Great leaders understand that they need to master more than one leadership style. The best leaders are acutely aware of what their typical approach to leadership is and constantly evaluate themselves to ensure that they are responding appropriately to each situation. These individuals have the ability to alter their leadership style when the situation calls for it. After all, each style has its own specific strengths and weaknesses. When leaders understand these advantages and disadvantages, as well as their own tendencies, they have the ability to shift seamlessly between the styles to remain as effective as possible.
When a “clash” happens between employee and manager, this conflict generally stems from the manager’s inability to change leadership styles. Not all employees respond to the same type of leadership. Leaders who are considered charismatic are able to motivate all employees by reading each person’s cues and responding in an appropriate manner. In other words, these individuals are excellent at reading a situation and altering their own behavior accordingly. Below is a look at the four basic leadership styles that great leaders need to master, as well as a look at the advantages and drawbacks of each approach.
Directive
Directive leadership is one of the oldest approaches to leadership in the corporate world. Many people think of directive leaders as autocrats at best and micromanagers at worst. When this type of leader interacts with an employee, he or she issues orders and expects them to be followed exactly. Very little room for creativity is left to the employee.
Some people might consider this leadership style outdated, but it still has a number of merits. When employees are new at the company and have little experience, they may benefit from a directive leader, who can show them the ropes and reduce their anxiety about making mistakes. Likewise, in an emergency situation, directive leaders are the ones who get things done by issuing orders and telling people explicitly what their responsibilities are.
At the same time, many employees, especially those who have a lot of work experience, balk at directive leaders. Employees who feel micromanaged tend to “check out” and may not bring their full potential to the company.
Laissez-faire
The laissez-faire leader takes a hands-off approach to responsibility. This leader may give a general idea of what is desired or needed from a project, but employees have wide berth to bring their own ingenuity to the work. Traditionally, laissez-faire leaders have been viewed as lazy, but this approach motivates a number of employees, especially those who are creative or very experienced. This type of leadership can communicate confidence and trust, which motivates employees to make great achievements.
When a new employee comes to the company, a laissez-faire attitude may make the individual feel lost or aimless. However, a proven top performer does not typically need more motivation than a laissez-faire prompt. For example, suppose that a multi-million-dollar deal comes to the table and the boss assigns it to the most senior and most proven employee. If the manager takes a directive approach, this could stymie the employee and end up costing the deal. In this case, laissez-faire is often the best leadership approach.
Participative
The democratic approach to leadership is the participative style. Participative leaders constantly seek input from employees and actively involve the entire team in the decision-making process. This type of leadership is often lauded as an ideal approach in today’s market. Indeed, a participative approach can make employees feel heard and respected, which in turn motivates them to work harder for the company and the leader. Also, involving employees in the entire decision-making process teaches them a number of important business lessons that can better equip them to handle similar situations on their own in the future.
However, there are certain scenarios in which the participative style is inappropriate. Consider again the emergency situation. A participative leader will waste too much time asking for input from employees, and the situation could escalate in the meantime.
Often, the participative style is best for mid-level employees. They need less oversight than new hires but more direction than senior salespeople, who appreciate a laissez-faire approach.
Adaptive
The adaptive style of leadership takes into account both the situation and the person being led when making a decision about the best approach. As shown in the previous three leadership descriptions, both the competency of the employee and the immediacy of the task have a bearing on what type of leadership style is best. Leaders also need to consider the personality of the employee when they decide on the best approach. The adaptive style involves a great deal of mindfulness. The leader needs to keep constant tabs on the situation to decide how to respond.
Few leaders are naturally adaptive managers. Instead, the adaptive style takes work and practice, especially under stress. When stress levels run high, people tend to revert back to their innate styles, which is why it is critical that leaders take an honest inventory of their typical approach to leadership and work diligently to develop their skills in other styles.