There are many different leadership styles: autocratic, Laissez-faire, transactional, and transformational to name a few. Each style has positives and negatives. My research did not reveal any single leadership format to be without flaws. However, there are some that are more positive than negative. In addition, one format of leadership may be better suited for a specific arena while a different style fits another altogether. In other words, what works for one department or organization may not work for another. Before we explore a few of the differing leadership styles, let us take a moment to define what a leader is and is not. A leader is not necessarily the manager, or the supervisor or the boss. Those are positions to be held with tasks and goals that need to be met. Managerial positions revolve more around staffing and the bottom line. It involves more controlling or managing of the staff to ensure tasks are met as expected, when expected and for the expected cost. In contrast, a leader is proactive, shapes the culture within the group, and grooms and empowers the team.
…show more content…
A leader is a visionary who sees an opportunity for change and in turn inspires people to follow. However, this is not to be mistaken for a cult-type environment. The followers in a leadership style relationship are not following blindly. They not only question the leader, goal, and methods of attainment but is encouraged to do so.
Though I have just defined two roles, manager and leader, they are not necessarily separate. These roles can be combined. A manager, supervisor or boss can be a good leader and vice versa. Though it may be easier to become a leader in a managerial role than a manager in a leadership role. While some argue that leadership is an innate quality one is born with, author Paul Bambrick-Santoyo makes the argument that leadership can be taught with time, quality coaching and support (Bambrick-Santoyo, 2012). Autocratic leadership is more of a dictatorship in which the control in one individual’s hands rather than in a team or horizontal organization (Yoder-Wise, 2015). In a creative environment, such as product development, this may not be a leadership format that would prove to be very effective. It could stifle the productivity of the team as creativity cannot be demanded nor extrinsically controlled. In his article author Shams Huda discovered that faculty and staff using autocratic leadership in the nursing school environment, was a contributing factor in the national shortage of nurses in Pakistan. This style of leading, with its narrow vision and domineering power, tends to undercut the very factors that are needed to create a functioning environment: trustworthiness, credibility, vision and team building; demotivating students and faculty alike (Huda, 2014). However, autocratic leadership, even with some perceived flaws, does a place where it can not only be appreciated but desired. For instance, in an environment where decisions must be made and implemented immediately. In nursing this would fit well within an emergency department or critical care unit (Yoder-Wise, 2015). These arenas need a leader capable of accepting the responsibility for making life and death decisions, and making them, in fractions of a second without time for discussion or debate. Laissez-faire is an approach where the leader does not partake in any responsibility and makes a conscious decision to do nothing even when the need to do something is evident (Yoder-Wise, 2015). Instead, the Laissez-faire leader delegates the decision making to the employees. This leadership style can be successful in situations where the team consists of highly skilled, capable and motivated employees, such as the case with autonomous nurses. This leadership style will not work in environments where the employees lack experience or when procedures are pre-determined such as the case with newly employed teenage fast-food workers (Zareen, Razzaq & Mujtaba, 2015). Transactional leadership is most commonly associated with the typical boss image: the rules are to be followed or there will be consequences. Per authors McGuire and Kennerly in their article for Nursing Economics journal, it’s a more punitive than supportive leadership style. Transactional leadership helps get the work done-deadlines are met but, with little to no job satisfaction and limited levels of commitment on the employee’s part. This causes a higher employee turnover rate (McGuire & Kennerly, 2008). The hospital setting
A leader is a visionary who sees an opportunity for change and in turn inspires people to follow. However, this is not to be mistaken for a cult-type environment. The followers in a leadership style relationship are not following blindly. They not only question the leader, goal, and methods of attainment but is encouraged to do so.
Though I have just defined two roles, manager and leader, they are not necessarily separate. These roles can be combined. A manager, supervisor or boss can be a good leader and vice versa. Though it may be easier to become a leader in a managerial role than a manager in a leadership role. While some argue that leadership is an innate quality one is born with, author Paul Bambrick-Santoyo makes the argument that leadership can be taught with time, quality coaching and support (Bambrick-Santoyo, 2012). Autocratic leadership is more of a dictatorship in which the control in one individual’s hands rather than in a team or horizontal organization (Yoder-Wise, 2015). In a creative environment, such as product development, this may not be a leadership format that would prove to be very effective. It could stifle the productivity of the team as creativity cannot be demanded nor extrinsically controlled. In his article author Shams Huda discovered that faculty and staff using autocratic leadership in the nursing school environment, was a contributing factor in the national shortage of nurses in Pakistan. This style of leading, with its narrow vision and domineering power, tends to undercut the very factors that are needed to create a functioning environment: trustworthiness, credibility, vision and team building; demotivating students and faculty alike (Huda, 2014). However, autocratic leadership, even with some perceived flaws, does a place where it can not only be appreciated but desired. For instance, in an environment where decisions must be made and implemented immediately. In nursing this would fit well within an emergency department or critical care unit (Yoder-Wise, 2015). These arenas need a leader capable of accepting the responsibility for making life and death decisions, and making them, in fractions of a second without time for discussion or debate. Laissez-faire is an approach where the leader does not partake in any responsibility and makes a conscious decision to do nothing even when the need to do something is evident (Yoder-Wise, 2015). Instead, the Laissez-faire leader delegates the decision making to the employees. This leadership style can be successful in situations where the team consists of highly skilled, capable and motivated employees, such as the case with autonomous nurses. This leadership style will not work in environments where the employees lack experience or when procedures are pre-determined such as the case with newly employed teenage fast-food workers (Zareen, Razzaq & Mujtaba, 2015). Transactional leadership is most commonly associated with the typical boss image: the rules are to be followed or there will be consequences. Per authors McGuire and Kennerly in their article for Nursing Economics journal, it’s a more punitive than supportive leadership style. Transactional leadership helps get the work done-deadlines are met but, with little to no job satisfaction and limited levels of commitment on the employee’s part. This causes a higher employee turnover rate (McGuire & Kennerly, 2008). The hospital setting