Styles of Leadership and When to Use Each

Confused by all the different labels for types of leadership? Are you wondering which style might be best? Leadership styles consist of many factors, but the most important is the degree to which the leader controls organizational decisions. To keep them all straight, and determine when each style might be most appropriate, we can think of all styles of leadership as occupying segments of a continuum from “Low Organizational Control” to “High Organizational Control.” Each leader must be adept at determining when to use each technique, as the circumstances dictate where they will be most effective on this Control Continuum.

Basics of the Control Continuum

Let’s start with a line running from ‘Low Control’ to ‘High Control.’ Control is defined as the degree to which the leader maintains the decision-making to themselves, for the organization. The far right, or very high control, would be a Dictatorial leadership style, where the leader makes all the decisions themselves. The far left, or very low control, would be a Laissez Faire style, where the leader doesn’t seek to control anything. To the right of the mid-point will contain varying degrees of ‘consultive’ style – where the leader may seek input into a decision, but will ultimately make the decision – perhaps based on the input.  As we move left, past the mid-point on the continuum, the team members will have a greater say in the decision, and decisions become far more democratic or collaborative.

Management styles to the high side are considered Autocratic, while management styles to the lower side are considered Democratic or Participative styles where individual team members have more and more ability to participate in actual decision making.

Autocratic Styles of Leadership

When describing a ‘high control’ leadership style, one might consider an image of an old-style drill sergeant, barking out orders to be obeyed without question. This image might be a more extreme example, however, there are times when very directive leadership is critical. The lower end of the autocratic section of the control continuum blurs into the area of consultive styles, but where the leader still clearly makes and owns the decision.

Leadership methods that fall into this area of higher control are oft considered more efficient in the short term, but may impair longer term objectives as they do not promote employee development or drive organizational engagement.

Situations demanding an autocratic style of leadership could include;

1. An emergency response – where central and quick decision making is critical

2. An inexperienced team – where team members do not have the business acumen required to make certain decisions

3. Situations requiring speedy response – there isn’t always time to involve others

4. Confidential topics – by their nature require a smaller number of people ‘in-the-know’ and therefore result in a more autocratic style of leadership

5. Narrow scope of decision – there is no need to involve others when the topic is narrow and in the wheel house of the leader.

6. Situations where the consequences of failure are high, and the team needs to be protected from consequences of a decision, also require the leader to, at least publicly, be seen as the decision maker. If the consequences of failure are high, hopefully the leader is at least consulting team members prior to deciding on a course of action.

It is important to note that our mental image of autocratic leadership being that of a bully, is not correct. While any leader may be a bully, the autocratic leader is simply one who is exercising a high degree of control regarding decisions, which may be completely appropriate at certain times.

Participative Styles of Leadership

The lower control section of the continuum includes leadership styles that delegate some decision-making authority directly to individuals or teams. These styles include on the higher end, a regimented facilitation style, where the leader guides a process whereby the team explores the topic and recommends actions.

As we move to the left on the continuum, we see greater and greater participation and autonomy over not just the exploration of the topics, but also in making the actual decision on how to proceed. The very popular leadership styles of Empathetic Leadership or Servant Leadership occupy territory in this section.

It is commonly held that more participative leadership styles are best for the longer-term results as they promote broader empowerment, thereby promoting higher levels of engagement, and employee development. Greater participation also ensures that more perspectives are heard, and therefore better answers may become apparent.

Times where a more participative style of leadership is appropriate include;

1. The team is mature and has the knowledge to make decisions independently.

2. There is adequate time available to involve more people in the decision process

3. The consequence of failure is lower, thereby giving the leader comfort that their direct involvement isn’t needed.

An interesting point can be made about speed of decision making. While initially an autocratic style may seem to enable faster decisions, a truly empowered team - well out to the left on the continuum - can actually deliver faster decisions and actions, because any member of the team can act independently with trust in how their leader would respond. This is an advantage found in high-trust environments that typically are enabled by empathetic or servant-leader styles. This multiplication of actions taken through empowerment is one way that we can create value through servant leadership.

Situational Leadership

It’s easy to see that different styles overlap considerably when viewed in this manner, and that a leader must choose their leadership style based on the fluid realities of business. This ability to shift one’s style along the control continuum is described as Situational Leadership.

Clearly, an effective leader needs to be able to switch styles as the business circumstances change. I would argue that it is best to utilize a more democratic style of leadership, to build organizational capability and trust, for 90% of the situations encountered. The remaining 10%, might require the leader to move to higher control styles.

In the end, all styles have their place and time, and how each style is named is not important. The leader must recognize when to move to higher or lower organizational control methods, in order to have the best organizational effectiveness and efficiency for both the short term, and the long term!

---