6 Types of Management Styles: Specificity of Differences

The current business world is full of stereotypes per to which supervision style could be called the most effective for a company. In addition to personal preferences, it is also necessary to take into account objective reality. The latter consists in fact that laborers need to reach certain outcomes, so the methods of achievement may vary depending on the staff’s skills and other factors. To be a good leader or manager you have to apply various administrative types, using as much as possible a whole arsenal of means of motivation and order.

When to Use Management Styles: Timeless of Changes

If one leader tries to influence by persuasion, the other one prefers to act according to the formula “must” or “have”. Some chiefs tend to keep their wage-earners “at a distance”, to solve solely even the smallest questions. A lot of bosses are supporters of so-called “open doors” when it is not difficult to meet for any reason. But people do not go to such a manager for trifling matters, being accustomed to some order of distribution of powers and responsibilities.

The style forms subconsciously and gradually, until a certain set of communication channels with dependent persons and the impact on them is composed. Its character corresponds to the supervisor personality, allowing him or her to find a successful solution regarding managing.

But it does not mean that an administrative method is necessarily shaped spontaneously. Each bellwether has an ability to reach it purposefully. Success of his or her selection is determined by the extent to which a chief takes into account the company's traditions, willingness, and capacity of the staff to implement decisions.

You ought to consider own opportunities, conditioned by an education, work experience, or mental qualities. When forming a management type, a hierarchy, specify of activity and specific situations also affect. Experts identify the next categories of leadership styles.

Directive Leadership Style

Its main goal consists in the immediate subordination of laborers. A lot of businessmen are guided by the principle “do as I said”, believing that they are more competent than others. Command type provides for absolute control over the subordinates. Dominant motivating factors are strict discipline and threat of penalties.

Aggressively imposing own decisions, a boss destroys everything new. People lose a sense of responsibility. Such approach also adversely affects an incentive system. For most professionals, money is not the only excitant element; no less essential is satisfaction or pride in well-done work. Directive leadership style infringes upon the indicated feelings.

It justifies itself during crisis situations or in the event of huge risks. But in stable conditions, it is far inefficient. There is a low level of development of personnel disinterested in independent training. High-level specialists, as a rule, are dismissed from their activity, dissatisfied with the constant control. This is perceived as a manifestation of distrust.

An akin method needs to be applied very carefully and only in exceptional cases, for instance, height of large-scale reorganization. Furthermore, coercion is sometimes used in relation to difficult individuals, when there is no use for different ways.

Coaching Style

This method, first of all, involves mentoring. It focuses on the long-term professional development of laborers and frequently called a humanistic approach. The leader inspires own team and helps it improving, thereby increasing the quality of work. A motivation for staff is the opportunity for personal growth.

The chief does not skimp on consultation and feedback, gives people significant assignments, even if he or she understands that they won’t be fulfilled quickly. In other words, mentor leaders are prepared to put up with immediate difficulties and setbacks for the sake of success. Thanks to the dialogue, people always know what is expected of them and how their work is related to a corporate strategy.

They have a stronger sense of responsibility as loyalty to the overall objectives since a boss shows to own laborers that he or she believes in them and is ready to help. Quite often workers do their best to meet his/her expectations. One of the biggest mistakes consists in when bellwethers are focusing on the employees’ weak sides. If you want to reach better outcomes, you need to focus on your team’s strengths. But coaching style does not justify itself if the command is not an authority within company because of a low level of competency.

Pacesetting Style

The akin method is oriented to the fulfillment of the accepted assignments at the highest possible level. The head, as well as the company’s staff, work with absolute dedication. From dependent persons expect following the chief’s figure. Motivation is the recognition of quality work results. Such a leader sets the pace for his/her team.

As a rule, bellwether practically does not give detailed instructions, expecting from the personnel appropriate awareness. Therefore, people, instead of doing job the best, are trying to predict the boss’s wishes and spend all their energy on it. In addition, colleagues feel distrust, so not want to work independently.

Pacesetting style frequently leads to congested staff and burnout. Such leaders get results in the short term, inflicting great damage on the corporative spirit. It is suitable for the supervision of specialized experts, but absolutely ineffective if it is necessary to involve a third party.

Democratic (Participative) Style

Such approach is best used when you as a boss are not 100% sure in which direction to move and want to use “wisdom of the crowd” for selecting a right vector. It aims to maximize the laborers’ involvement through creating an atmosphere of mutual understanding within a team. The main slogan of this category is “everyone contributes to a common cause”.

Workers on an equal partake in making important strategic solutions and share all received outcomes. A participative style is fruitful if the firm’s personnel are sufficiently competent in their field. True, it also has shortcomings like endless meetings. Participants repeatedly discuss the same ideas, but they do not come to a common opinion. Democratic type is not suitable for organizations whose employees are not sufficiently qualified or informed. Besides, such tool is absolutely inapplicable during the crisis.

Affiliative Style

Its main aim is the formation of harmonious relations between workers and firm management. As a priority, people act. A chief of such type tries to avoid conflicts and maintain a good working mood for all staff. If there are differences in the team and someone does not like his/her colleagues, this leadership style could help to correct the situation.

Akin director acts like a wise head of own family, who, as children grow up, changes the rules of life of the whole house. He or she does not impose strict instructions for achieving the objectives but gives them the right to decide how to work by themselves.

Affiliate style is good in all aspects. It could be combined with other supervision methods. It is suitable for performing routine assignments, encouraging the quality of wage-earners. True, it is ineffective during the crises. Although such way has many merits, it should not be used in a “pure form”. Its weak point is the emphasis on encouragement. To the leader from the height of own position, shortcomings are often not visible. If this happens time after time, the employees begin to consider mediocre results as quite acceptable.

Authoritative (Visionary) Style

The mentioned type focuses on the development of a long-term firm’s strategy by creating comfortable conditions for its laborers. It is usually described as “strict, but fair”. A supervisor shares with wage-earners a clear vision of further prospects and motivates them through praise or persuasion. Such a chief pushes people to a common dream. The bottom line is not how to get to the goal, but in getting the team to understand where you want to go.

Each member of the collective knows what kind of work is considered as great and for which he or she could receive a reward. Also, this leadership positively influences on flexibility. A bellwether defines an ultimate objective and gives some freedom in choosing the means to achieve it. The manager in this style is able to develop a new course and lead your team.

The head creates a bright motivating visualization of the future, describes it in simple words. He or she intervenes from time to time, if necessary, to return to the initially announced strategy, but no more. In fact, a leader allows laborers to look for new ways to solve problems and experiment. Failures are permissible and accepted. Accordingly, personnel may feel themselves comfortable trying innovative approaches. A visionary style is fruitful in a situation that requires clear guidelines and standards. But it justifies itself only if a manager enjoys the confidence of his/her colleagues.

Thus, talented leaders easily switch from one management style to another. It is very important that they feel the reaction of others and reach the best results flexibly, intuitively adapting to circumstances. It is worth remembering that leadership way is not a once-and-for-all set of features of a particular bellwether. It could change with the growth of professional skills, experience, or the current market conditions.

×
Sarah
Sarah online
CAN’T FIND YOUR TOPIC?
Let us write it for you!
START NOW