What kind of leadership

Affiliative leadership is used to nurture workplace morale, helping staff members reconnect with their organization and their peers. This leadership style focuses on the group as a unit; however, it is important to hold each employee accountable for their role in the team re-building process. When morale is low, some workers need more motivation than others to encourage them to invest their hearts into rebuilding workplace relationships. The democratic leadership style involves soliciting group opinion to help find the solution to a difficult problem.

When business leaders include staff in the decision-making process, staff members are more likely to offer genuine support for the agenda, because they helped to devise the plan. The democratic leadership style is not appropriate for dealing with business emergencies. The pacesetting approach requires setting performance standards and holding team members accountable for meeting those goals.

Although performance can be measured based on quantifiable metrics, it is especially important for leaders using the pacesetting approach to understand and consider all possible factors that can influence performance. Additionally, the pacesetting method should not be overused, as it can lower staff morale when they do not achieve the goals.

The autocratic leadership style is primarily the traditional boss-worker structure, where management makes a majority of decisions and workers do what is asked of them. An advantage of this method is that companies and organizations are able to execute their vision in an efficient and effective manner. A great example of when this leadership style is appropriate is for extremely complex projects — such as construction — where conformity is necessary for worker safety and project completion.

However, if an autocratic leadership style is used inappropriately, workers may become extremely dissatisfied and can feel as though they provide little to no value. This type of leader is driven by his or her core values which are modeled and aligned with company values.

His personal and work ethics served as a model to inspire others in the development of the world-class Indian Space Research Organization. This model was developed by business consultant and bestselling author Ken Blanchard and behavioral scientist Paul Hersey.

It is a framework for leaders to match their behaviors to the performance needs of those they are working to influence.

The Center for Leadership Studies explains that situational leaders must have the ability to:. A notable example of a leader who practiced situational leadership is former NBA Coach Phil Jackson, who managed his team based on their individual strengths, weaknesses, and motivations. Servant leaders enrich the lives of others by focusing on building better organizations and ultimately creating a world that is more caring and equitable.

First coined by Robert K. The servant leader dedicates himself or herself to the growth and well being of people in the community.

Instead of focusing on accumulating power, this leader shares power and helps others perform as highly as possible. There have been many studies indicating organizations that are servant-led perform better and yield higher returns.

One leader might be charismatic and inspire others while another might excel at developing teams. To be a good leader, she says, you really just have to be agile. You want to be flexible, but to stay authentic to who you are. You need to really think about who you are and what makes you tick.

These are important steps to building your personal brand as a leader. In this leadership style, the leader makes decisions without taking input from anyone who reports to them.

Employees are neither considered nor consulted prior to a change in direction, and are expected to adhere to the decision at a time and pace stipulated by the leader.

An example of this could be when a manager changes the hours of work shifts for multiple employees without consulting anyone — especially the affected employees. Frankly, this leadership style stinks.

Most organizations today can't sustain such a hegemonic culture without losing employees. It's best to keep leadership more open to the intellect and perspective of the rest of the team. If you remember your high-school French, you'll accurately assume that laissez-faire leadership is the least intrusive form of leadership.

The French term "laissez-faire" literally translates to "let them do," and leaders who embrace it afford nearly all authority to their employees. In a young startup, for example, you might see a laissez-faire company founder who makes no major office policies around work hours or deadlines. They might put full trust into their employees while they focus on the overall workings of running the company. Although laissez-faire leadership can empower employees by trusting them to work however they'd like, it can limit their development and overlook critical company growth opportunities.

Therefore, it's important that this leadership style is kept in check. Strategic leaders sit at the intersection between a company's main operations and its growth opportunities.

He or she accepts the burden of executive interests while ensuring that current working conditions remain stable for everyone else. This is a desirable leadership style in many companies because strategic thinking supports multiple types of employees at once. However, leaders who operate this way can set a dangerous precedent with respect to how many people they can support at once, and what the best direction for the company really is if everyone is getting their way at all times.

Transformational leadership is always "transforming" and improving upon the company's conventions. Employees might have a basic set of tasks and goals that they complete every week or month, but the leader is constantly pushing them outside of their comfort zone.

When starting a job with this type of leader, all employees might get a list of goals to reach, as well as deadlines for reaching them. While the goals might seem simple at first, this manager might pick up the pace of deadlines or give you more and more challenging goals as you grow with the company. This is a highly encouraged form of leadership among growth-minded companies because it motivates employees to see what they're capable of.

But transformational leaders can risk losing sight of everyone's individual learning curves if direct reports don't receive the right coaching to guide them through new responsibilities.

Transactional leaders are fairly common today. These managers reward their employees for precisely the work they do. A marketing team that receives a scheduled bonus for helping generate a certain number of leads by the end of the quarter is a common example of transactional leadership.

When starting a job with a transactional boss, you might receive an incentive plan that motivates you to quickly master your regular job duties. For example, if you work in marketing, you might receive a bonus for sending 10 marketing emails.

On the other hand, a transformational leader might only offer you a bonus if your work results in a large number of newsletter subscriptions. Transactional leadership helps establish roles and responsibilities for each employee, but it can also encourage bare-minimum work if employees know how much their effort is worth all the time.

This leadership style can use incentive programs to motivate employees, but they should be consistent with the company's goals and used in addition to unscheduled gestures of appreciation. Similarly to a sports team's coach, this leader focuses on identifying and nurturing the individual strengths of each member on his or her team.

They also focus on strategies that will enable their team to work better together. This style offers strong similarities to strategic and democratic leadership, but puts more emphasis on the growth and success of individual employees. Rather than forcing all employees to focus on similar skills and goals, this leader might build a team where each employee has an area of expertise or skillset in something different.

In the long run, this leader focuses on creating strong teams that can communicate well and embrace each other's unique skillsets in order to get work done. A manager with this leadership style might help employees improve on their strengths by giving them new tasks to try, offering them guidance, or meeting to discuss constructive feedback. Additionally, the pacesetting method should not be overused, as it can lower staff morale when they do not achieve the goals.

The autocratic leadership style is primarily the traditional boss-worker structure, where management makes a majority of decisions and workers do what is asked of them. An advantage of this method is that companies and organizations are able to execute their vision in an efficient and effective manner. A great example of when this leadership style is appropriate is for extremely complex projects — such as construction — where conformity is necessary for worker safety and project completion.

However, if an autocratic leadership style is used inappropriately, workers may become extremely dissatisfied and can feel as though they provide little to no value. Modeled after the military, the commanding leadership style is similar to the autocratic leadership style but involves no input from subordinates.

The commanding method of leadership has long been known as the style used in a time of crises when there is no time for leadership to explain what is happening but immediate action is necessary. In the daily workplace, this is the most ineffective leadership style, as there are rarely daily crises and workers enjoy understanding what they are doing, as well as having a say in work-related projects and situations.

The laissez-faire leadership style involves leadership empowering staff with minimal directives. With this style, leaders often provide their staff with the tools needed to complete their work, and as appropriate, let staff resolve issues on their own. Although this method results in the highest job satisfaction rating, the success of the style can be largely dependent on the composition of the team and specific to highly skilled and motivated staff members. The bureaucratic leadership style relies on the positions individuals hold within their organizations and businesses to definitively outline their responsibilities, rules and regulations within the organization.

An advantage of this leadership style is that it is highly efficient and controllable.