What is your leadership style?

Test results: explanations of the different styles of leadership

Authoritarian style

Autocratic. Transactional: the “transaction” is that the organisation rewards (pays) the team, in return for their work & compliance. Example: Napoleon!
Amount of control: High: telling, directing, controlling.
The leader has a lot of power over team members & has the right to reward good performance or punish members if they don't reach the agreed standard. They tell their team what they want done & how without often asking for advice from team members. Team members are given little opportunity to make suggestions, even if these would be in the team's interest. It should normally only be used occasionally. The focus is on short-term tasks so it's more a a method of managing rather a true leadership style
WHEN USED
Works well when you're short on time, & team is well motivated. For some routine & unskilled tasks. In a crisis. With difficult employees.
PROS
Can achieve results quickly In research done on this groups were found to be most productive under autocratic, but if the leader was absent work stopped.
CONS
Team doesn't gain from creativity & knowledge of members, so benefits of teamwork are lost. Staff can't improve their job satisfaction& may resent the way they are treated leading to high absenteeism & staff turnover. Serious limitations but still much used. Sometimes thought of as bullying but this isn't a valid authoritarian style.

Procedural style

Task-orientated, bureaucratic, managerial. Example: Florence Nightingale
Amount of control: high. Telling, directing, controlling.
Work “by the book”: team members follow procedures precisely. Focus only on getting the job done, & can be quite autocratic. Little thought given to the well-being of team members Task Orientated vs relationship orientated: both procedural & transformational leaders are usually needed. "managers" focus on tasks while "leaders" focus on people.
WHEN USED
Tasks requiring great attention to detail. Appropriate for work involving safety risks such as working with machinery or where large sums of money are involved.
PROS
Clearly defines the tasks & the roles required. Puts structures in place: planning, organization & monitoring is usually good.
CONS
The inflexibility & high levels of control exerted can demoralize team members, & reduce the organisation's ability to react to changing circumstances Similar problems to autocratic leadership: difficulties in motivating & retaining team members.

Transformational style

Charismatic leadership is very similar, where the leader depends on his/her charisma & energy to inspire staff. Example: Barack Obama
Amount of control: medium. Selling, reasoning, persuading, delegating.
The leader inspires team with their vision of what should happen. They supply the main goal, but allow members to choose their own way of reaching it. The leader is totally focused on organizing, supporting & developing the team. The leader is always looking for ideas that move towards the organisation’s vision. Transformation leaders are very visible, & spend lot of time communicating. Communication is the basis for achievement by focusing the group on the required outcome. They don’t necessarily lead from the front, as they tend to delegate responsibility.
WHEN USED
This is the most common modern leadership style.
PROS
Motivates the team to be effective & efficient. Tends to lead to good teamwork & creative collaboration. The enthusiasm & energy of a transformational leader is often infectious. Can communicate an inspirational vision of the future
CONS
Procedural & transformational leadership are symbiotic. The procedural leaders (managers) ensure routine work is done well, while the transformational leaders focus on initiatives that add value. The transformational leader focuses on the big picture, but needs to be surrounded by people who take care of the details. Taken to extremes, can lead to failure to achieve the team's goals.

Participative style

Democratic or Consulting. Example: Nelson Mandela
Amount of control: medium. Selling, reasoning, persuading, consulting.
Builds consensus through participation: the leader makes the final decision, but the team to contribute to the decision-making process. The leader asks the team's opinions & uses these to make decisions. The team is kept informed & are allowed to discuss & propose changes to policy. The leader can't know everything: this is why you employ skillful team members. This style is not a sign of weakness, more a sign of strength your team will respect.
WHEN USED
When organisational flexibility & a sense of individual responsibility is needed, Where team working is essential. When quality is more important than speed or productivity.
PROS
Mutual benefit: allows members to feel part of the team & leader to make better decisions. Members feel in control & motivated to work hard. Increases job satisfaction by involving the team in decisions. Helps to develop team members' skills. Most consistent in quality & productivity
CONS
This style may result in indecision, & some team members may be left feeling confused & leaderless. As participation takes time things may happen more slowly than with an autocratic approach, but often the end result is better.

Laissez-faire style

Delegative Servant: A leader who is not formally recognised. Leads just by meeting the needs of the team. Whole team is involved in decisions. Example: Mahatma Gandhi
AMOUNT OF CONTROL: low. Advising, counseling, participating, observing, joining.
Team members make the decisions but leader is still responsible for these. Leader asks for the team's opinions. Team is left to make its own decisions which are then sanctioned by the leader. Leader participates in the discussion as a normal team member & agrees in advance to carry out whatever decision the group makes. Team members are left to get on with their tasks. Effective if the leader monitors what is being achieved & regularly communicates this back to the team.
WHEN USED
When you have confidence & trust in your team. Where team members are experienced & skilled; they can analyse the situation & determine what needs to be done & how to do it. (e.g. team of research scientists).
PROS
Increasingly necessary in a world where leaders achieve power on the basis of their ideals & values. You can't do everything so you have to set priorities & delegate some tasks.
CONS
Often less effective in terms of quality and productivity than other methods. Not good in competitive situations. Often happens naturally in situations where managers are not exerting sufficient control.