Leadership Skills

Directing Leaders - define the roles and tasks of the ‘follower’, and supervise them closely. Decisions are made by the leader and announced, so communication is largely one-way. Less autonomous for the follower to make decisions and more dependent on the leader to provide directions.

Coaching Leaders - define roles and tasks, but seeks ideas and suggestions from the follower. Decisions remain the leader’s prerogative, but communication is much more two-way. Follower has some leeway to make some decisions and answerable to mistakes made.

Supporting Leaders  - pass day-to-day decisions, such as task allocation and processes, to the follower. The leader facilitates and takes part in decisions, but control is with the follower.  Follower may feel more confident in making decisions with the support from the leader.

Delegating Leaders - are still involved in decisions and problem-solving, but control is with the follower. The follower decides when and how the leader will be involved.  Follower gets more freedom in making and taking decisions and actions.

Another approach categorizes styles according to emotional intelligence competencies, some of which work better than others in specific situations. These styles have each their pros and cons :

Coercive: The “Do what I tell you to do” style demands compliance by the follower. It is especially useful in turnaround situations, in a crisis, and when you faced with difficult employees where you need to set an authoritative tone and get instruction followed. However, using this style inhibits your organization’s flexibility and can dampen staff morale and motivation. There may be no improvement in work environment and no new ideas being created.

Authoritative: This style mobilizes people toward a vision. Specifically, it provides an overarching goal, but gives others the freedom to choose their own way of reaching it. This approach is most effective when a business is at sea and needs direction, or during an economic or business downturn. This style is less successful when the leader is working with a team of experts who may have more experience—and may disagree with his approach.

Affiliative: This “people-first” style creates emotional bonds and team harmony. It is best used when team coherence is important or in times of low staff morale. But this approach’s focus on praise may permit poor performance among employees to continue unchecked, and employees may lack a sense of overall direction. The downside of this style, however, is that it may result in indecision, and some staff may be confused and leaderless as the directions set could be unclear.

Democratic: This style builds consensus through participation. It is most appropriate when organizational flexibility and a sense of individual responsibility is needed. The downside of this style, however, is that it may result in indecision, and some people may be left feeling confused and leaderless.

Coaching: This style focuses on personal development. Coaching leaders help people identify their strengths and weaknesses, and tie them to their career aspirations. While this style is highly successful with people who wish to improve professionally, it is largely unsuccessful with those who are resistant to learning or changing their ways.

While some styles may be more comfortable for you to adopt than others, the more you stretch yourself to learn a range of styles, the more effective you will be as a leader.