Article by Daniel Goleman, Leadership that gets results is one of the best articles in the Harvard Business Review archives. As the noted author of the book, emotional intelligence, Goleman combines his expertise in emotional intelligence with research on leadership styles conducted by the consulting firm Hay/McBer. His research uncovers six distinct leadership styles. Goleman concludes that there is no one best style, but the best leaders use their emotional intelligence to determine which style best suits their specific situation. He describes each of the leadership styles, their advantages and disadvantages, and offers some brief examples of how a leader might apply the style. Every leader or aspiring leader should understand each of these styles and how they can be used:
coercive style: This is a compliance-focused style characterized by the phrase “Do as I tell you.” Although this style works well in extreme circumstances of crisis or change, in most cases it will have a negative impact on the organization as a whole once the crisis passes.
authoritarian style: This style is used by leaders who have a clear vision of the organization and can encourage people by saying, “Come with me.” It is a generally positive style and works very well when an organization that has been flooded in the past can be inspired to move in the direction of a new vision.
affiliative style: This is a style that leaders use to create harmony and teamwork within an organization. It is characterized by the phrase “People come first.” Leaders will use this style to break down silos, build relationships, and get people to communicate and cooperate.
Democratic style: As the name suggests, this style is used to get people to agree and build consensus. It is best described by the phrase “What do you think?” It works well in professional settings where subordinates have extensive experience and access to information so they can collaborate to make informed, consensus-based decisions. However, the democratic style can also be frustrating because it will require many meetings and discussions to reach a consensus.
Style that sets the pace: This style is typically used by leaders who have technical expertise and can lead by example. Hence the phrase, “Do what I do, now” best describes this style. Setting the pace can achieve quick results if the team is experienced and primarily needs to be motivated; however, this style can also be demotivating as the focus is on the leader’s performance and high standards. It deprives some team members of demonstrating their own leadership and expertise, or leaves others feeling overwhelmed by the fast pace and exacting standards.
style training: This style is used by leaders to develop people through coaching. Those who use the coaching style will suggest ideas to subordinates with the catchphrase “try this.” This style works well when people are receptive to coaching, but it can also require patience and a willingness to accept failure from the leader/coach when subordinates are learning.
Goleman’s conclusion that there is no one best style is supported by additional research that correlates six organizational climate factors with each of the styles. Organizational factors include: flexibility, accountability, standards, rewards, clarity, and commitment. Research shows that the coercive and pacing styles have negative correlations on organizational climate, while the other four styles have a positive impact. Therefore, except in unusual circumstances where coercive and pacer styles may be appropriate, leaders typically must use a combination of authoritarian, affiliative, democratic, and coaching styles to achieve success. The best leaders will intuit from their emotional intelligence when to use each of these styles. Whether you are an aspiring leader or a leader who wants to get to the next level of leadership excellence, Goleman’s article is a great primer on how to effectively use different leadership styles.