how to practice extreme ownership while also adhering to the freedom of 'decentralized command.'

Willink made an interesting point that if there is up to around a 60% chance that a leader's plan will yield the desired result, compared to a 40% chance the subordinate's plan will, the leader should go with the subordinate's plan.

That's not to say, of course, that you should go with a decision that would harm your team. Willink explained that if a subordinate's plan is clearly inferior, it's the leader's job to explain why, rather than make a demand. His point was that a leader must be willing to cede minor things so that subordinates can take ownership for their work.

If one of your reports runs into a challenge with the plan you forced on him, Willink explained, he will blame you for the trouble and be less prepared to react in a constructive way; if a challenge arises in his own plan, he has to answer to himself.

Willink also added that you don't want to be an "easy button" that doles out quick fixes. When your team members come to you with questions, he said, have them explain to you what they're thinking and make an attempt at an answer before helping them out.