What kind of leader are you?!!!

When good intentions lead to unintended consequences

We’ve all seen the test that tells you what kind of leader you are! Right?! There are dozens of books and probably hundreds of these quizzes and depending on who you ask, there are four types of leaders, or five, or six, or ten. Some dissect your various strengths and ‘abilities’ by percentages, while others look at leadership as if you can only operate in one mode like “Authoritarian”, “Transformative”, “Transactional”, and so forth.

One of my favorite self-development authors is Brian Tracy. He’s been around the block for a very long time, and perhaps I favor him because I started reading his books many years ago when I was on my path towards leadership.

He sums up five leadership styles that you can use alternatively depending on the team you have, and the situation. Here goes a brief description of each style:

#1. Structured:

1.     Everyone knows their roles and their responsibilities

2.     You accept complete responsibility for your team and who you choose to be on it

3.     You assign them and choose their roles with the expectation that they will deliver excellent work

Pros: Allows you to make quick decisions since there is limited input from others. Allows for transactional activities like rewards and punishment based on performance. Good for a motivated team, who are experts and do not need significant direction.

Cons: Since it is a rigid approach, over reliance on this style can stifle innovation and make a less than seasoned team feel overwhelmed with expectation and not feel sufficient support.

#2. Participative:

1.     You make your team feel that you care about them and put them first

2.     Involves a friendship factor that takes time, caring, and respect similar to treating a family member

3.     Creates a feeling of bonding and belonging because of the closeness of the relationship

Pros: Boosts morale, builds loyalty, creates consensus, and team members feel their opinions are heard and they buy into changes more easily. Good for fresh ideas and perspective, to gain trust, and during stressful times.

Cons: Too much praise and nurturing can muddle the clarity of purpose and direction and without balancing the approach, the team can feel coddled rather than challenged

#3. Servant:

1.     Golden rule: manage your team the way you’d like to be managed

2.     Everyone understands their role, and have all their tools, and you offer training opportunities

3.     Elicits peak performance because you’re investing in the team’s knowledge and growing them

Pros: This style is best for diverse team with a personalized management unique to each person. Because you are taking the time to customize each Associate’s development, you can get the most out of their performance, and leverage their strengths, and you build a strong culture around you.

Cons: Without sufficient balance this style can cause the team to run the show and feel that there is lack of authority, and feel that they have limited direction and vision to guide them.

#4. Freedom:

1.     You give your team the freedom to perform. You assign a task or provide a vision, and stay out of the way but help when needed

2.     Authoritative towards pointing to a goal or vision

3.     Similar to the Participative style, you leave the means of accomplishing the goals and tasks up to each member

4.     Entrepreneurial

Pros: Good for expert employees who don’t need supervision, and for a team going through changes and need a vision to guide them, but still feel empowered to reach it through their own means. You must also have great expertise to use this style successfully.

Cons: However, it is also not going to be successful if your team needs supervision, because left to their own devices, they will struggle to stay on task in achieving the vision. This can potentially cause lower production, feedback, and control.

#5. Transformational (and Brian Tracy’s favorite)

1.     Affects people’s emotions by painting the big, exciting picture of what the future holds

2.     You transform people by tapping into their hopes and aspirations

3.     You motivate them by being motivated yourself

4.     You inspire confidence through high transparency and communication. Uses the future to excite everyone and unite them

5.     Lead by example and being excited and committed to what you say

Pros: Build personal strengths in them and along the way you inspire the team because they see their role as part of a larger mission and purpose that excited them because they know what the final outcome will look like. It fosters the sense of team by seeing that everyone is in this vision together and will do anything to reach it. 

Cons: Some team members need direction and need help filling in the gaps of how to achieve that vision, by needing the steps required of them. Be conscious about fulfilling that need, otherwise you may have team members who are overwhelmed because the vision seems lofty and out of reach or hard to see how it will be achievable.

There you have it folks! What kind of leadership styles do you gravitate more towards and under what circumstances?

I definitely see myself using the Transformational style frequently, as well as the Structured approach as my ying and yang. On the one hand I paint the big picture to inspire my leaders and team members, and on the other hand I ensure that those that need the more nitty-gritty details of how we’ll get there can understand their specific role in making that dream happen.