Various Leadership Styles at Work

Researching Values and Culture for Effective Leadership
Introduction
Organizations that are not focused on change management will inevitably fall into a static or stagnant spell—a period of inertia in which the energy, morale and stamina of the workforce flags or at least appears to lack the original zest and sense of urgency that existed at the outset. Change is important to pursue because the world itself is always changing and the culture of an organization should reflect the world and the people it serves, their values and their aspirations so that it can effectively meet their needs. In order to achieve this constant state of becoming, the organization will need to rely on leaders who have the appropriate leadership styles needed for overcoming periods of inertia. This paper will discuss leadership styles within a student services office including describing and applying the styles of pragmatic, idealist, steward, and diplomatic to the office. It will also discuss why organizations fall into patterns of inertia and detail what critical pragmatic leadership skills leaders need to regain organizational momentum. Finally it will apply and discuss the best leadership theory for a standard student services office and the leadership styles to avoid.
Leadership Styles
Pragmatic
The pragmatic leader is practical in style. He has a utilitarian philosophy, which means he is interested in helping all stakeholders to achieve the greatest common good. The pragmatic leadership style focuses on the processes involved in accomplishing tasks. The leader who adheres to this style often looks to best and most effective ways of achieving an objective and then concentrates all his energy and implementing that process. It is not always associated with the most humane of leadership styles, as the pragmatic leader can become more consumed with processes and tasks and fail to take the time required to commiserate with staff. In an office trying to work its way out of its inertia and ennui, a leader may need to adopt a style a little more invigorating than pragmatic style.
Idealist
Idealist leaders are like Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon. He has charisma and vision; he also professes to believe in the best in people. He sees only the positive potential in others. The idealist leader is one who has an ideal of the way things should be and then dedicates himself to achieving that ideal. He inspires with his vision and in some regards is like a transformational leader because his approach is supportive, positive and encouraging (Nawaz & Khan, 2016). The drawback of the idealist leader is that he does not see the reality of the situation in every case. Sometimes there are some very real negatives that have to be considered. The idealist believes that by focusing exclusively on the positive and on the ideal these negatives can be pushed out. However, as servant leaders will testify the negatives can sometimes be turned to positives simply through a little care and attention that a servant leader will be an expert at providing.
Steward
The steward leadership style is one in which the leader acts as the servant of the worker. The prototypical servant leader is Christ, Who washed the feet of His apostles to demonstrate his service to them and the humility required of the office of leader. The steward leadership style demands that the leader possess humility and so this style is the exact opposite of the autocratic leadership style which is essentially founded on ego. The steward takes care of all the things that make the office run well. The steward puts the cares and concerns of the office before all else. The steward has no concern for self: his actions are not oriented towards benefiting himself. His aim is only to benefit the office and to get it going. His method is to identify the needs of the members of the office and to make sure those needs are fulfilled. In many ways, the steward leadership style is complementary to the transformational leadership style, as they both focus on transforming the office by lifting it up through attentive devotion to the personnel working there.
Diplomatic
Diplomatic leadership style focuses on representing all sides fairly and evenly. It is a style useful for when there is conflict in the office. In a situation in which the office is suffering from inertia and is not really growing or developing, diplomatic leadership is probably not going to be a great fit. In that type of environment, workers need a leader who can inspire with a vision and provide them with support. Diplomatic leaders tend to be helpful in situations in which there are various stakeholders, all of whom have opinions on what needs to be done regarding a certain issue. This style could be effective in the stagnant office if there are a variety of different views about how to improve things, but at the end of the day, the leader has to make the call. The diplomatic leader can ease tensions and resolve issues through careful negotiation.
The Problem of Inertia
Inertia occurs when an organization stops looking forward, stops examining itself and its culture and becomes comfortable with the status quo. This occurs frequently in organizations that have found a degree of success and want to maintain it for as long as possible. They become stuck in their ways and gradually things begin to fall off: the workers begin to lose enthusiasm, desire for growth and for reaching for still higher goals begins to dissipate. Everyone seems to come and go in a state of inertia as though they were not moving along of their own volition but were rather still being carried forward by the forces that motivated them long back at the beginning. Gradually, however, that inertia too fades and the organization is left with a stagnant culture that is empty and void of purpose and meaning.
What Pragmatic Leadership Skills Leaders Need to Regain Organizational Momentum
Leaders need to be focused on change, but in order to change for the better, to move the office out of its rudderless state of inertia into something dynamic, motivated, engaged and exciting, the leader needs to have a vision. That vision should be informed by feedback from the office workers themselves: they are on the front lines and have the most experience in the organization, dealing with students and providing services. They are likely to have a sense of what works and what does not. At the same time, even if they do not have any grand ideas to share they will appreciate the opportunity to provide opinions and to take part in the decision-making process.
Best Leadership Theory
The best leadership theory for the office is transformational theory, as it is one that combines servant leadership with transformational leadership (Nawaz & Khan, 2016). The best leaders have always combined these leadership styles—whether it was Herb Kelleher at Southwest Airlines or Sir Richard Branson at Virgin Group. They knew enough to have and communicate a vision, to transform their industries and to motivate and inspire their workers to buy into the vision they communicated. They were also supportive and eager to provide their workers with whatever they needed so that they could do their jobs. They put the right people in the right places and then got out of the way. They led by example and then trusted that their followers would pass it on. To bring an office out of its stagnant, status quo existence, a leader has to have a vision, has to have enthusiasm for that vision, has to be able to communicate it, and has to be able to provide his workers with the social and emotional support they require so that resistance to whatever change is being implemented can be broken down and overcome; this is the essence of transformational theory and transformational leadership (Nguyen, Mia, Winata, & Chong, 2017). The leader has to educate, use reason and logic to explain the vision, and provide workers with an opportunity to benefit themselves and grow by buying into the vision. The leader must be willing and able to both serve and transform his workers.
Styles to Avoid
The Autocratic Leader. The autocratic leader is one who rules with an iron fist, makes all the decisions himself and lets everyone know that their opinions do not matter when it comes to making those decisions. He may be personable. He may even be well liked. But his leadership style is all about him. He wants things his way or it is the highway for the worker. Some workers will tolerate this kind of leadership style. Some will even like it. Most will chafe. Leadership is about striking a balance between showing appreciation and respect to workers and making the tough decisions that have to be made, usually based on one’s own best intuition.
The Democratic Leader. Democracy might be nice for American voters but in a workplace it can tend to bog things down a bit much. Workers want to know that they have a leader they can look up to and go to for guidance and support. They have enough to do, typically, just when it comes to doing their jobs and servicing students out of the office. They don’t need to or generally want to be tasked with the additional work of having to take part in every decision that has to be made. When it comes to big decisions, they appreciate being given the opportunity to provide feedback. But when it comes to other things, they feel the manager is the manager for that reason: with added responsibility comes the power to lead, to make decisions, and to guide. Democratic leaders tend to be seen as leaders who want to delegate leadership to others, which is not likely to sit well with most workers.
The Micromanager. The best thing about servant leaders is that they know how to get out of the way so that employees can work and do their jobs—the jobs they were hired to do based on the skills they were perceived to possess. The leader who acts like a micromanager fails to realize that the people hired can actually do their jobs without their boss hanging over their shoulder. No one likes being micromanaged, so this is one obvious leadership style that should be avoided at all costs. Let the workers do their work. Make sure they have everything they need. If the leader still feels they are slacking, call a meeting and get to the bottom of things. Be honest, be open, and be critical—but always be supportive and show the love.
The Distant Leader. The leader who checks out and never engages with the workers and who never gets to know the workplace culture is a leader who is asking for trouble. The distant leader is one of the worst kind of leaders imaginable. The hands-off leader is typically not well-regarded (Asrar-ul-Haq & Kuchinke, 2016; Cheung, Yeung & Wu, 2018). At least the micromanager is paying attention: the distant leader does not even want to get involved. He sits in his office, closes the door and does not talk to his employees. He communicates via memos which are taped to the wall or bulletin board when no one is looking. He is never seen and never heard from. The only feedback workers get is when a memo is posted—and then they feel that the communications are so impersonal and unfair (because the workers never get to give feedback) that the workers begin to revolt. A distant leader inevitably breeds contempt and that contempt can turn into sabotage. The quickest way to sink an office is to adopt a distant leadership style.
Conclusion
Leadership styles can vary. Leaders can be practical, idealists, servants, and diplomats. They can try to lead by using micromanagement tactics, or autocratic style; they might seem themselves as being overly-friendly or as wanting to get as far away as possible. At the end of the day, the leader needs to be engaged with his workers, but he also needs to recognize the fact that he is the leader. On an NBA basketball team, there is always going to be a leader on the floor, showing the way forward from the team. He does not take away from anyone else’s position: everyone on that floor has a role to play and each role is important. The same is true for the office. Every person in that office plays an important role and the leader has to recognize that fact and be able to acknowledge that fact. The leader should be inclusive, be supportive, and have a vision that he can articulate: it is that vision of where to go from here that will help to get the office out of its funk into growth mode so that it is firing once more on all cylinders.
References
Asrar-ul-Haq, M., & Kuchinke, K. P. (2016). Impact of leadership styles on employees’
attitude towards their leader and performance: Empirical evidence from Pakistani banks. Future Business Journal, 2(1), 54-64.
Cheung, F., Yeung, D. Y., & Wu, A. M. (2018). Employees’ perception of leadership
styles and successful aging in the workplace. Journal of Career Development, 45(6), 610-624.
Nawaz, Z. A. K. D. A., & Khan_ PhD, I. (2016). Leadership theories and styles: A
literature review. Leadership, 16, 1-7.
Nguyen, T. T., Mia, L., Winata, L., & Chong, V. K. (2017). Effect of transformational-
leadership style and management control system on managerial performance. Journal of Business Research, 70, 202-213.