Tag Archives: Leadership Style

Leadership

Balancing Your Leadership Style

This summer we began work with a Chief Service Officer (CSO) in a customer service organization with call centers around the globe. His prime objective for the coming year was the recruitment and retention of employees with a ‘customer-focused’ mindset. He knew the value of a diverse workforce would flow over into satisfying worldwide customer demands, impact the standardization of the delivery process of a diverse vendor base; and enhance or break their global image as well. He expressed that several of the state-side centers had begun to experience employee conflict attributed to a mix of the generational workforce management styles. He stated that the company had its own distinctive personality; but, with the current issues he was certain leadership styles were unbalanced.

We were anxious to help him discover if the belief structure of the mix of generational core values was influencing leadership styles. Were they too autocratic, too transactional focused, overly bureaucratic, or overly participatory, never able to reach a final decision? Do the leaders at each center need a mix of leadership styles, a more evenhanded methodology? We are still working with this organization, but let’s explore a few of the common leadership styles practiced today. There are a few more leadership styles than we list here, but considered these were more relevant to our CSO’s situation.

o Autocratic leadership- leader exerts high levels of power over the employees or teams. Team members are given few opportunities for making alternate proposals, even if these would best serve the organization’s processes.
o Bureaucratic leadership- leader works “by the book”, ensuring that their staff follow procedures exactly, very appropriate for work involving serious safety risks such as, working with machinery, with toxic spills or at extremely contagious health conditions.
o Democratic leadership-participative leadership- this leader makes the final decision. They invite others to contribute to the decision-making process, increasing job satisfaction by involvement.
o Situational leadership-a leader that can instinctively switch between styles according to the staff and the corresponding work they are dealing with at the current moment, ensuring the right levels of product quality, environmental security; and employee motivation.
o Transactional leadership- leader is in the agreement with the team members to obey their leader totally when they take a job on. The “transaction” is that the organization pays the team members in exchange for their expertise and conformity.
o Transformational leadership- leader is a sincere principal who inspires the team members with a shared vision of the future. Transformational leaders are highly noticeable and are seen truly listening & engaging their staff.

As technology advances in all industries, this challenges the leadership style of command-and-control. The leadership methodology of the past century is inefficient in the motivation & retention of people who are talented in the hi-tech fields, some even holding patents in the creation of the newer wireless tools.

The leadership of this century is a combination of earnest employee relationships and internal meaningful achievement. Great leaders have learned how to assimilate and execute many types of leadership. A balanced leadership style includes the creation of a positive work culture, constructing opportunities where the team’s expertise is visible internally & externally, maintaining consistent communication between team members and other departments, sustains a certainty in the company’s direction; and, acknowledges the achievements of individual members.

Remember that organizational ‘systems’ progress toward change cautiously. As you may want to integrate a leadership change, describe your perspective in positive terms using the benefits to the company’s economic result and resolve the human apprehension of a change in your style. Last, define how your changes can be more strategically activated with their collaboration while developing new enthusiasm, corporate confidence, and vitality.

If you think your leadership style could use some integration of other styles, ask yourself:

o What style of leadership best describes you? Are you happy with that style or would you benefit from an integration of a few styles?
o What routine practices are fading out in your industry and how will that change your leadership style for the future of your business?
o What type of leadership relationships will your clients value in coming years?
o What technological changes will have a positive or negative effect on your business? What new concerns and problems will be generated by these technologies and may propel you to a new style of leadership?
o What would the people you’ve worked with do differently because they worked with you in the new leadership style?
o What elements of leadership will you use to purge out old language, delete old behavior patterns, or discard anything not useful to meet your collective goals?
o How will you measure the success of discarding what is not needed for the future goals?
o Do you, as a leader, understand the specific fears of your employees? What are they concerned about? How strongly do they feel about it? Do they perceive your stated strategies as beneficial or not?
o As the leader you aspire to be, how do you inspire and display enthusiasm for management of complex issues regarding performance without being autocratic?
o How will you nurture and encourage initiative and boldness, both verbally and visually?
o How will you sustain the balance of work and personal life for yourself as a great leader?

“Management is efficiency in climbing the ladder of success; leadership determines whether the ladder is leaning against the right wall.” Stephen Covey

Bradley Morgan, MS,PCC

Bradley Morgan is a corporate and ontological coach who served as a hi-tech executive for over 17 years, in companies such as, IBM, Bay Networks, Premysis, and Brocade Communications. Bradley’s credentials include a BS from Georgia Tech, a MS from UCLA, a certificate in gerontology from the University of Maryland; and a Professional Coaching Certification (PCC) through the Newfield Network program. In the telecommunications industry, she developed both domestic and international systems engineering teams for technical expertise and executive level leadership. Bradley is a member of the International Coaching Federation (ICF), American Management Associates (AMA), the American Society on Aging (ASA); and the American Parkinson’s Disease Association (APDA). Please visit the Web site, [http://www.walksbesidecoaching.com].

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Bradley_Ann_Morgan/174791

 

Leadership

What Is Your Leadership Style?

Leadership takes many forms, but there are three styles of leadership that are the most prevalent. Good leaders do not take one form and stick to it – they look for the right situations for each style. However, good leaders do know what their dominant style is and capitalize on the benefits of that style. Let’s look at the three leadership styles, and the potential pitfalls of each. Think about which style is yours – and how you can modify it in various situations.

Autocratic leadership is also referred to as authoritarian leadership. In this style, the leader normally outlines what he or she wants and how this is to be achieved. In many ways, autocratic leadership isn’t leadership at all but a form of disciplinarian management. Are there situations where this style is effective? First of all, look at the organization. If the organization is well motivated and mature, an autocratic situation may be effective. Let’s say you have most of the information you need but the time to achieve a certain goal is very short. In a well-motivated organization, you can probably give an autocratic order and not be concerned about how it will be taken – as long as this does not become your dominant style. If you are a consistent autocratic leader, you’re probably not getting a good response from your organization. One of the pitfalls of autocratic leadership is the possibility of falling into an abusive or demeaning pattern – this is why you should only use an autocratic stance in rare situations and certainly not regularly. If you identify with a dominant autocratic style, consider transitioning into a more participative style of leadership.

Participative or democratic leadership is a style in which the leader still outlines a goal but allows some input from the organization as far as how the goal will be achieved. But a democratic leader still makes it necessary to obtain approval for decisions by any member of the team. In situations where information is spread out between the leader and the team members, a democratic style may work. This style can also be an appropriate way for an autocratic leader to transition out of that style – without giving total control to the team. This leadership style is very empowering to teams that have not felt empowered before. It’s also a great way to test the knowledge and ability of a team before transitioning into a much less controlling leadership style. Because this leadership style is basically one step up from autocracy, it may be easy for a leader to fall back into an authoritarian stance. If the team fails or falls short, democratic leadership allows them to re-formulate plans and activities – without telling them exactly what to do.

The third, and most empowering form of leadership is the laissez-faire or delegative style. The delegative leader sets an overall priority, goal, or instruction, but then stands out of the way to let things happen. Using this style, a leader takes responsibility for all decisions that are made – but leaves the decision making to the team. This also means that team members are expected to analyze, evaluate, and change issues and problems as they move along. This style of leadership is definitely appropriate with mature or more senior teams – the ones who have had the time to prove themselves to the leader and have the confidence to handle all issues. One of the biggest pitfalls of this type of leadership involves failure. If something goes wrong, this is not the place for a leader to blame the team – and this is more than likely a natural reaction for a laissez-faire leader.

Now that we’ve seen the three dominant leadership styles, which one are you? Remember that the mark of a good leader is the ability to use various styles depending on the situation – a bad leader sticks with the same style at all times. So what are some of the situations where each style is appropriate? If you have a new team, you may want to use the autocratic style as a means of assessing the group and its members. But what if you are placed in a position where most of the teams know their tasks well and would not react well to an autocratic stance? Use a participative style in this situation – allow the teams to have input in the decision making process. Remember that you can empower yourself as a leader as well as a team using this style. Finally, what if your team members know more about the situation than you do? Take a delegative approach and let the teams make their own decisions, all the while reminding them that you will be responsible for the outcomes.

When you’re deciding what leadership style to take, there are a few things to consider. First of all, how much time do you have? If you’re very limited in time, participative or autocratic may be the best style. Of course, this also depends on the team and its makeup – if you have an experienced team and limited time, there is no need to use an autocratic stance. Simply explain and emphasize that time is limited. You should also take into account who has the information related to the project or task at hand – if information is divided amongst you, the leader, and the team, you may want to take a participative stance. If your team has all of the information, take a delegative stance – let them use their information to come up with the best solutions. Also consider the type of task you’re looking at – how complicated is it? Compare this with the skill of the team and you should be able to choose an appropriate leadership style.

If your dominant style is more autocratic, you may want to examine what’s keeping you from moving into a participative stance. If you are one of the other two types, you’re probably getting a good response from your teams. Just remember to alter your leadership style based on situations – and don’t stick to one style regardless. When you begin to move around the different styles, you’ll find that your teams will respond.

Copyright 2008 Bryant Nielson. All Rights Reserved.

Bryant Nielson – Managing Director and National Sales Trainer – assists executives, business owners, and top performing sales executives in taking the leap from the ordinary to extraordinary. Bryant is a trainer, business & leadership coach, and strategic planner for sales organizations. Bryant’s 27 year business career has been based on his results-oriented style of empowering.

Subscribe to his blog – and learn the legendary secrets of top business training programs at:

[http://www.BreathtakingLeadership.com] & [http://www.BryantNielson.com]

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Bryant_Nielson/142446