Four Leadership Styles: Theory, Cases, and Personal Model

Introduction

Leadership is one of the most important needs in any organization. Leaders provide guidance, support, vision, direction, decision-making, and accountability. They inspire workers and help to motivate them by fulfilling their needs and incentivizing them whenever possible (Gerhart & Fang, 2013). However, because there are many different styles of leadership that can be employed, it is important to understand the various options and approaches that may be utilized, as well as the circumstances under which each is most likely to be effective. This paper defines and describes four styles of leadership, discusses how they apply in four different case studies, and identifies which leadership style best fits a personal style of leadership.

Transformational Leadership

Transformational leadership focuses on motivating people to embrace change by inspiring them with a vision, explaining the purpose or need for the change in a logical manner, and providing workers with the support they need to buy in to the change and make it a reality (Nawaz & Khan, 2016; Warrick, 2011). Transformational leaders must be able to communicate well, connect with people, and—most importantly—articulate the vision required for the change in an ordered and logical way so that it appeals to rationally minded workers.

From a transformational leadership perspective, Harold needs to be more engaged with his workers in terms of opening a two-way flow of communication. When he first arrived, he began making top-down changes without first obtaining feedback from his workers. As Kotter (2012) shows, it is essential that a transformational leader gather feedback from workers before any major changes are made; that way the leader knows what workers need, and workers feel empowered and invested in the decision-making process because their input has been sought.

Harold had a clear vision, but he was unable to implement it effectively because he never achieved complete buy-in from the workers and never provided them with sufficient support for the vision to be embraced by all. Pockets of resistance developed in the form of suspicion and mistrust toward Harold. Workers failed to understand him: he drove a foreign car yet worked for an American car manufacturer. This sent mixed signals that muddied his vision. To say one thing but do another is to communicate poorly. A clear vision must be communicated in words as well as in actions (Kotter, 2002).

To be effective as a social architect and change agent, a leader must possess a degree of social and emotional intelligence (George, 2000). Harold lacked this quality and did not demonstrate any ability to read, understand, or sympathize with his workers. This created a gap between him and his team that did not facilitate the change management process. In order to be more effective at change, Harold should have developed and applied social and emotional intelligence skills to communicate his vision, promote buy-in, and motivate his workers.

The strengths of this style are that it allows the leader to be himself and to use his particular talents and skills to tap into what those around him need (Kotter, 2002). Using this style, the leader can assess what workers require and then set about meeting those needs in a manner suited to his strengths. The transformational leadership style embraces the idea that a certain degree of character and charisma is required of the leader—and for leaders who possess both, it can be tremendously effective (Northouse, 2018).

This style of leadership is rather general in terms of how it is taught. It does not provide a clear or strict set of guidelines prescribing what a leader should do, unlike a structured framework such as Kotter's 8-step model of change management (Kotter, 2002). Thus, it is fairly open-ended, which can be viewed as a limitation for leaders who need concrete guidance in order to fulfill their duties.

Authentic Leadership

Authentic leadership is based on the idea that transparency and trust promote positive relationships between leaders and followers, and that if a leader demonstrates moral and ethical behavior in an open and honest manner, he will earn the respect of followers who will then imitate his genuine approach to work (Boekhorst, 2015). As Northouse (2015) notes, authentic leadership is helpful for building trust in an organization. When it comes time to motivate workers, the genuine example of a principled leader accomplishes exactly that. Authentic leaders generally present themselves as they truly are, without pretending to be anything other than what they know themselves to be.

For Sally, self-awareness was the bedrock of her leadership story. By accepting herself as she was, she was able to become the person she wanted to be—a writer. Before accepting herself, she struggled to envision any clear path. Recognizing that she genuinely wanted the free lifestyle of a writer allowed her to take chances and follow where the winds of change led her. By living this life she discovered truths that others needed to hear and was able to convey them, and for that she was recognized as a leader with something genuine to offer.

The authenticity of Sally's leadership could be described as her ability to sit back, observe, and reflect on what she had experienced. She added nothing to what she saw but simply reflected everything she took in; her writing was a mirror image of what she observed. By being fair, honest, and accurate, she earned both confidence in herself and high praise from others when her book became a success. Everyone wanted more insight and sought her out for advice, because they could tell they were getting an honest person. Her authentic style of leadership required nothing more than telling the truth, and people appreciated her for it.

Sally took on the mantle of leadership at the end of the case study, and this development was significant because it represented the passing of the torch. She would now be the one to light the way for others—to draw their attention to certain things and to show them what they were missing. She took on the mantle because she had been there, done that, and experienced what others had not; she had been the fly on the wall in rooms others would never enter. She was willing and able to tell what needed to be told. Taking on this mantle is important for every leader, as it marks them formally as a leader (Northouse, 2018).

The strengths of this leadership style are that it promotes honesty, integrity, openness, and transparency in the workplace. The more authentic a leader is shown to be, the more ethical the workplace culture is likely to become (Northouse, 2015). This style is also well suited to leaders who seek to remain true to themselves and who believe that by being true to oneself one cannot go wrong by others.

The limitations of this style are that its actual positive psychological effect is difficult to measure and that its moral component is not clearly defined. For a leader to engage in authentic leadership, he must bring with him a sense of morality and an understanding of what it means to be open and ethical. The style itself does not provide a guide on how to cultivate these qualities or what psychological outcomes to expect (Northouse, 2015).