Abstract
The paper is focused on the six leadership styles according to the concept of Daniel Goleman. The advantages and disadvantages of each style are discussed. The main idea is that all Leadership styles have some valuable instruments and elements, and it is due to the skill of the manager to use them properly. In order to develop such skills it is necessary to look closely at each leadership style. These six styles are: Visionary, Coaching, Affiliative, Democratic, Pacesetting, and Commanding. Visionary style is mostly a prerogative of CEO or top managers as it is considered with the vision of the company development. Coaching style is focused more on individual cooperation and can be very effective when the employee is eager to raise his competence within the company; however, the leader has to be very careful not to put much pressure on the subordinate. Affiliative style deals mostly with emotional comfort and interpersonal relations within the team. The Affiliative leader should be aware of the disadvantages of this style, which are fostering mediocrity, and lack of emphasis on performance results. Democratic leadership style is rather effective when managing high competence and motivated teams. Though this style facilitates innovation and sharing of company values, it is not suitable when the company enters a crisis. The style that is ideal for crisis management is Commanding Leadership style. However, in the normal running of all the business processes in the company it is not recommended to use Commanding style as it kills initiative and creates tough emotional atmosphere. The knowledge of all the six leadership styles may broaden the view on leadership tools and help the managers to lead their teams effectively.
According to Daniel Goleman, the six major leadership styles can be identified. They are: Visionary, Coaching, Affiliative, Democratic, Pacesetting, and Commanding. (“Leadership styles”, n.d.) The type of organization and the industry where it is operating set certain requirements for the leadership style that tends to be the most effective in this organization. In addition, all managers and team leaders have different individual mixes of personal characteristics, competence and background, which presume they have certain preferences in the leadership styles. However, the modern environment is quite demanding and a good leader has to adapt fast to use the elements of all leadership styles as his tools depending on what is needed in the particular situation. There are no “good” or “bad” leadership styles, each of them can be most and least effective in the certain situation of the organizational life.
Visionary Leadership style is effective when there is a need to foresee the future trends and determine the vector of the company’s development. It is assumed, that the most crucial Visionary leadership is for the company when it is undergoing through changes. No doubt, that it is true, however, the need for effective Visionary leadership evokes not only in the period of change. When a company is operating successfully and everything seems all right, the role of Visionary leader is not to let the company revel in success, but trim the sails to the wind. That means, a leader should feel the market trends, be able to monitor recent tendencies and interpret them correctly. The sustainability of the company is determined by not only the level of success at present, but also, which is more important, by the ability to catch the right trend in advance and manage to timely adapt the company to the future reality. Therefore, the Visionary Leadership is not the style that a company needs from time to time.
Definitely, at the time of changes the price of mistakes in terms of company vision is very high; consequently, the responsibility of the leader is hard to overestimate. If due to mistakes in Visionary leadership a company chooses the wrong way, for example invest in the falling industry, all the business processes, no matter how effectively they are built, would be useless. However, Visionary leadership cannot be the answer to all the questions: it is important to show the way, but what is also important is to define how the company would move to the goals set.
Coaching leadership style is set aside, because it deals more with individual than group interaction. Coaching is about developing an employee within the organizational structure through revealing his internal potential. Coaching leadership is extremely effective if the employee is eager to learn and take on the new tasks. As a rule, this style is used when a leader has to prepare a replacement or train the person entering new position. Coaching happens to be effective if the leader manages to build with the subordinate healthy relations of trust and understanding. The feedback is very important and it cannot always be positive, because practicing learning by doing may sometimes lead to mistakes of the trainee. In such situations, when both the leader and the trainee are open to each other it is much easier to deliver negative feedback, because both parties adequately understand the nature and the purpose of it.
The leader should be very attentive applying Coaching style, because a healthy balance should be kept. If the leader tends to exert control, or the trainee’s starting competencies are lower that it was expected, the Coaching might not be effective as it may switch to Commanding style or Pacesetting. Too much control or negative feedback may demotivate the employee and the primary goal of coaching: learning and increasing competence would not be met. (TTI, 2013)
As regards Affiliative leadership style, it is directed mainly on harmonization and emotional stability of the group. This style establishes close connection between the team members and fosters respect of emotional needs of co-workers. It is effective when the group needs to overcome the consequents of stress, for example, when Call Center operators suffer from dealing with tough clients. Also, those, practicing Affiliative leadership style often can serve as toxic handlers during hard times.
However, the emphasis on emotional comfort in favor of performance results may be jeopardizing the success of the company. The leader can be entrapped when faced with a choice – either to be consistent with the Affiliative leadership style, or to demand outstanding results. It is hard for the leader to suddenly become demanding when he knows like nobody else how the employee would react to negative feedback, because of the personal relationship with each employee. Therefore, the leaders should not be too fond of this leadership style. Some elements of it could be used effectively, because all employees are human beings and sometimes need empathy and understanding. However, if this style is dominating in the leader, there is a risk of sliding to mediocrity. One of the solutions can be to assign different roles applying different leadership styles in the company. For example, the top management can accord, that HR Director will be the predominant bearer of the Affiliative style, and the Team Leaders will use a mix of styles, like, for example, Visionary, Affiliative and Coaching. In such a way the employees will be emotionally comforted by one leader, and motivated to work hard by the others.
The Democratic Leadership style encourages participation and cooperation. It is effective if applied within a group of experts that complement each other. When the leader gives his team the opportunity to innovate, the company has a chance to produce an outstanding product or service. If the Democratic and Visionary styles are applied together, the leader on one hand provides the freedom of creativity for the employees, and on the other hand, watches that this creativity was pointed to the right direction. One of the results of successful application of Democratic Leadership style is when the team shares the company values. It is not surprising because if the team members are free to contribute to the common result and feel that their opinions are respected, they perceive the company success as their own and consider themselves to be a valuable part of the team. This style is suitable for the spheres of business where innovation and creativity are cherished, or for the highly motivated teams, which do not demand close supervision.
The backside of this style is that in the time of crisis the Democratic Leader could be considered weak due to his intention to reach consensus with everyone, and that leads to protracting and temporizing. When delay in decision-making costs the company’s success, there is no place for Democratic style.
The Pacesetting Leadership style is concentrated on high performance standards. The leaders applying this style as primary are usually self -motivated and results-oriented. Such style may probably be the best for the sales teams. The Pacesetting leaders have the energy to motivate and move towards ambitious goals. The only concern is – the top management should not let this style be the dominant in the company, because it has some flaws.
The negative sides of this style are the lack of empathy and high pressure. If used heavily, it may lead to emotional burnout of the team. To balance this highly demanding leadership style it is recommended to complement it with Visionary and Affiliative. (TTI, 2013) Visionary style shows the path where the energy should be directed. Affiliative style smoothes the communication and gives some breaks in the race for achievements in order to allow people to enjoy already gained success the gather strength for the next accomplishment. Backed by the other styles, the Pacesetting can become an invaluable driver of the company’s achievements.
The Commanding style was the most popular in the 20th century business environment. It is best described in the TTI article: “A legacy of the old command-and-control hierarchies that typified 20th century businesses, this military approach is truly appropriate to the battlefield, hospital emergency room or a hostile takeover”. (TTI, 2013) The Commanding Leadership style is suitable in the crisis situation, when the decisions should be made fast. Such situations require a leader, who is competent and eager to take a sole responsibility for the decisions made. This leadership style is the only alternative in a situation of danger, regardless of what is it – a fire alarm or the reputation crisis of a business. In such situations applying Commanding style by a right person can save the company, however, when used solely it is not sufficient, Commanding should be in tight interaction with Visionary style, because the decisions have to be not just fast and pushing, they should correspond to the vision of the company future.
If not for the crisis or some rigid structures such as military, The Commanding style is not recommended as dominant style in organizations. “Because it rarely involves praise and frequently employs criticism, it undercuts morale and job satisfaction. Mr. Goleman argues it is only effective in a crisis, when an urgent turnaround is needed. Even the modern military has come to recognize its limited usefulness”. (“Leadership styles”, n.d.) Usually Commanding leaders lack empathy and flexibility, that demotivates people, cuts initiative and consequently leads to poor performance.
The modern leaders have to be agile and creative. They should not be doomed to just one leadership style, which was probably once defined as most fitting their personality. On the contrary, one’s most favorite style should be considered as only one of the paints in the diverse palette of leadership styles, available for the smart leader. There is no reason to stick to just one style instead of understanding and using all of them as effective tools, each for the right purpose. All the six leadership styles, such as Visionary, Coaching, Affiliative, Democratic, Pacesetting, and Commanding, introduced by Daniel Goleman, have pros and contras and should be used wisely depending on the organizational goals, the industry and the nature of the teams involved. Now days the effective leader is not the one possessing the “best” leadership style, but the one who is able to apply the style which is most beneficial for the company in the particular situation.
References
TTL Success Insights. (2013). Leadership Styles. The Six Primal Leadership Styles: Pros and Cons.
Retrieved from: http://www.ttisuccessinsights.com/system/resources/W1siZiIsIjIwMTQvMDYvMTEvMTVfMDlfMTRfNjc0X0dDXzZfUHJpbWFsX0xlYWRlcnNoaXBfU3R5bGVzLnBkZiJdXQ/GC%206%20Primal%20Leadership%20Styles.pdf
(n.d.). Leadership styles. The Wall Street Journal.
Retrieved from: http://guides.wsj.com/management/developing-a-leadership-style/how-to-develop-a-leadership-style/
