Leadership Styles

Leadership styles are not something to be tried on like so many suits, to see which fits. Rather, they
should be adapted to the particular demands of the situation, the particular requirements of the
people involved and the particular challenges facing the organization.
In the book Primal Leadership, Daniel Goleman, who popularized the notion of Emotional
Intelligence, describes six different styles of leadership. The most effective leaders can move among
these styles, adopting the one that meets the needs of the moment. They can all become part of the
leaders repertoire but I will focus on XXX main leadership styles here.
Visionary. This style is most appropriate when an organization needs a new direction. Its goal is to
move people towards a new set of shared dreams. Visionary leaders articulate where a group is
going, but not how it will get there setting people free to innovate, experiment, take calculated
risks, write Mr. Goleman and his coauthors.
Coaching. This one-on-one style focuses on developing individuals, showing them how to improve
their performance, and helping to connect their goals to the goals of the organization. Coaching
works best, Mr. Goleman writes, with employees who show initiative and want more professional
development. But it can backfire if its perceived as micromanaging an employee, and
undermines his or her self-confidence.
Affiliative. This style emphasizes the importance of team work, and creates harmony in a group by
connecting people to each other. Mr. Goleman argues this approach is particularly valuable when
trying to heighten team harmony, increase morale, improve communication or repair broken trust in
an organization. But he warns against using it alone, since its emphasis on group praise can allow
poor performance to go uncorrected. Employees may perceive, he writes, that mediocrity is
tolerated.
Democratic. This style draws on peoples knowledge and skills, and creates a group commitment to
the resulting goals. It works best when the direction the organization should take is unclear, and the
leader needs to tap the collective wisdom of the group. Mr. Goleman warns that this consensusbuilding approach can be disastrous in times of crisis, when urgent events demand quick decisions.
Pacesetting. In this style, the leader sets high standards for performance. He or she is obsessive
about doing things better and faster, and asks the same of everyone. But Mr. Goleman warns this
style should be used sparingly, because it can undercut morale and make people feel as if they are
failing. Our data shows that, more often than not, pacesetting poisons the climate, he writes.
Commanding. This is classic model of military style leadership probably the most often used, but
the least often effective. Because it rarely involves praise and frequently employs criticism, it
undercuts morale and job satisfaction. Mr. Goleman argues it is only effective in a crisis, when an
urgent turnaround is needed. Even the modern military has come to recognize its limited usefulness.

Leadership Styles
Leadership style is the manner and approach of providing direction, implementing plans, and motivating people.
Kurt Lewin (1939) led a group of researchers to identify different styles of leadership. This early study has been
very influential and established three major leadership styles. The three major styles of leadership are (U.S. Army
Handbook, 1973):

Authoritarian or autocratic

Participative or democratic

Delegative or Free Reign

Although good leaders use all three styles, with one of them normally dominant, bad leaders tend to stick with
one style.

Authoritarian (autocratic)

I want both of you to. . .

This style is used when leaders tell their employees what they want done and how they want it accomplished,
without getting the advice of their followers. Some of the appropriate conditions to use it is when you have all the
information to solve the problem, you are short on time, and your employees are well motivated.
Some people tend to think of this style as a vehicle for yelling, using demeaning language, and leading by threats
and abusing their power. This is not the authoritarian style, rather it is an abusive, unprofessional style called
bossing people around. It has no place in a leader's repertoire.
The authoritarian style should normally only be used on rare occasions. If you have the time and want to gain
more commitment and motivation from your employees, then you should use the participative style.

Participative (democratic)

Let's work together to solve this. . .

This style involves the leader including one or more employees in the decision making process (determining what
to do and how to do it). However, the leader maintains the final decision making authority. Using this style is not a
sign of weakness, rather it is a sign of strength that your employees will respect.
This is normally used when you have part of the information, and your employees have other parts. Note that a
leader is not expected to know everything this is why you employ knowledgeable and skillful employees. Using
this style is of mutual benefit it allows them to become part of the team and allows you to make better
decisions.

Delegative (free reign)

You two take care of the problem while I go. . .

In this style, the leader allows the employees to make the decisions. However, the leader is still responsible for
the decisions that are made. This is used when employees are able to analyze the situation and determine what
needs to be done and how to do it. You cannot do everything! You must set priorities and delegate certain tasks.
This is not a style to use so that you can blame others when things go wrong, rather this is a style to be used
when you fully trust and confidence in the people below you. Do not be afraid to use it, however, use it wisely!
NOTE: This is also known as laissez faire (or laisser faire), which is the noninterference in the affairs of others.
[French : laissez, second person pl. imperative of laisser, to let, allow + faire, to do.]

Leadership styles
1.

Authoritarian

The authoritarian leadership style or autocratic leader keeps strict, close control over
followers by keeping close regulation of policy's and procedures given to followers. To keep
main emphasis on the distinction of the authoritarian leader and their followers, these types of
leaders make sure to only create a distinct professional relationship. Direct supervision is
what they believe to be key in maintaining a successful environment and follower ship. In
fear of followers being unproductive, authoritarian leaders keep close supervision and feel
this is necessary in order for anything to be done.
Examples of authoritarian communicative behavior: a police officer directing traffic, a
teacher ordering a student to do his or her assignment, and a supervisor instructing a
subordinate to clean a workstation. All of these positions require a distinct set of
characteristics that give the leader the position to get things in order or get a point across.
Authoritarian Traits: sets goals individually, engages primarily in one-way, downward
communication, controls discussion with followers,and donates interaction.[2]

2.

Democratic

The democratic leadership style consists of the leader sharing the decision-making abilities
with group members by promoting the interests of the group members and by practicing
social equality.[3]
This style of leadership encompasses discussion, debate and sharing of ideas and
encouragement of people to feel good about their involvement. The boundaries of democratic
participation tend to be circumscribed by the organization or the group needs and the
instrumental value of people's attributes (skills, attitudes, etc.). The democratic style
encompasses the notion that everyone, by virtue of their human status, should play a part in
the group's decisions. However, the democratic style of leadership still requires guidance and
control by a specific leader. The democratic style demands the leader to make decisions on
who should be called upon within the group and who is given the right to participate in, make
and vote on decisions.[4]

Research has found that this leadership style is one of the most effective and creates higher
productivity, better contributions from group members and increased group morale.
Democratic leadership can lead to better ideas and more creative solutions to problems
because group members are encouraged to share their thoughts and ideas. While democratic
leadership is one of the most effective leadership styles, it does have some potential
downsides. In situations where roles are unclear or time is of the essence, democratic
leadership can lead to communication failures and uncompleted projects. Democratic
leadership works best in situations where group members are skilled and eager to share their
knowledge. It is also important to have plenty of time to allow people to contribute, develop a
plan and then vote on the best course of action.[2]

3.

Laissez-faire

The laissez-faire leadership style was first described by Lewin, Lippitt, and White in 1938,
along with the autocratic leadership and the democratic leadership styles. The laissez faire
style is sometimes described as a "hands off" leadership style because the leader delegates the
tasks to their followers while providing little or no direction to the followers.[5][unreliable source?]
If the leader withdraws too much from their followers it can sometimes result in a lack of
productivity, cohesiveness, and satisfaction.[6]
Lassiez-faire leaders allow followers to have complete freedom to make decisions concerning
the completion of their work. It allows followers a high degree of autonomy and self-rule,
while at the same time offering guidance and support when requested. The lassiez faire leader
using guided freedom provides the followers with all materials necessary to accomplish their
goals, but does not directly participate in decision making unless the followers request their
assistance.[7][unreliable source?]
This is an effective style to use when:

Followers are highly skilled, experienced, and educated.

Followers have pride in their work and the drive to do it successfully on their own.
Outside experts, such as staff specialists or consultants are being used.
Followers are trustworthy and experienced.

This style should NOT be used when:

Followers feel insecure at the unavailability of a leader.

The leader cannot or will not provide regular feedback to their followers.[7]

4.

Transactional

The transactional style of leadership was first described by Max Weber in 1947 and then
later described by Bernard Bass in 1981. Mainly used by management, transactional leaders
focus their leadership on motivating followers through a system of rewards and punishments.
There are two factors which form the basis for this system, Contingent Reward and
management-by-exception.[8][unreliable source?]

Contingent Reward Provides rewards, materialistic or psychological, for effort and

recognizes good performance.
Management-by-Exception allows the leader to maintain the status quo. The leader
intervenes when subordinates do not meet acceptable performance levels and initiates
corrective action to improve performance. Management by exception helps reduce the
workload of managers being that they are only called-in when workers deviate from
course.[9]

4 Leadership Styles to Master

It's not enough to have just one way of leading: Different circumstances require
separate management styles.
When it comes to leadership it doesn't matter if you manage a company with 500
employees or one where you are the only employee. Either environment will disprove the
myth that leaders should stick to just one leadership style that they have perfected. In a
dynamic setting several styles will be necessary and the ability to adapt is key. There's a
lot to learn from each leadership style and when to use it. Here's the four that basic
styles:
1. Directive: One of the oldest styles and frequently described as autocratic. Someone
using this style tells people what to do and expects them to jump to it.
2. Participative: This style seeks input from others and participates with those they are
leading in the decision making process.
3. Laissez-faire: Typically a hands-off approach allowing for both initiative and the
latitude to determine process to affect an outcome.
4. Adaptive: A fluid style that takes into consideration the context of the environment
and the individual being led.
When we are highly stressed and up against tight deadlines we frequently act a little out
of character. Have you ever been in one of those moments and had someone come to you
with an issue or idea that in the greater scheme of things does not come close to meeting
the priority of what you are working on? Many of us may have been a little terse in our
response, creating an immediate reaction from our subordinate that comes in the form
of a shocked expression. This is a leadership misfire. The situation as they saw it did not
match up to your response. Putting things in context in terms of the situation and
individual you are dealing with is important. Here are a few illustrations:
1. Context: A new employee has just started their first day. Individual: New to the
industry and therefore brings no experience to the table. The most appropriate
leadership approach is directive. They need a lot of direction as they learn to find their
way.

2. Context: A problem has come to the surface that needs remedy. Individual: A
subordinate that has been on the job for some period of time, they have mastered the
basics but are still learning the nuances. The most appropriate approach is
participative. This allows the person to participate in solving the problem based on
their knowledge and gives you an opportunity to see how well they are developing.
3. Context: A major sales lead comes in which represents an excellent opportunity.
Individual: Your most seasoned sales person who closes a high percentage of his/her
business and takes great initiative. The most appropriate approach may be laissezfaire. You don't want to hover over or stymie this individual's performance.
4. Just to put a point on this let's consider the last example. Given the same
experienced individual sitting at their desk, you discover the building is on fire. You
wouldn't casually stroll in and mention the building is on fire. The context would
dictate that you use a directive approach and tell them to get out of the office.
So adapting our approach to consider the context and individual we are working with is
important in developing and leading a staff.

Leadership Styles
Most common Leadership Types

Autocratic Leadership
Autocratic leadership is an extreme form of transactional leadership, where a leader
exerts high levels of power over his or her employees or team members. People within
the team are given few opportunities for making suggestions, even if these would be in
the team's or organizations interest.
Most people tend to resent being treated like this. Because of this, autocratic leadership
usually leads to high levels of absenteeism and staff turnover. Also, the team's output
does not benefit from the creativity and experience of all team members, so many of the
benefits of teamwork are lost.
For some routine and unskilled jobs, however, this style can remain effective where the
advantages of control outweigh the disadvantages. Learn more...
Bureaucratic Leadership
Bureaucratic leaders work by the book, ensuring that their staff follow procedures
exactly. This is a very appropriate style for work involving serious safety risks (such as
working with machinery, with toxic substances or at heights) or where large sums of
money are involved (such as cash-handling).
In other situations, the inflexibility and high levels of control exerted can demoralize
staff, and can diminish the organizations ability to react to changing external
circumstances. Learn more...

Charismatic Leadership
A charismatic leadership style can appear similar to a transformational leadership style,
in that the leader injects huge doses of enthusiasm into his or her team, and is very
energetic in driving others forward.
However, a charismatic leader can tend to believe more in him or herself than in their
team. This can create a risk that a project, or even an entire organization, might collapse
if the leader were to leave: In the eyes of their followers, success is tied up with the
presence of the charismatic leader. As such, charismatic leadership carries great
responsibility, and needs long-term commitment from the leader.
Democratic Leadership or Participative Leadership
Although a democratic leader will make the final decision, he or she invites other
members of the team to contribute to the decision-making process. This not only
increases job satisfaction by involving employees or team members in whats going on,
but it also helps to develop peoples skills. Employees and team members feel in control
of their own destiny, and so are motivated to work hard by more than just a financial
reward.
As participation takes time, this style can lead to things happening more slowly than an
autocratic approach, but often the end result is better. It can be most suitable where
team working is essential, and quality is more important than speed to market or
productivity. Learn more...
Laissez-Faire Leadership
This French phrase means leave it be and is used to describe a leader who leaves his
or her colleagues to get on with their work. It can be effective if the leader monitors
what is being achieved and communicates this back to his or her team regularly. Most
often, laissez-faire leadership works for teams in which the individuals are very
experienced and skilled self-starters. Unfortunately, it can also refer to situations where
managers are not exerting sufficient control. Learn more...
People-Oriented Leadership or Relations-Oriented
Leadership
This style of leadership is the opposite of task-oriented leadership: the leader is totally
focused on organizing, supporting and developing the people in the leaders team. A
participative style, it tends to lead to good teamwork and creative collaboration.
However, taken to extremes, it can lead to failure to achieve the team's goals.
In practice, most leaders use both task-oriented and people-oriented styles of
leadership.
Servant Leadership
This term, coined by Robert Greenleaf in the 1970s, describes a leader who is often not
formally recognized as such. When someone, at any level within an organization, leads

simply by virtue of meeting the needs of his or her team, he or she is described as a
servant leader.
In many ways, servant leadership is a form of democratic leadership, as the whole team
tends to be involved in decision-making.
Supporters of the servant leadership model suggest it is an important way ahead in a
world where values are increasingly important, in which servant leaders achieve power
on the basis of their values and ideals. Others believe that in competitive leadership
situations, people practicing servant leadership will often find themselves left behind by
leaders using other leadership styles.
Task-Oriented Leadership
A highly task-oriented leader focuses only on getting the job done, and can be quite
autocratic. He or she will actively define the work and the roles required, put structures
in place, plan, organize and monitor. However, as task-oriented leaders spare little
thought for the well-being of their teams, this approach can suffer many of the flaws of
autocratic leadership, with difficulties in motivating and retaining staff. Task-oriented
leaders can benefit from an understanding of the Blake-Mouton Managerial Grid, which
can help them identify specific areas for development that will help them involve people
more.
Transactional Leadership
This style of leadership starts with the premise that team members agree to obey their
leader totally when they take a job on: the transaction is (usually) that the
organization pays the team members, in return for their effort and compliance. As such,
the leader has the right to punish team members if their work doesnt meet the
pre-determined standard.
Team members can do little to improve their job satisfaction under transactional
leadership. The leader could give team members some control of their income/reward by
using incentives that encourage even higher standards or greater productivity.
Alternatively a transactional leader could practice management by exception,
whereby, rather than rewarding better work, he or she would take corrective action if
the required standards were not met.
Transactional leadership is really just a way of managing rather a true leadership style,
as the focus is on short-term tasks. It has serious limitations for knowledge-based or
creative work, but remains a common style in many organizations.
Transformational Leadership
A person with this leadership style is a true leader who inspires his or her team with a
shared vision of the future. Transformational leaders are highly visible, and spend a lot
of time communicating. They dont necessarily lead from the front, as they tend to
delegate responsibility amongst their teams. While their enthusiasm is often infectious,
they can need to be supported by detail people.
In many organizations, both transactional and transformational leadership are needed.
The transactional leaders (or managers) ensure that routine work is done reliably, while
the transformational leaders look after initiatives that add value.

The transformational leadership style is the dominant leadership style taught in the "How
to Lead: Discover the Leader Within You" leadership program, although we do
recommend that other styles are brought as the situation demands.
Using the Right Style Situational Leadership
While the Transformation Leadership approach is often highly effective, there is no one
right way to lead or manage that suits all situations. To choose the most effective
approach for you, you must consider:

The skill levels and experience of the members of your team.

The work involved (routine or new and creative).
The organizational environment (stable or radically changing, conservative or
adventurous).
You own preferred or natural style.

A good leader will find him or herself switching instinctively between styles according to
the people and work they are dealing with. This is often referred to as situational
leadership.
For example, the manager of a small factory trains new machine operatives using a
bureaucratic style to ensure operatives know the procedures that achieve the right
standards of product quality and workplace safety. The same manager may adopt a
more participative style of leadership when working on production line improvement with
his or her team of supervisors

Three Classic Leadership Styles

One dimension of has to do with control and one's perception of how much control one
should give to people. The laissez faire style implies low control, the autocratic style high
control and the participative lies somewhere in between.
The Laissez Faire Leadership Style

The style is largely a "hands off" view that tends to minimize the amount of direction and
face time required. Works well if you have highly trained and highly motivated direct
reports. More info...
The Autocratic Leadership Style
The style has its advocates, but it is falling out of favor in many countries. Some people
have argued that the style is popular with today's CEO's, who have much in common
with feudal lords in Medieval Europe.
The Participative Leadership Style
It's hard to order and demand someone to be creative, perform as a team, solve
complex problems, improve quality, and provide outstanding customer service. The style
presents a happy medium between over controlling (micromanaging) and not being
engaged and tends to be seen in organizations that must innovate to prosper.
Determining the Best Leadership Style
Situational Leadership. In the 1950s, management theorists from Ohio State University
and the University of Michigan published a series of studies to determine whether
leaders should be more task or relationship (people) oriented. The importance of the
research cannot be over estimated since leaders tend to have a dominant style; a
leadership style they use in a wide variety of situations.
Surprisingly, the research discovered that there is no one best style: leaders must adjust
their leadership style to the situation as well as to the people being led.
The Emergent Leadership Style
Contrary to the belief of many, groups do not automatically accept a new "boss" as
leader. We see a number of ineffective managers who didn't know the behaviors to use
when one taking over a new group.
The Transactional Leadership Style
The approach emphasizes getting things done within the umbrella of the status quo;
almost in opposition to the goals of the transformational leadership. It's considered to be
a "by the book" approach in which the person works within the rules. As such, it's
commonly seen in large, bureaucratic organizations.
The Transformational Leadership Style
The primary focus of this leadership style is to make change happen in:
*
*
*
*

Our Self,
Others,
Groups, and
Organizations

Charisma is a special leadership style commonly associated with transformational

leadership. While extremely powerful, it is extremely hard to teach.
Visionary Leadership
Visionary Leadership, The leadership style focuses on how the leader defines the future
for followers and moves them toward it.
From the short review above, one can see that there are many different aspects to being
a great leader; a role requiring one to play many different leadership styles to be
successful.
Other leadership styles include:
Strategic Leadership
Strategic Leadership is practiced by the military services such as the US Army, US Air
Force, and many large corporations. It stresses the competitive nature of running an
organization and being able to out fox and out wit the competition.
Team Leadership
Team Leadership. A few years ago, a large corporation decided that supervisors were no
longer needed and those in charge were suddenly made "team leaders." Today,
companies have gotten smarter about teams, but it still takes leadership to transition a
group into a team.
Facilitative Leadership
Facilitative Leadership. This is a special style that anyone who runs a meeting can
employ. Rather than being directive, one uses a number of indirect communication
patterns to help the group reach consensus.
Leadership Influence Styles
Leadership Influence Styles. Here one looks at the behaviors associated how one
exercises influence. For example, does the person mostly punish? Do they know how to
reward?
Cross-Cultural Leadership
Cross-Cultural Leadership. Not all individuals can adapt to the leadership styles expected
in a different culture; whether that culture is organizational or national.
Coaching
Coaching. A great coach is definitely a leader who also possess a unique gift--the ability
to teach and train.
Level 5 Leadership.

Level 5 Leadership. This term was coined by Jim Collins in his book Good to Great: Why
Some Companys Make the Leap and Other Dont. As Collins says in his book, "We
were surprised, shocked really, to discover the types of leadership required for turning a
good company into a great one."
Servant Leadership.
Servant Leadership. Some leaders have put the needs of their followers first. For
example, the motto of the Los Angeles Police Department, "To Protect and Serve."
reflects this philosophy of service. One suspects these leaders are rare in business.