\u201cNew research suggests that the most effective executives use a collection of distinct leadership styles \u2013each in the right measures, at just the right time. Such flexibility is tough to put into action, but it pays off in performance. And better yet, it can be learned.\u201d\u00a0 (Daniel Goleman)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Many managers mistakenly assume that leadership style is a function of personality rather than strategic choice. Instead of choosing the one style that suits their temperament, they should ask which style best addresses the demands of a particular situation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Research has shown that the most successful leaders have strengths in some key emotional intelligence competencies. For example, Daniel Goleman, a recognized researcher and author in the field of emotional intelligence, found that the following emotional intelligence competencies are common among successful leaders: Self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy and social skills<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to Goleman\u2019s view, there are six basic styles of leadership; each makes use of the key components of emotional intelligence in different combinations. In other words, the best leaders do not know just one style of leadership, but they are skilled at several, and have the flexibility to switch between styles as the circumstances dictate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Managers often fail to appreciate how profoundly the organizational climate can influence financial results. It can account for nearly a third of financial performance. Organizational climate, in turns, is influenced by leadership style \u2013by the way that managers motivate direct reports, gather and use information, make decisions, make change initiatives, and handle crises. Daniel Goleman describes six basic leadership styles. Each of them derives from different emotional intelligence competencies, works best in particular situations, and affects the organizational climate in different ways.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1. The Coercive Style. This \u201cdo what I say\u201d approach can be very effective in a turnaround situation, a natural disaster, or when working with a problematic employee. But in most situations, coercive leadership inhibits the organization\u2019s flexibility and dampens employees\u2019 motivation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2.The Authoritative Leadership. An Authoritative leader takes a \u201ccome with me\u201d approach; she states the overall goal but gives people the freedom to choose their own means of achieving it. This style works especially well when a business is adrift. It is less effective when the leader is working with a team of experts who are more experienced than he\/she is.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
3.The Affiliative Style. The hallmark of the affiliative leader is a \u201cpeople come first\u201d attitude. This style is particularly for building team harmony or increasing morale. But its exclusive focus on praise can allow poor performance to go uncorrected. Also, affiliative leaders rarely offer advice, which often leaves employees in a quandary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
4.The Democratic Style.\u00a0 This style\u2019s impact on organizational climate is not as high as you can imagine. By giving workers a voice in decisions, democratic leader build organizational flexibility and responsibility and help generate fresh ideas. But sometimes the price is endless meetings and confused employees who feel leaderless.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
5.The Pacesetting Style. A leader who sets high performance standards and exemplifies them himself has a very positive impact on employees who are self-motivated and highly competent. But others employees tend to feel overwhelmed by such a leader\u2019s demands for excellence \u2013and to resent his\/her tendency to take over a situation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
6.The Coaching Style. This style focuses more on personal development than on immediate work-related tasks. It works well when employees are already aware of their weaknesses and want to improve, but not when they are resistant to changing their ways.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The more styles a leader has mastered, the better. In particular, being able to switch among the authoritative, affiliative, democratic, and coaching styles as conditions dictate creates the best organizational climate and optimizes business performance.<\/p>\n<\/body>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cNew research suggests that the most effective executives use a collection of distinct leadership styles \u2013each in the right measures, at just the right time. Such flexibility is tough to put into action, but it pays off in performance. And better yet, it can be learned.\u201d\u00a0 (Daniel Goleman) Many managers mistakenly assume that leadership style […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[15,14,12],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-106","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-leadership","category-learning-organization","category-management"],"yoast_head":"\n