Leadership styles in management: ultimate guide

Looking to move up to a leadership role? Apparently, so are many Filipinos today.

According to the 2022 Future of Recruitment report, when asked what their ideal career path would be, around 50 percent of Filipino job seekers said they wanted to join a company and progress to a leadership position. This was higher than the average measured across Southeast Asia (45%), and that of the rest of the world (41%). When the job seekers were asked why they were looking for new employment, more than 55% of Filipino respondents said they were searching for a more interesting position or something of higher seniority.

Competition for leadership positions is getting tight. To land that dream job, you need to stand out and demonstrate your leadership skills. But before you can do that, you must first understand that there actually are different leadership styles.

• Why leadership styles matter
• Autocratic Leadership Style
• Democratic Leadership Style
• Laissez-Faire Leadership Style
• Task-Oriented Leadership Style
• People-Oriented Leadership Styles
• Advantages of Adopting Different Leadership Styles
• Disadvantages of Adopting Different Leadership Styles
• Summary
• Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Why leadership styles matter

Every leader has their own way of handling or working with their team. Each has their own method of guiding, motivating, influencing, or encouraging employees to achieve a goal or perform in a certain way. This is their leadership style.

An individual’s leadership style carries certain attitudes, abilities, experiences, beliefs, and values.  Think of it as a signature that represents how the leader works and treats team members.

That is why a person’s leadership style can have a great impact on their company. It can explain whether or not a leader will plan ahead, or will just react to things as they come. Or if he or she will be hands-on or hands-off when managing their team. Or if he or she will be agile and resilient enough to keep up with the fast-changing world.

Great leaders are often the ones who employ different leadership styles depending on the situation. What is crucial is understanding that different leadership styles have different uses and drawbacks, affect people in different ways, and offer different approaches to solving problems or maintaining good relations among team members.

Knowing which style resonates with the kind of leader you are (or want to be) is a key to success. The following article provides a comprehensive discussion of different leadership styles. Hopefully, after reading it, you will have a firmer grasp of the leadership style you have and want to learn more about.

Autocratic Leadership Style

In the military, soldiers are expected to follow the orders of their superiors.  Such a command-and-control, top-down approach to leadership is often described as “autocratic” or “authoritarian.” Its main feature is that the leader exercises full control over all decisions with very little input from the team.

Many list figures like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Saddam Hussein, and even US President Lyndon Johnson as examples of people who used this leadership style.

Conventionally, autocratic leadership is viewed negatively. Critics cite how this method stifles innovation and creativity.

In recent years, however, some have written about the advantages of autocracy. Rajeev Peshawaria, a former chief learning officer at Coca-Cola and Morgan Stanley argued that in today’s fast-paced world, top-down forms of leadership are needed.

Peshawaria writes: “It is no secret that only those organizations that innovate faster and more frequently in the current environment will survive and thrive. And if they are to innovate fast and more frequently, there is no time to be lost in consensus building… A clear sense of direction for the business can get lost in a mass of opinions that could muddy or compromise it. In this environment, leaders need to be decisive one way or another, even if it means being autocratic. [Emphasis provided]”

So despite its negative connotation, an autocratic leadership style can be useful when decisions need to be made swiftly, such as during a crisis or in the face of intense competition.

Another advantage of autocratic leadership is that it operates on a clear chain of command, where duties and responsibilities are delineated.  With such a setup, it is much easier to determine who is accountable.

Democratic Leadership Style

In contrast, a democratic leadership style is one where followers are included in the decision-making process. This is why the method is sometimes called “participative management.”

Figures like US President Dwight D. Eisenhower and former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan  are often identified as examples of a democratic leadership style. Both figures were known for their ability to keep coalitions together, even if some of the parties involved did not see eye-to-eye.

In this leadership style, emphasis is placed on open communication and teamwork. The assumption is that the actions of the collective would be better informed if everybody is allowed to contribute their thoughts on the matter at hand.

The general belief is that through a democratic leadership style, followers tend to have higher morale, are more engaged in the work, are able to generate more innovative solutions, and are more loyal to each other and to the company.

One criticism of this style is that it can get bogged down by consultations and consensus-building.  Another disadvantage is that the group can be dragged down by followers or members who are not as engaged or as eager to participate in the decision-making.

Laissez-Faire Leadership Style

Kurt Lewin, the father of Social Pscyhology, was the first to describe a leadership style as “Laissez-Faire” (which is French for “leave alone” or “let one do”). A leader employing this method lets their followers have total freedom and autonomy while providing very little guidance or inputs (if at all).

One of the historical figures associated with this style is Queen Victoria, who between 1837 and 1901,  allowed her trusted advisers to decide and act on the reforms they thought were needed in the United Kingdom. Another is former US Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon who selected highly talented individuals and trusted them with expanding his family’s business empire.

Some include the late Apple CEO Steve Jobs under this category, mostly because he was quoted as saying, “It doesn’t make sense to hire smart people, and then tell them what to do; we hire smart people so they can tell us what to do.”

Laissez-Faire leaders choose their trusted circle of managers and executives to whom they give full autonomy to achieve whatever prescribed goals they have. Some argue that a Laissez-Faire leader is only successful when their followers are talented, competent, and highly engaged individuals.

This style is said to be effective in quick-paced, highly creative industries, where teams are trusted to handle their day-to-day affairs. One advantage is that leaders are unburdened by routine tasks and are able to think about other, more strategic concerns.

As with all styles, there are some instances where a Laissez-Faire approach may not work. For instance, new employees may find it difficult to keep up when no guidance is provided. There is also the criticism that since leaders take a hands-off approach, nobody is really made accountable if goals are not achieved.

Task-Oriented Leadership Style

Task-oriented leadership is focused on meeting objectives and getting the desired results.  Task-oriented leaders tend to put importance on defining goals and identifying the steps necessary to reach them, and ensuring that every member does what it takes to get the job done.

When managed by task-oriented leaders, employees and followers have a clear idea of their role in the organization and what is expected of them.

One pitfall of task-oriented leadership is that it does not account for the individual needs of the followers or employees. No consideration is paid to their motivations or emotional state. Neither is there any space or opportunity for new ideas to be discussed and adopted.

Bureaucratic Leadership Style

One subset of task-oriented leadership can be described as “bureaucratic.” Here, leaders and managers set up clear hierarchies, structures, and processes to follow throughout their work. Communication is through formal channels which correspond to a clear chain of command.

Transactional Leadership Style

Another kind of task-oriented leadership is said to be “transactional” where companies or organizations achieve higher productivity levels when there is a clear rewards and punishment system. Such a punitive method of leadership is focused on close supervision and regular performance assessments.

People-Oriented Leadership Styles

In contrast, people-oriented (sometimes called relationship-oriented) leadership styles are mainly concerned with the welfare and well-being of the employees or followers involved. People-oriented leaders want their followers to be personally invested in the job at hand. Free-flowing communication is often encouraged.

If a people-oriented leader is successful, then their employees are generally more motivated and engaged in their work, and more loyal to the company. All of these are said to contribute to a company becoming more efficient, effective, and ultimately more profitable.

A downside to people-oriented leadership is the amount of time and resources needed by the leader to build meaningful relationships with their employees. There is also the risk that professional boundaries would be blurred because leaders and followers have a stronger bond with each other. As a result, a leader might find it more difficult to act like a “boss” when needed, or fire someone from the team.

Coaching Leadership

One application of this orientation towards people is hinged on seeing the leader as a coach–one who actively gives constructive feedback to an employee or follower so that the latter can improve on their weaknesses, capitalize on their strengths, and achieve their fullest potential.

As one Forbes.comarticle argued, more and more companies are demanding that their managers learn how to become better coaches in a bid to jumpstart the evolution of their respective organizations into full-fledged learning organizations. The authors said this was a “dramatic and fundamental shift” that they observed over the past decade in the face of the digital age.

Quiet Leadership

Another example of a people-oriented leadership style is one described in the book Quiet Leadership by David Rock. Rock proposed six steps that leaders can follow to change the way their followers think and improve their performance. Many of these steps demand that the leader step back, listen intently to what their employees say, and allow them to engage in self-directed learning.

Servant Leadership

Servant Leadership, a more popular example of the people-oriented style, was coined by Robert K. Greenleaf in his 1970 essay, “The Servant as a Leader.” In it, he proposed that what was needed were leaders who put the needs of others first, and helped people develop and perform at their fullest potential.

Advantages of Adopting Different Leadership Styles

Peter Drucker, Austrian-American management consultant and world-renowned business sage, wrote: “The job of a leader is to get extraordinary results from ordinary people.” That means getting their people to perform at high levels across the board and providing them with a rallying point or direction upon which team members pursue their respective work responsibilities.

But while all great leaders get results, what differs is how they do so. Now consider that everybody responds differently to different leadership styles. It is crucial then for a leader to employ the leadership style or styles that get results, no matter how difficult the circumstances or challenges they face.

This is why applying different leadership approaches comes with significant advantages because doing so brings out good performance and high achievement, regardless of the personalities involved.

One seminal study conducted in 2000 surveyed close to 4,000 business executives and found that the leaders with the best results do not rely on a single leadership style. In fact, the research suggested that exemplary leaders can use up to six different styles within the course of a week, depending on the business situation.

In fact, there is a host of ways that adopting different leadership styles can be advantageous to an organization ranging from increased efficiency and higher morale to an enhanced capability to solve complex problems.

Increased Effectiveness and Efficiency

Teams are often composed of people that have different levels of skills, expertise, and experience. This means that while some may need to be coached or guided on how to do certain specific tasks, there are others that can be left alone and allowed to have free rein over a project or assigned work.

From a management standpoint, it would be a waste of time if a leader devoted the same amount of effort and resources to guiding and coaching an experienced team member as he or she would have for a less experienced member. By switching styles, a leader would be providing team members support according to their specific needs. Some call this “ meeting people where they are.” This ultimately increases the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the company or organization, which happens through improved communication and collaboration, and increases in morale, motivation, engagement, and job satisfaction.

Improved Communication and Collaboration

Knowing that different people respond to different leadership styles, how then should you go about discovering which is most effective? One way of approaching it is to open communication lines between you and your employees or members. Sincerity, vulnerability, and honesty are crucial in this regard.

You could take the bold step of directly asking your team, “What can I do to better support and motivate you?” While some may argue that this is unorthodox and possibly difficult to pull off,  such a tactic allows the process to become more collaborative. This in turn ensures greater buy-in and participation from the rest of the group.

A leader may be the main person assigned to do the “leading.” But, taking the steps to ensure the success of a certain style of leadership can start off as a ground-up process–the result of which can only be attained through improved communication and collaboration.

Increased morale, motivation, engagement, and job satisfaction

When communication lines are open and free-flowing, employees could start feeling that their concerns are addressed, and that their opinions are actually heard and considered. Morale skyrockets as a result.

Being more upbeat, employees become more motivated and engaged in their work. The office suddenly stops being just their workplace. It transforms into a space where they can be themselves, exercise their individuality, and pursue their respective passions.  And the more they are able to do these things–and self-actualize –the more engaged and satisfied they are with their job.

This is desirable because it affects the bottomline of companies. A 2018 Gallup study found that companies that reported high engagement exhibited substantially higher productivity, better retention, fewer accidents, and up to 21 percent higher profitability.

Positive Impact on Organizational Culture

As always, leadership plays a key role not only in laying the foundation for such an environment to grow but also in maintaining and keeping it vibrant such that it becomes part of the organization’s culture.

Ultimately, responsive leadership–that is, one that adopts different styles, methods, or approaches of leadership–could start off a virtuous cycle within the company or organization. When the leadership takes the first step to hear out and work towards fulfilling the needs and upholding the welfare of the employees, then a more compassionate, inclusive, and collaborative work culture could start to take shape.

Note that a company’s organizational culture finds expression in almost all aspects, including the way employees converse with each other and how departments work together; the expectations employees have as well as what the company expects from them; the norms they maintain when it comes to work-life balance, making mistakes, and even risk-taking.

All these factors contribute to the performance of a company. A Harvard Business School study even found that the average revenue growth in companies where the leadership encouraged a “performance-enhancing” organizational culture was as high as 682% compared to the 166% where such a corporate culture was absent.

Enhanced Innovation and Creativity

Many have also written about the important role the leadership plays in encouraging creativity and innovation. One 2017 McKinsey article emphasized, “How individual leaders inspire and influence others will become a key differentiator between organizations that thrive and those that do not.”

Earlier research even found a corporate culture based on trust among employees is more effective in encouraging innovation and creativity than monetary incentives. Leadership plays a key role in making their people feel this level of comfort.

Disadvantages of Adopting Different Leadership Styles

In reading up on leadership, you should refrain from falling into the trap of thinking that leaders should be superheroes. Even the smartest, most capable executives have weaknesses and limitations. They cannot be expected to solve everything and have all the facilities to handle all situations in the best way possible.

As one Wall Street Journal article pointed out: “Large, complex organizations can’t depend on a singular leader to define and execute their strategic agendas. Instead, they need a pool of leaders who collectively have the talents, strength, and commitment to meet the demands of the marketplace.”

So as you try to learn more about the different leadership styles, you must also keep from falling for the wrong mindset that to be effective, a leader must know how to use all the styles possible.

Potential for confusion and inconsistency

Leaders who constantly switch between leadership styles run the risk of coming off as inconsistent. And as their employees or followers are left confused, morale, engagement and job satisfaction might begin to dip. Productivity soon follows to ultimately affect the company’s profitability.

A leader must avoid confusing followers because doing so leaves them unable to inspire and motivate others, which Zenger Folkman research has found to be the most common “fatal flaw” that leaders must work on.

Difficulty in maintaining a cohesive team culture

One product of this confusion is the difficulty of keeping a cohesive team or organizational culture. Resentment may even emerge between departments, especially when different leadership styles are adopted piecemeal rather than wholesale. This creates divisions within a company, which in turn could lead to even further job dissatisfaction and diminish its overall capacity to perform.

Ineffective implementation and execution of leadership style

Another pitfall of switching between leadership styles is that doing so hinges too much on the capability and competency of the leader. No person can motivate all team members, especially when they each have differing needs.

Resistance to change and unfamiliar styles

On the flipside, the followers themselves may not be receptive to any change in leadership style. No matter how smart or competent a leader is, if their influence does not overcome their followers’ resistance to change (such as the new, unfamiliar style) then they are doomed to fail. This is because the success of a switch in leadership style is very much dependent on the leader’s relationship with their followers.

Summary

The time may come that you will assume a leadership position. To prepare, it is crucial that you understand not just the different leadership styles, but the advantages and disadvantages of switching between them.

For more tips on how to lead a team, download the JobStreet app on Google Play or App Store. Visit Career Advice for other tips. #SEEKBetter leadership opportunities on Jobstreet! Create or update your Jobstreet profile now!

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What is a leadership style?
   ⁠A leadership style refers to the methods, habits, behaviors, and principles a leader uses when guiding, motivating, influencing or encouraging their followers to achieve a goal or perform a task in a certain manner.
   ⁠
2. What are the different leadership styles?
   ⁠There are several leadership styles such as the autocratic or authoritarian style; the democratic style; the laissez-faire style; the transformational or visionary leadership style; the transactional leadership style; among many others.
   ⁠
3. How can I develop my leadership skills?
   ⁠A good first step is to read up on the different leadership styles. There is abundant research on how different methods have both positive and negative effects. Once you’re comfortable with the amount of knowledge you have about the topic, then you can decide which specific leadership skill–and style–you want to learn more about.