LEADERSHIP STYLE - What style do you practice?

2014-02-21T23:11:24-05:00

In the book “Primal Leadership,” Daniel Goleman, who popularized the notion of “Emotional Intelligence,” describes six different styles of leadership. The most effective leaders can move among these styles, adopting the one that meets the needs of the moment. They can all become part of the leader’s repertoire.

Visionary. This style is most appropriate when an organization needs a new direction. Its goal is to move people towards a new set of shared dreams. “Visionary leaders articulate where a group is going, but not how it will get there – setting people free to innovate, experiment, take calculated risks,” write Mr. Goleman and his coauthors.

Coaching. This one-on-one style focuses on developing individuals, showing them how to improve their performance, and helping to connect their goals to the goals of the organization. Coaching works best, Mr. Goleman writes, “with employees who show initiative and want more professional development.” But it can backfire if it’s perceived as “micromanaging” an employee, and undermines his or her self-confidence.

Affiliative. This style emphasizes the importance of team work, and creates harmony in a group by connecting people to each other. Mr. Goleman argues this approach is particularly valuable “when trying to heighten team harmony, increase morale, improve communication or repair broken trust in an organization.” But he warns against using it alone, since its emphasis on group praise can allow poor performance to go uncorrected. “Employees may perceive,” he writes, “that mediocrity is tolerated.”

Democratic. This style draws on people’s knowledge and skills, and creates a group commitment to the resulting goals. It works best when the direction the organization should take is unclear, and the leader needs to tap the collective wisdom of the group. Mr. Goleman warns that this consensus-building approach can be disastrous in times of crisis, when urgent events demand quick decisions.

Pacesetting. In this style, the leader sets high standards for performance. He or she is “obsessive about doing things better and faster, and asks the same of everyone.” But Mr. Goleman warns this style should be used sparingly, because it can undercut morale and make people feel as if they are failing. “Our data shows that, more often than not, pacesetting poisons the climate,” he writes.

Commanding. This is classic model of “military” style leadership – probably the most often used, but the least often effective. Because it rarely involves praise and frequently employs criticism, it undercuts morale and job satisfaction. Mr. Goleman argues it is only effective in a crisis, when an urgent turnaround is needed. Even the modern military has come to recognize its limited usefulness.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2014 1:05 AM

2014-02-22T01:05:01-05:00

I guess my mix is middle of the road. I tend to start as more of a pace-setting type, to set the standard, show the standard and ensure all is capable of reaching it. I then transition over to coaching. If I see someone struggling at the beginning, I will do a little coaching on the side. I'm assuming its the introversion in me.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2014 3:00 AM

2014-02-22T03:00:04-05:00

I adapt my leadership style to what will be most effective with my men to accomplish the mission. I have used all of the above.

Response by SFC Steven Harvey made Mar 28 at 2014 7:19 AM

2014-03-28T07:19:16-04:00

I definitely switch between most of these, with the variety of troopers we get these days you have to to be an effective leader.

What works for one Soldier won't work for someone else. If I had to pick one where I usually sit on its team building.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 24 at 2014 2:35 PM

2014-10-24T14:35:33-04:00

I can honestly say I do not have one of those as outlined; I tend to adapt to the situation and guide as needed.

The hardest thing I have faced is being in the HQ platoon in an ever-evolving unit. I have seen 7 PSGs in my 2.75 years here. I have kind of been forced to take a more adaptive role as a supervisor.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 29 at 2014 7:24 PM

2014-12-29T19:24:43-05:00

I have always preferred to use Coaching. One always hopes people want to do the right thing, if someone will just tell them what that is. When necessary, I have used Commanding (as any senior NCO has) but even then I keep firmly in mind that rewards should be public, punishment private, and try to emphasize the rewards.

Response by SSG Kevin McCulley made Jan 8 at 2015 11:39 PM

2015-01-08T23:39:21-05:00

I tend to pull the levers based on the soldiers I have. Some soldiers you can be, 'He gents, can yall run down to the motor pool for me and verify with the mechanics that all the strykers have had their cherry juice flushed then go dip to chow," and I know that if there is an anomaly they will send someone back to tell me and furthermore they will even come back at 1300 without saying. Then there are those I have to friggin knife hand.

I love building a new Private into auto-Joe. You pull the string, aim and off they go like a hurricane. It is also nice to see what it does to their confidence. For me it is a rewarding part of being a leader. The important part to that is training them to have enough accessory knowledge of the task to understand the 'why' of it and intent so they know when a deviation is big enough to require them to grab the NCO.. not because they can't fix it themselves but because leadership needs to be aware.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 16 at 2015 3:28 PM

2015-10-16T15:28:19-04:00

I tend to switch, most often between visionary, coaching and pacesetting, situation and audience dependent.

Response by SFC Melvin Brandenburg made Jul 17 at 2019 9:33 PM

2019-07-17T21:33:18-04:00

My style has evolved over time as I gained maturity and confidence. Currently I code switch between transactional and transformational leadership depending upon the circumstances.