What is leadership?
In many organisations, when people think of what are the different styles of leadership, they will not think or their own management. Contrary to popular faith, leadership has nothing to do with a company’s status or hierarchy, it’s more about creating a favourable approach and passing it on to others to enable them to achieve a shared objective.
There are as many management methods as there are representatives, ranging from the 1930s “Lewin’s Leadership Styles” structure to the latest thoughts on transformative management. There are several overall types, such as servant leadership and transactional leadership, and building frameworks and design knowledge can help you to evolve your strategy and become a more efficient leader.
Types of leadership styles
Curiously, each of us is a leader and we also have a type of management that goes into operation both at the office and during difficult times in life. Many individuals, moreover, seem to overlap management with leadership or vice versa. However, there is a lot of differentiation among both management and leadership. For the time being, we need to concentrate on learning about distinct leadership styles and how to make the most of them.
In the 1930s, psychologist Kurt Lewin created his framework and established many of the strategies that followed. He asserted that three noticeable management types arise:
Although their contribution would be helpful, autocratic leaders create decisions without advising their teammates. This can be suitable when choices need to be made rapidly, when there was no need for group feedback, and when team consent is not required for a good result. This style, furthermore, can be demotivating and can result in elevated levels of absenteeism and turnover of employees. Democratic leaders make the key judgments, however, in the decision-making process, they include team employees. They foster creativity, and often individuals are extremely involved in initiatives and judgments. As a consequence, teams appear to be highly satisfied with their jobs and elevated productivity. However, if you need to create a fast decision, it is not always an effective technique to use.
Laissez-faire leaders offer a large degree of liberty to their team members with how they do their job and arrange their schedules. If necessary, they provide assistance and guidance, but otherwise, they will not get engaged. This independence can result in a strong level of job satisfaction, but it can be harmful if leaders do not handle their time well or if they do not have the understanding, abilities or self-motivation to do their job efficiently. A laissez-faire style of leadership can also happen when executives have no power over their job and individuals.
Strategic leadership style
Strategic leadership is the capacity to impact others to create judgments willingly that improve the opportunities for long-term achievement of the organization. Simply put, it relates to the capacity or ability of the leader to convey the organization’s global view. Furthermore, convince them to achieve that view with the assistance of appropriate policies and instruments. This type of management allows you to build a squad of well-trained and very well-equipped team leaders to cope with unexpected hazards and dangers. Strategic leadership style often generates more leadership, which is all about setting an example to the people.
The management frameworks mentioned so far are all helpful in distinct circumstances, but the most efficient approach to use is often “transformation management” in the company.
Transformational leaders have dignity and elevated awareness of emotion. With a mutual vision of the future, they inspire people and interact well. Typically they are self-conscious, genuine, empathetic, and modest.
Transformational leaders encourage their teammates because they promote the best of everyone and are responsible for their behaviour. They fix definite objectives and have an excellent ability to resolve conflicts. This results in elevated productivity and commitment.
Leadership, moreover, is not a “one size fits all” thing; but you often have to adjust your strategy to suit the scenario. That’s why developing a thorough knowledge of other management frameworks and types are helpful; after all, the more methods you know, the more versatile you can be.
Bureaucratic rulers rigorously follow guidelines and ensure that their individuals are accurately following processes. This is suitable for a job involving severe safety hazards (such as operating with equipment, toxic materials or at hazardous heights) or large quantities of money. Bureaucratic leadership is also helpful for handling staff who undertake repetitive daily duties. In groups and organisations relying on flexibility, creativity, or technology, this style is much less efficient.
Charismatic leadership mirrors transformative management: both kinds of leaders encourage and inspire their team members. Transformative leaders need their teams and organisations to be transformed. While leaders who depend on charisma often concentrate on themselves and their own aspirations and will not want to modify anything. Charismatic leaders may think they could do no wrong, even if others inform them of their path. As shown in the 2008 financial crisis, this sense of invulnerability can significantly harm a team or an organisation.
A “servant leader” is somebody who contributes, irrespective of rank, merely by satisfying the team’s requirements. This often defines them as a leader, even without official recognition.
These individuals frequently lead by example. They guide others with dignity and kindness. Their strategy can generate a favourable corporate culture, and among team employees, it can contribute to elevated morale. Servant leadership model supporters recommend it as a way to push forward in a society where morals are becoming more and more crucial. And where servant leaders can gain authority because of their principles, morals, and ethics.
However, others think that, especially in challenging circumstances. Hence, individuals who exercise servant leadership may discover themselves “abandoned behind” by other leaders.
It also requires time to implement this style properly: it is unfit for circumstances where you need to create rapid judgments or fulfil narrow deadlines.
This style begins with the concept that when accepting a task, group participants decide to follow their mentor. Typically, the “operation” includes the organisation charging team participants with a short-term assignment in exchange for their effort. And enforcement and the leader has the power to “reward” team participants if necessary. In many corporate management scenarios, transactional leadership is available and offers some advantages. For instance, it clarifies the functions and duties of everyone.
And, as transactional leadership reviews quality team participants, individuals who are adventurous or driven by internal benefits, including reward, often flourish.
This style’s downside is that it can be chilling and amoral on its own and can contribute to a heavy turnover of employees. It also has severe constraints for a job based on knowledge or creativity. As a consequence, employees of the team can sometimes do little to enhance their job satisfaction.