Introduction
Leaders are considered the pivot that the success of a company tilts on. The leadership of a company determines a lot of things, but the most important is productivity. For any organization to be considered successful, it is important that the leadership also be top notch. Different people have different leadership styles that have different characteristics.
Different kinds of leadership styles
The different leadership styles include the high direction style. This kind is where one takes action without consulting others. This kind of leadership is most appropriate where the leader has to assign specific tasks to various team members in a bid to ensure that they carry out the tasks. Leaders who use this kind are good supervisors who ensure that the members do what is required of them at the designated time. The aristocratic leadership falls under this category.
This kind of leadership has a few advantages and disadvantages. Some of the advantages include timely completion of tasks, where supervision plays an important part. Secondly, few mishaps on who takes what role because the leader delegates the work as he sees fit. This leadership however is not fit in situations where there is tension among team members. It is autocratic in nature and can sometimes leave out ideas that could see the problem fixed more easily.
Another leadership style is the high support and high direction style. This type involves the incorporation of ideas from members into the decisions that the top management develop. Leaders who use this kind of style have good interaction with members of their teams and are able to solicit for ideas easily on problems they experience in their day to day experiences in the team. Leaders who use this are also known to have good judgment on the course of action to take to counter a problem they met. The democratic kind of leadership falls under this category (Dyck & Neubert, 2010).
This leadership style is advantageous where the team is developing a new idea which it had not considered before. It also is advantageous as it creates harmony and co-existence among members. It also ensures that the best ideas are brought to the table and weighed accordingly. However it is disadvantageous because it is time consuming because of lengthy discussions. Also, in cases where there are several fitting ideas, the developers of those not picked may feel as if their ideas have been rejected and may not fully participate.
The third kind of leadership style is the high support style. In this kind of leadership, leaders are known to assist the team members in problem solving. They do not provide the means to solving a problem but merely act as a guide by asking a lot of questions. This kind of interaction guides members of the team into formulating the best course of action. This kind of leadership is best suited for medium risk assignments.
The human relations leaders fall in this category. It is advantageous as it gives the team members a chance to develop their problem-solving skills. It also gives the team members a sense of responsibility. It is however disadvantageous because it can lead to watering down the role of the leader’s authoritative role. It also could lead to the wrong decision being made (Dyck & Neubert, 2010).
The fourth and final style is the low support, low direction style. Leaders who use this assign tasks to the employees and are not involved in problem solving at all. It is also important to note that this style of leadership promotes the idea that the leader does not interfere with the decision making of the team members. They rarely ask for follow up for the actions and problems the members encounter. This kind of leadership is most suited for low risk tasks.
The laissez faire leader falls in this category. It has almost the same advantages as high support style plus it delegates duties fully to the members. It also eases the work of the leader to deal with only the most crucial tasks. However it is disadvantageous as the leader is out of touch with the members who only report to alert of the completion of the said task. It also may lead to serious losses if the leader does not contribute in making crucial decisions.
However we are going to concentrate on one specific leadership style: the developer.
Developer (The high support style)
As seen from earlier, the high support style is where the leader is not fully involved and acts merely as a guide for the team members. The leader who takes this role is tasked with developing a new brand unique from the present tasks at hand. This means that he has to involve experts in the said field because he may lack the necessary skills to fully implement plans for the task (Chevalier, 2007).
Any leader who decides to use this style of leadership has to be ready to carry out the following tasks: note and improve key points from meetings, pay attention to nonverbal cue of all members, listen to and contribute to responses and finally be able to make summaries.
Comparison of Developer (The high support style) with problem solver (high support, high direction and director (high direction) types
Developer vs. Problem solver
In comparison to problem solver who falls under the high support, high direction style of leadership, this style is of lower rank if you consider the benefits and risks that each has to offer. This kind of leadership is mostly seen in the democratic kind of leadership. A problem solver is one who is able to incorporate views of others and incorporate them into the final solution. This leads to high morale of the workers who are able to feel that their views are important in the organization. Also, different solutions to a problem are discussed and the best is offered to be considered by the leader. The leader who adopts this style is able to monitor the implementation of the solution to the end. Since this leadership style (the developer) has little emphasis on performance and high emphasis on people, the focus on the target of the organization may shift thus the targets are not met. The problem solver however, has an advantage over it; it focuses on both people and performance (Warrick, 1981).
However, it also has disadvantages. One includes lengthy discussions into coming up with one solution hence it becomes over-involved. Secondly, if the ideas of a certain individual are rejected, he or she may feel unwanted and may lead to low performance levels.
Developer vs. Director
When we compare the developer type of leadership to the director type of leadership (high direction), we find that the director type is more of an aristocratic type of leadership where the leader usually has the final say without consulting others. This kind of leadership is in itself advantageous because tasks are assigned and completed on time. Also, supervision of tasks is ensured hence this is very successful especially in tasks that are hypersensitive to the organization’s objectives.
However, the disadvantages outweigh the advantages. One, the leader disregards the opinions of the team players. Second there is low staff morale because of the stringent rules that are enforced by the leader. Third, communication is hindered since it is mostly one way traffic. This strains relations between the leader and the team members. In many cases, the leader may put the blame on someone else even though it is his fault. This is dangerous since it makes the person being blamed feel like the scapegoat and may lead to the member quitting. Overall, even though it aims to increase production, it tends to be counterproductive where the leader becomes dictatorial (Desmond & IEEE Communications Society, 2009).
Incorporation of the above two into the developer style
After discussing the two above, one thing is clear; the developer is not perfect but can be made perfect by incorporating some of the principles the above two are based on. Being a leader means that you guide your team through all types of situations in order to attain perfect performance.
Being a developer, it is important to understand these two leadership styles because they form part of the most basic functions of a leader. When developing any idea, there will be times when problems will arise and a good leader will be shown by how he tackles them. A good leader should also be able to delegate tasks that arise in the course of developing ideas. When leaders are able to incorporate these two aspects of the different leadership styles, they form a formidable force against any hindrances that may arise (Chevalier, 2007).
However, it is important to note that over-reliance on one type and suppressing any other may lead to serious problems in the team. That is why the leaders involved should be wary of changing environment in the team and adopt each type accordingly.
Pitfalls a Problem Solver and a Director could encounter due to the differences in leadership styles
Any leader expects to run into problems because they are not perfect. It is the reason that sometimes leaders face challenges when they try to implement the policies of an organization. One of the challenges a problem solver faces is having a semi-developed team. The success of this kind of leadership style depends a lot on the experience of the team members. If the team has little or no experience of a certain subject, it will be quite hard for the leader to successfully use this leadership style. Secondly, the time taken for consultation about a problem is lengthy. Every member of the team feels that they have something to contribute and it ends up taking up too much of the time to come up with a solution (Warrick, 1981).
The director kind of leadership probably faces the most challenges of all four. One of the most common problems is low productivity. Many of the team members may feel looked down upon when they are not included in decision making. This leads to hostility between the leaders and team members. Communication which is limited to a downward movement is the most important for any organization to prosper. If the leadership is not keen on improving communication between the leaders and the actual implementers of the tasks, then there will be a total failure in achieving the set target. As a result, the team will experience a huge number of turnovers as people seek to work in environments they feel comfortable in (Desmond & IEEE Communications Society, 2009).
These pitfalls are some of the areas that leaders should be wary of in any organization because the way they handle them will determine how the organization performs.
Three ways to overcome these pitfalls
Secondly, when reprimanding them, it is imperative to ensure that it is done in a humane way; not one that shows disrespect and hostility. If the team members have made a mistake, try using words that show your disappointment but are still not harsh as that would kill their morale.
The third and final way to ensure that these pitfalls are avoided is to have regular meetings, preferably weekly for urgent tasks and bi-weekly or monthly meetings where all leaders meet with the members of their teams. This will ensure that any problems, views and opinions affecting the team members are addressed and tackled before they escalate to levels that they become unmanageable. Potential synergies that may exist between problem solver and director types of leaderships and how you can capitalize on them to increase productivity
When the above styles are used separately, they each have limited success, but when they are combined, they have a greater impact on the organization or team. This is because when we adopt the positive aspects of each side, then we get better results as compared to before.
For both problem solvers and directors, they need to have authority and that authority is not undermined. Any leader should be respectable and should command respect from subordinates, not in a dictatorial way but a more open way. He should be able to give instructions which should be followed (Cranwell-Ward, Bacon, & Mackie, 2002).
Both are decision makers so it is imperative that they have good decision making skills in which they are able to deliver them in an adequate time span. They should also ensure that the ideas brought forward are all scrutinized and the best chosen for the specific task.
In doing so, productivity of the group will be increased, the leadership qualities such as charismatic and time are improved and the overall performance of the company is improved. Where an organization adopts the positive sides of each of the different types of leadership, the leaders developed are developed to be quite productive and the teams they lead are always productive. It is therefore important even as one identifies their kind of leadership style that they also adopt other forms in order to develop as all round leaders.
References
Warrick, D. D. (December 01, 1981). Leadership Styles and Their Consequences. Journal of Experiential Learning and Simulation, 3, 155-72.
Dyck, B., & Neubert, M. J. (2010). Management: Current Practices and New Directions. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Chevalier, R. (2007). A Manager's Guide to Improving Workplace Performance. New York: AMACOM, American Management Association.
Cranwell-Ward, J., Bacon, A., & Mackie, R. (2002). Inspiring Leadership: Staying Afloat In Turbulent Times. London [u.a.: Thomson.
Desmond, C., & IEEE Communications Society. (2009). Comsoc: Pocket Guide To Managing Telecommunications Projects. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
