The Six Leadership Styles

Being a leader entails making decisions as well as influencing other people towards the achievement of goals. Making effective organizations is tough for any leader and requires substantial knowledge and skill in leadership, especially in the current dynamic environment. Goleman, Boyatzis and McKee (2003), cite six leadership styles that leaders can use to create effective organizations. These styles include coercive, authoritative, democratic, affiliative, pacesetting and coaching leadership styles. It is crucial to understand that none of these leadership styles is absolute in all kinds of environments. Each is effective during certain circumstances.

A coercive leader is one who rules through instilling fear in his or her subordinates. This kind of leader is a dictator. As bad as this style may seem, it is highly effective during times of crisis. The other style close to coercion is authoritative that seeks to use power to articulate as well as win people to the mission of the company. In this style, the leader creates a clear path for others to follow. The leader states the goals clearly but allows workers to figure their way to the objective. It is most effective when the company is facing problems or has a new mission to accomplish (Myran, 2003).

Democratic leadership, on the other hand, is the exact opposite of coercion and authoritative. It seeks consensus when making decisions. Opinions from workers are highly welcome and valued. Through consensus, democratic leaders are able to create commitment to goals, objectives and strategies. This works well when dealing with teams of employees that are highly skilled in their work. On the other hand, affiliative leaders focus on establishing respectful relationships within teams. Followers gain trust of their leader because they like the leader. This encourages loyalty and sharing of information, which creates a better climate for the workers. It is most effective when there is a need to create harmony and trust within the organization.

The pacesetter leader is one who sets high standards to the team including him. Although they set high standards, such leaders have problems in trusting workers. This style tends to undermine the morale and motivation of the workers. However, it works well when workers are highly motivated (Myran, 2003). On the other hand, the coach seeks to develop people for the future. This style of leadership depends on identifying talent and developing it. Coaching leaders offer tasks that are challenging and requiring creativity, as well as the use of new skills. It is ideal when the company is anticipating change in the future.

Among the six leadership styles, I aspire to become a coaching leader, one who develops talent. I believe that this leadership style is ideal for a vibrant and changing market. Currently, most of the organizations are relying on innovations to gain competitive advantage. Although other leadership styles are also essential, I think that the current environment requires a coaching leader. The future is highly uncertain and requires new skills all the time (Williams, 2007). Therefore, being a coaching leader ensures that the organization will have the talent to fill the required skills in the future. Currently, an effective organization is one that can survive in a dynamic market through adopting change, remaining relevant and updating on new knowledge and skills. As such, through coaching or encouraging learning and innovations using this style, I believe I will create an effective organization.

 

Resource:

 

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R.E. & McKee, A. (2003). Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence. New York, NY: Harvard Business Press

Myran, G.A. (2003). Leadership Strategies for Community College Executives. New York, N.Y: Amer. Assn. of Community Col

Williams, R.K. (2007). Emotional Intelligence and Leadership Style: An Investigation within a Major Telecommunications Company. Massapequa, N.Y: ProQuest.