There have been a lot of studies about the behavior of managers as leaders in variety of settings. It is concluded that managers show various patterned behaviors which could be described commonly by one or more of herewith 6 fundamental of managerial styles. It is widely known that company managers occasionally assume about leadership style in which is a function of their personality rather than a strategic option. It results them to choose a single style only that fits their temperamental emotion by the time instead they suppose to choose a style that best reference on the demands of a certain situation. Well, this of course is a lot easier to say than to do.
Deeper studies go on to explore that the most successful leaders possess natural strengths of emotional intelligence proficiencies consisting of self-consciousness, social skill, motivation, empathy and self-regulation. There are furthermore six fundamental styles of leadership with each functioning to the key components of emotional intelligence in distinct combinations. In the end, the best leaders are them who are familiar enough with not just one style of leadership but they are also capable of making use of several and having the flexibility to switch between styles as the circumstances demand.
We often wonder why leadership style is important in daily implementation. It is surely because the style directly impacts the organizational atmosphere and climate which in turn taking account for bigger percentages of financial and managerial performances. That’s large enough to warrant getting familiar with the styles identified for leadership.
The styles are as follow::
The Coercive Style
It is the most common style with the technique that numerous people rely on because it seems pretty easy. However, coercive leadership style often inhibits the organization’s flexibility and diminishes employees’ motivation.
The Authoritative Style
The term actually has negative connotations but it is a kind of effective style in many situations. This authoritative leader applies the approach of stating the overall target by giving people the freedom to choose their own means of achieving it. This style usually works well when a business is at a drifted state.
The Affiliative Style
An affiliative style of leading and managing is not quite common and unfortunately we could only see the negatives that such a technique can gain. This style is believed to be particularly useful for increasing morale or founding team harmony. The negative exclusively focuses on praise can allow poor performance to go mistakenly.
The Democratic Style
According to the study, this style impacts on organizational climate but not as high as what we could imagine. Democratic style leaders build organizational responsibility and flexibility and assist generate fresh ideas. The downside of this style is that company could be led to endless discussions and confused employees who feel leaderless.
The Pacesetting Style
This sort of style sounds quite enchanting since the leader of this style exemplifies his people himself by having a very positive impact on his people who are highly competent and self-motivated and sets high-leveled performance standards. However, there is problem that many employees are just at work when they need to pay their rent and tend to feel overwhelmed.
The Coaching Style
This style apparently focuses more on self development than on instantaneous work-related duties. It works quite well when employees already gain their self awareness of their own weaknesses and willing to get improvement.
I can add one more classification of leadership styles (learn about it while preparing to my exams:)).
1. Autocratic leadership
2. Bureaucratic leadership
3. Charismatic leadership
4. Democratic leadership
5. Laissez-faire leadership
6. People-oriented leadership
7. Servant leadership
8. Task-Oriented leadership
9. Transactional leadership
10. Transformational leadership