10-2 Leadership Styles

When leading and managing within familiar cultural settings, it is a relatively complex process to read the verbal and nonverbal cues and responses of others, and determine whether messages/approaches have been received as intended. Leading and managing in unfamiliar/diverse cultural settings becomes even more complex because it requires us to:

• observe the communication styles, pattern, and behaviors of organizational members.
• analyze the similarities and differences and consider the extent to which our styles align.
• Identify new approaches and shift our styles to be more effective.
• reflect on the results of our interactions and make constant adjustments.
• remain curious, keep an open-mind, and be flexible in all situations.

Six Leadership Styles

The characteristics of six styles are outlined below along with some of the circumstances in which they are most and least effective. Before reading about each style, please consider the following points:

• Leadership requires the constant shifting of perspectives and adapting to different situations with the support of different styles.
• Leadership styles are meant to complement one another rather than work in isolation.
• Visionary, Coaching, Affiliative, and Democratic leadership styles are transformational models, in that they look for change, improvement, and stakeholder support. While being considered positive models, each has limitations.
• Pacesetting and Commanding leadership styles are transactional models. While considered to have negative attributes, they are sometimes elements of organizational processes.

Visionary style:

• Useful when a department or organization is looking for a new direction.
• Sets directions but doesn’t tell people how to get there.
• Allows people the freedom to innovate, try new approaches, and take risks.
• Provides the big picture and clarifies goals.
• Builds team commitment and creates a shared dream.
• Most effective when:
  • decisions can be made at all levels (lower-power distance).
  • employees show personal/team initiative and accountability.
  • team members are committed to collective goals.
• Least effective when:
  • organizations are highly rule based.
  • employees are looking for explicit instructions and structures.
  • employees expect decisions to be made by senior managers and leaders.

Coaching style:

• Gives a leader a chance to hold meaningful conversations with employees.
• Invests time to check in, ask questions, clarify, and mentor.
• Offers employees the opportunity to be open about strengths, gaps, and goals.
• Allows employees to make long-term improvements for themselves and the organization.
• Fosters a positive workplace environment.
• Most effective when:
  • employees are more responsible and motivated.
  • employees show initiative and a desire to gain experience.
  • leaders are empathic and able to adjust communication to suit different employees.
• Least effective when:
  • experienced/senior employees are not receptive to this style.
  • employees are looking for explicit and/or concise communication.
  • individuals or teams are highly independent.
  • specific tasks or projects have time constraints.

Affiliative style:

• Focused on creating trust and cohesion.
• Promotes belonging to the organization or department.
• Used in times of stress or when morale is low.
• Prioritizes harmony, trust, and encouragement.
• Allows the leader to be part of the team.
• Most effective when:
  • the environment is stressed, and morale is low.
  • there is a lower-power distance culture.
  • the culture of the organization or team is more collective.
• Least effective when:
  • people expect a ‘strong’ decisive leader.
  • leaders must correct performance issues.
  • disagreements, strong opinions, and conflict are valued as ways to make decisions and resolve issues.

Democratic style:

• Focused on consensus building and participation.
• Creates individual and team buy-in.
• Builds employee ownership of decisions, plans, and goals.
• Hones creativity, knowledge, and skills.
• Most effective when:
  • there is a preference for individual input.
  • leaders promote low-power distance relationships.
  • individuals have a strong achievement orientation.
  • leaders have a genuine interest in getting employee input.
• Least effective when:
  • inclusion is prioritized over input from appropriate stakeholders.
  • there are time constraints.
  • there is insufficient information to make decisions.
  • teams have divergent views on how decisions should be made.

Pacesetting style:

• Focused on high standards, as set by the leader.
• Pushes employees with challenging goals and expectations.
• The leader gets involved and takes a ‘hands-on’ approach with individuals, but also expects employees to know what to do.
• Efficiency and constant improvement are key objectives.
• Demanding, with a strong push for results.
• Most effective when:
  • employees are highly motivated and achievement oriented.
  • employees are risk takers and not scared to solve complex problems on their own.
  • direct communication is expected and appreciated.
  • there are time constraints.
• Least effective when:
  • individuals or teams want to build relationships and collaborate.
  • employees need constant support/acknowledgement.
  • input is required by a wide range of stakeholders.
  • objectives and tasks are ambiguous.

Commanding style:

• Focused on a top-down approach.
• Leader uses demands, explicit instructions, and commands to get tasks done.
• Involves criticism and reprimands.
• Employees are rarely consulted, but rather, told what to do.
• Maintains a high-power distance culture.
• Separates the leader and employees.
• Most effective when:
  • there is a crisis.
  • quick decisions need to be made.
  • employees expect ‘strong’ and decisive leadership.
  • roles are clearly laid out.
  • underperforming/problem employees need to be pushed.
• Least effective when:
  • employees are looking for encouragement and support.
  • lower-power distance is expected.
  • employees want to get involved and be more collaborative.
  • employees are experienced or are highly skilled.