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.
Whether you are managing a team at work, captaining your sports team or leading a
major corporation, your leadership style is crucial to your success. Consciously, or
subconsciously, you will no doubt use some of the leadership styles.
There are a number of different approaches, or 'styles' to leadership and management
that are based on different assumptions and theories. The style that individuals use will
be based on a combination of their beliefs and values and preferences , as well as the
organizational culture and norms which will encourage some styles and discourage
others.

There is a significant amount of literature in both the pop or self-help domains

and in the organisational research arena. Generally, theorists and proponents
of Leadership style fall into 1 of 3 key beliefs:

1) Leaders are born, not made. This approach suggests that great leaders
are heroic, genetically pre-determined to rise to the role of leader at the
right time. Winston Churchill and the Dali Lama are two individuals who are
thought to have been destined (for different reasons) to be leaders of their
time.

2) Leaders have personality styles that make them what they are –
Great. This approach assumes that people have certain qualities that are
stable and inherent: good leaders have a particular set of qualities that
mean they have a natural affinity to the role. Of course, there are many
people who have the set of qualities considered to indicate good
leadership style but do not become leaders!

3) What makes a good Leader differs across contexts. This final

approach suggests that a good leader may have a set of general qualities
that provide optimal support, but they also have specific qualities and skills
they can use to effect outcomes in particular situations. At times, they may
utilise a leadership style that is participative, while at other times they are
more directive or authoritative in their approach.
Leadership Tips:

In some situations, an autocratic or authoritarian style is appropriate:

• In critical situations, where one leader is required

• When the leader has specific knowledge that others do not

In some situations, a delegative style is appropriate:

• If a team member knows more than you do about a task

• When work loads and deadlines are pressing (shared success builds
team cohesion)

In most situations, a participative style is appropriate:

• Especially when team members understand the objectives and their

role in the task
• To gain engagement and buy-in from all team members (it is noted that
participative decision making is different to participative leadership and
not always possible)

There are multiple Leadership Styles within each of the three key beliefs
listed above. Some styles reflect more than 1 belief and share some
overlap – e.g., autocratic leaders are a form of transactional leader.
 TYPES OF LEADERSHIP STYLES
The leadership styles we look at here are:

1. Autocratic leadership
2. Bureaucratic leadership
3. Charismatic leadership
4. Democratic leadership
5. Laissez faire leadership
6. people oriented leadership
7. Servant leadership
8. Task-oriented leadership
9. Transactional leadership
10.Transformational leadership

1. Autocratic Leadership Style

This is often considered the classical approach. It is one in which the manager retains as
much power and decision-making authority as possible. The manager does not consult
employees, nor are they allowed to give any input. Employees are expected to obey
orders without receiving any explanations. The motivation environment is produced by
creating a structured set of rewards and punishments.
This leadership style has been greatly criticized during the past 30 years. Some studies
say that organizations with many autocratic leaders have higher turnover and
absenteeism than other organizations. These studies say that autocratic leaders:

• Rely on threats and punishment to influence employees

• Do not trust employees
• Do not allow for employee input
Yet, autocratic leadership is not all bad. Sometimes it is the most effective style to
use. These situations can include:
• New, untrained employees who do not know which tasks to perform or which
procedures to follow
• Effective supervision can be provided only through detailed orders and
instructions
• Employees do not respond to any other leadership style
• There are high-volume production needs on a daily basis
 • There is limited time in which to make a decision
• A manager’s power is challenged by an employee
• The area was poorly managed
• Work needs to be coordinated with another department or organization

The autocratic leadership style should not be used when:

• Employees become tense, fearful, or resentful
• Employees expect to have their opinions heard
• Employees begin depending on their manager to make all their decisions
• There is low employee morale, high turnover and absenteeism and work stoppage

2. Bureaucratic Leadership Style

Bureaucratic leadership is where the manager manages “by the book¨ Everything must be
done according to procedure or policy. If it isn’t covered by the book, the manager refers
to the next level above him or her. This manager is really more of a police officer than a
leader. He or she enforces the rules. . 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 organization's ability to react to changing external
circumstances.

This style can be effective when:

• Employees are performing routine tasks over and over.
• Employees need to understand certain standards or procedures.
• Employees are working with dangerous or delicate equipment that requires a
definite set of procedures to operate.
• Safety or security training is being conducted.
• Employees are performing tasks that require handling cash.

This style is ineffective when:

• Work habits form that are hard to break, especially if they are no longer useful.
• Employees lose their interest in their jobs and in their fellow workers.
• Employees do only what is expected of them and no more.
3. CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP STYLES

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. The Charismatic Leader gathers followers through
dint of personality and charm, rather than any form of external power or authority.
It is interesting to watch a Charismatic Leader 'working the room' as they move from
person to person. They pay much attention to the person they are talking to at any one
moment, making that person feel like they are, for that time, the most important person
in the world.
Charismatic Leaders pay a great deal of attention in scanning and reading their
environment, and are good at picking up the moods and concerns of both individuals and
larger audiences. They then will hone their actions and words to suit the situation.
Charismatic Leaders use a wide range of methods to manage their image and, if they are
not naturally charismatic, may practice assiduously at developing their skills. They may
engender trust through visible self-sacrifice and taking personal risks in the name of their
beliefs. They will show great confidence in their followers. They are very persuasive and
make very effective use of of body language as well as verbal language.
Charismatic Leaders who are building a group, whether it is a political party, a cult or a
business team, will often focus strongly on making the group very clear and distinct,
separating it from other groups. They will then build the image of the group, in particular
in the minds of their followers, as being far superior to all others.
The Charismatic Leader will typically attach themselves firmly to the identify of the
group, such that to join the group is to become one with the leader. In doing so, they
create an unchallengeable position for themselves.

However, charismatic leaders can tend to believe more in themselves than in their teams.
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.
4. Democratic Leadership Style

The democratic leadership style is also called the participative style as it encourages
employees to be a part of the decision making. The democratic manager keeps his or her
employees informed about everything that affects their work and shares decision making
and problem solving responsibilities. This style requires the leader to be a coach who has
the final say, but gathers information from staff members before making a decision.
Democratic leadership can produce high quality and high quantity work for long periods
of time. Many employees like the trust they receive and respond with cooperation, team
spirit, and high morale. Typically the democratic leader:

• Develops plans to help employees evaluate their own performance

• Allows employees to establish goals
• Encourages employees to grow on the job and be promoted
• Recognizes and encourages achievement.
Like the other styles, the democratic style is not always appropriate. It is most
successful when used with highly skilled or experienced employees or when
implementing operational changes or resolving individual or group problems.
The democratic leadership style is most effective when:
• The leader wants to keep employees informed about matters that affect them.
• The leader wants employees to share in decision-making and problem-solving
duties.
• The leader wants to provide opportunities for employees to develop a high sense
of personal growth and job satisfaction.
• There is a large or complex problem that requires lots of input to solve.
• Changes must be made or problems solved that affect employees or groups of
employees.
• You want to encourage team building and participation.
Democratic leadership should not be used when:
• There is not enough time to get everyone’s input.
• It’s easier and more cost-effective for the manager to make the decision.
• The business can’t afford mistakes.
• The manager feels threatened by this type of leadership.
• Employee safety is a critical concern.
 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 where quality is more important than speed to
market or productivity.

5. Laissez-Faire Leadership Style

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.

The laissez-faire leadership style is also known as the “hands-off¨ style. It is one in
which the manager provides little or no direction and gives employees as much freedom
as possible. All authority or power is given to the employees and they must determine
goals, make decisions, and resolve problems on their own.

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.

This is an effective style to use when:

• Employees are highly skilled, experienced, and educated.
• Employees 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
• Employees are trustworthy and experienced.
This style should not be used when:
• It makes employees feel insecure at the unavailability of a manager.
• The manager cannot provide regular feedback to let employees know how well
they are doing.
• Managers are unable to thank employees for their good work.
• The manager doesn’t understand his or her responsibilities and is hoping the
employees can cover for him or her.
6. 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 leader’s 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.

7. Servant Leadership

The servant leader serves others, rather than others serving the leader. Serving others
thus comes by helping them to achieve and improve.

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. The leader has responsibility for the followers.
Leaders have a responsibility towards society and those who are disadvantaged.
People who want to help others best do this by leading them.

Supporters of the servant leadership model suggest it is an important way ahead in a

world where values are increasingly important, and 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 can find
themselves "left behind" by leaders using other leadership styles.

There are two criteria of servant leadership:

• The people served grow as individuals, becoming 'healthier, wiser, more

autonomous and more likely themselves to become servants' (Greenleaf, 1977).
• The extent to which the leadership benefits those who are least advantaged in
society (or at least does not disadvantage them).
Principles of servant leadership defined by the Alliance for Servant Leadership
are:

• Transformation as a vehicle for personal and institutional growth.

• Personal growth as a route to better serve others.
• Enabling environments that empower and encourage service.
• Service as a fundamental goals.
• Trusting relationships as a basic platform for collaboration and service.
• Creating commitment as a way to collaborative activity.
• Community building as a way to create environments in which people can trust
each other and work together.
• Nurturing the spirit as a way to provide joy and fulfilment in meaningful work.

8. 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.

9. Transactional Leadership

The transactional leader works through creating clear structures whereby it is clear what
is required of their subordinates, and the rewards that they get for following orders.
Punishments are not always mentioned, but they are also well-understood and formal
systems of discipline are usually in place.
The early stage of Transactional Leadership is in negotiating the contract whereby the
subordinate is given a salary and other benefits, and the company (and by implication the
subordinate's manager) gets authority over the subordinate.

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 doesn’t 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. When the
Transactional Leader allocates work to a subordinate, they are considered to be fully
responsible for it, whether or not they have the resources or capability to carry it out.
When things go wrong, then the subordinate is considered to be personally at fault, and
is punished for their failure (just as they are rewarded for succeeding).

10. 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 don’t 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”.
Working for a Transformational Leader can be a wonderful and uplifting experience.
They put passion and energy into everything. They care about you and want you to
succeed.
Transformational Leadership starts with the development of a vision, a view of the future
that will excite and convert potential followers. This vision may be developed by the
leader, by the senior team or may emerge from a broad series of discussions. The
important factor is the leader buys into it, hook, line and sinker.

Selling the vision

The next step, which in fact never stops, is to constantly sell the vision. This takes
energy and commitment, as few people will immediately buy into a radical vision, and
some will join the show much more slowly than others. The Transformational Leader
thus takes every opportunity and will use whatever works to convince others to climb on
board the bandwagon.
In order to create followers, the Transformational Leader has to be very careful in
creating trust, and their personal integrity is a critical part of the package that they are
selling. In effect, they are selling themselves as well as the vision.

Finding the way forwards

In parallel with the selling activity is seeking the way forward. Some Transformational
Leaders know the way, and simply want others to follow them. Others do not have a
ready strategy, but will happily lead the exploration of possible routes to the promised
land.
The route forwards may not be obvious and may not be plotted in details, but with a
clear vision, the direction will always be known. Thus finding the way forward can be an
ongoing process of course correction, and the Transformational Leader will accept that
there will be failures and blind canyons along the way. As long as they feel progress is
being made, they will be happy.

Leading the charge

The final stage is to remain up-front and central during the action. Transformational
Leaders are always visible and will stand up to be counted rather than hide behind their
troops. They show by their attitudes and actions how everyone else should behave. They
also make continued efforts to motivate and rally their followers, constantly doing the
rounds, listening, soothing and enthusing.
It is their unswerving commitment as much as anything else that keeps people going,
particularly through the darker times when some may question whether the vision can
ever be achieved. If the people do not believe that they can succeed, then their efforts
will flag. The Transformational Leader seeks to infect and reinfect their followers with a
high level of commitment to the vision.
One of the methods the Transformational Leader uses to sustain motivation is in the use
of ceremonies, rituals and other cultural symbolism. Small changes get big hurrahs,
pumping up their significance as indicators of real progress.
Overall, they balance their attention between action that creates progress and the
mental state of their followers. Perhaps more than other approaches, they are
people-oriented and believe that success comes first and last through deep and
sustained commitment

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 new value.
11. Using the Right Style – Situational
Leadership

While the Transformation Leadership approach is often a highly effective style to use in
business, there is no one “right” way to lead or manage that suits all situations. When a
decision is needed, an effective leader does not just fall into a single preferred style, such
as using transactional or transformational methods. In practice, as they say, things are
not that simple.
Factors that affect situational decisions include motivation and capability of followers.
This, in turn, is affected by factors within the particular situation. The relationship
between followers and the leader may be another factor that affects leader behavior as
much as it does follower behavior.
The leaders' perception of the follower and the situation will affect what they do rather
than the truth of the situation. The leader's perception of themselves and other factors
such as stress and mood will also modify the leaders' behavior.
Yukl (1989) seeks to combine other approaches and identifies six variables:

• Subordinate effort: the motivation and actual effort expended.

• Subordinate ability and role clarity: followers knowing what to do and how to do
it.
• Organization of the work: the structure of the work and utilization of resources.
• Cooperation and cohesiveness: of the group in working together.
• Resources and support: the availability of tools, materials, people, etc.
• External coordination: the need to collaborate with other groups.

Leaders here work on such factors as external relationships, acquisition of resources,

managing demands on the group and managing the structures and culture of the group.

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 an Avalon Aviation Academy trains new candidates 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.

The Managerial Grid

Leaders may be concerned for their people and they also must also have some concern
for the work to be done.
The question is, how much attention to they pay to one or the other?
This is a model defined by Blake and Mouton in the early 1960s.

Country Club Team

High
management management
Concern for Mediu Middle of the road
People m management
Impoverished Authority-
Low
management compliance
Low Medium High
Concern for Production (Task)

Impoverished management

Minimum effort to get the work done. A basically lazy approach that avoids as much
work as possible.
Authority-compliance

Strong focus on task, but with little concern for people. Focus on efficiency, including
the elimination of people wherever possible.

Country Club management

Care and concern for the people, with a comfortable and friendly environment and
collegial style. But a low focus on task may give questionable results.

Middle of the road management

A weak balance of focus on both people and the work. Doing enough to get things done,
but not pushing the boundaries of what may be possible.

Team management

Firing on all cylinders: people are committed to task and leader is committed to people
(as well as task).
This is a well-known grid that uses the Task vs. Person preference that appears in
many other studies. Many other task-people models and variants have appeared since
then. They are both clearly important dimensions, but as other models point out, they are
not all there is to leadership and management.
The Managerial Grid was the original name. It later changed to the Leadership Grid.

LEWIN'S LEADERSHIP STYLES

Kurt Lewin and colleagues did leadership decision experiments in 1939 and identified
three different styles of leadership, in particular around decision-making.

Autocratic

In the autocratic style, the leader takes decisions without consulting with others. The
decision is made without any form of consultation. In Lewin's experiments, he found that
this caused the most level of discontent.
An autocratic style works when there is no need for input on the decision, where the
decision would not change as a result of input, and where the motivation of people to
carry out subsequent actions would not be affected whether they were or were not
involved in the decision-making.

Democratic

In the democratic style, the leader involves the people in the decision-making, although
the process for the final decision may vary from the leader having the final say to them
facilitating consensus in the group.
Democratic decision-making is usually appreciated by the people, especially if they have
been used to autocratic decisions with which they disagreed. It can be problematic when
there are a wide range of opinions and there is no clear way of reaching an equitable
final decision.

Laissez-Faire

The laissez-faire style is to minimize the leader's involvement in decision-making, and

hence allowing people to make their own decisions, although they may still be
responsible for the outcome.
Laissez-faire works best when people are capable and motivated in making their own
decisions, and where there is no requirement for a central coordination, for example in
sharing resources across a range of different people and groups.
In Lewin et al's experiments, he discovered that the most effective style was
Democratic. Excessive autocratic styles led to revolution, whilst under a Laissez-faire
approach, people were not coherent in their work and did not put in the energy that they
did when being actively led.
These experiments were actually done with groups of children, but were early in the
modern era and were consequently highly influential.

LIKERT'S LEADERSHIP STYLES

Rensis Likert identified four main styles of leadership, in particular around decision-
making and the degree to which people are involved in the decision.

Exploitive authoritative
In this style, the leader has a low concern for people and uses such methods as threats
and other fear-based methods to achieve conformance. Communication is almost entirely
downwards and the psychologically distant concerns of people are ignored.

Benevolent authoritative

When the leader adds concern for people to an authoritative position, a 'benevolent
dictatorship' is formed. The leader now uses rewards to encourage appropriate
performance and listens more to concerns lower down the organization, although what
they hear is often rose-tinted, being limited to what their subordinates think that the boss
wants to hear. Although there may be some delegation of decisions, almost all major
decisions are still made centrally.

Consultative

The upward flow of information here is still cautious and rose-tinted to some degree,
although the leader is making genuine efforts to listen carefully to ideas. Nevertheless,
major decisions are still largely centrally made.

Participative

At this level, the leader makes maximum use of participative methods, engaging people
lower down the organization in decision-making. People across the organization are
psychologically closer together and work well together at all levels.
This is a classic 1960s view in that it is still very largely top-down in nature, with
the cautious addition collaborative elements towards the Utopian final state

Forces

A good leader uses all the above styles, depending on what forces are involved between
the followers, the leader, and the situation. Some examples include:
• Using an authoritarian style on a new employee who is just learning the job. The
leader is competent and a good coach. The employee is motivated to learn a new
skill. The situation is a new environment for the employee.
• Using a participative style with a team of workers who know their job. The leader
knows the problem, but does not have all the information. The employees know
their jobs and want to become part of the team.
 • Using a delegative style with a worker who knows more about the job than you.
You cannot do everything! The employee needs to take ownership of her job.
Also, the situation might call for you to be at other places, doing other things.
• Using all three: Telling your employees that a procedure is not working correctly
and a new one must be established (authoritarian). Asking for their ideas and
input on creating a new procedure (participative). Delegating tasks in order to
implement the new procedure (delegative).

Forces that influence the style to be used included:

• How much time is available.
• Are relationships based on respect and trust or on disrespect?
• Who has the information - you, your employees, or both?
• How well your employees are trained and how well you know the task.
• Internal conflicts.
• Stress levels.
• Type of task. Is it structured, unstructured, complicated, or simple?

Positive and Negative Approaches

There is a difference in ways leaders approach their employee. Positive leaders use
rewards, such as education, independence, etc. to motivate employees. While negative
employers emphasize penalties. While the negative approach has a place in a leader's
repertoire of tools, it must be used carefully due to its high cost on the human spirit.
Negative leaders act domineering and superior with people. They believe the only way to
get things done is through penalties, such as loss of job, days off without pay, reprimand
employees in front of others, etc. They believe their authority is increased by frightening
everyone into higher lever of productivity. Yet what always happens when this approach
is used wrongly is that morale falls; which of course leads to lower productivity.
Also note that most leaders do not strictly use one or another, but are somewhere on a
continuum ranging from extremely positive to extremely negative. People who
continuously work out of the negative are bosses while those who primarily work out of
the positive are considered real leaders.
 Use of Consideration and Structure

Two other approaches that leaders use are:

Consideration (employee orientation) –
Leaders are concerned about the human needs of their employees. They build teamwork,
help employees with their problems, and provide psychological support.

Structure (task orientation) –

Leaders believe that they get results by consistently keeping people busy and urging
them to produce.
There is evidence that leaders who are considerate in their leadership style are higher
performers and are more satisfied with their job .
Also notice that consideration and structure are independent of each other, thus they
should not be viewed on opposite ends of a continuum. For example, a leader who
becomes more considerate, does not necessarily mean that she has become less
structured.