Leadership Styles for Managers – Part 1

In this two part series, Jeff Hodgkinson will identify how leadership style is a primary success factor for collaborative efforts. Jeff explains three styles of leadership (Decision-Making, Activity Management, Personal Authority) while explaining 15 sub-categories – after reading, try to identify how your method stacks up against your peers.

It is a ‘soft skill’ which is often neglected in training because it is very hard to measure a person’s leadership style in a training situation. By understanding leadership styles and their impact, a manager can become a great project leader. Therefore, these managers must determine the most appropriate leadership style for each project team. A program/project manager (PM) should choose the correct leadership style based upon the project and project team requirements. Some of the most common leadership styles include:

1) Decision-Making Styles

Autocratic: Makes decisions without input. This leadership style is seldom warranted, unless the PM clearly knows more about the subject matter and has immature and inexperienced team members. That is seldom the case, and if it is true the individual has made poor selections for team members. Someone who uses an autocratic style outside a ‘life or death emergency’ project should re-examine her/his overall methodology and motivation.

Consensus: Solves problems and makes decisions in group with decision-making based on group agreement. Unlike Democratic, this leader will not necessarily take a vote, but will rather lead discussions, ‘read’ the team position and personally make the decisions accordingly. This style is less formal than Democratic. It may work better for dispersed or virtual teams which cannot meet together frequently.

Democratic: Invites ideas from the team for decision-making process, goes with majority. Also known as Consultative or Participative. This style will usually result in a good decision, but may leave the minority voters disgruntled. It is important that the manager reach out to the minority voters to ensure that though they disagree with the decision, they commit to the outcome. A mature leader will never hold a vote without first consulting with the primary stakeholders in the vote. This is necessary to ensure that the vote properly addresses the issue at hand, and that all parties (including the manager) know what is at stake.

Laissez Faire: This French phrase means “leave it be.”  This style is a hands-off policy and the team is entirely self-led regarding the decision making process. Except in a very mature self-motivated team, this may lead to aimlessness and lack of success. Less mature team members may view it as a lack of interest or involvement by the PM.

2) Activity Management Styles

Directive: Tells others what to do.  If this style is warranted (but it seldom is) the manager must be very diplomatic and use a personal authority style which will not alienate team members. This style may be warranted in the case of an immature team, immature team members or an extremely time-critical project. However, this style is generally not preferred because it does not develop the team nor allow adequate feedback from the team. Mature team members will resent this style and productivity will be lower in the long run.

Bureaucratic: Runs projects “by the book,” ensuring the team follows procedures exactly. Some situations may call for this leadership style, such as a government contract or where regulatory requirements must be met. Usually, though, this style is the refuge of insecure project managers who fear accountability for variations from the standards. Projects may benefit from variation from published standards, if those variations can be justified. A consistently bureaucratic leadership style may indicate poor ability to manage risk or apply the value of informed risk-taking.

Coaching: Instructs and motivates others to enhance their skills to achieve maximum impact for the team and project. A coach is directive, but focused on individual and team development. This is very good as long as it is also in line with project goals. A manager’s first responsibility is to the project, and secondarily to the team and individual. Note that a ‘coach’ and a ‘mentor’ are not the same thing. A mentor’s first responsibility is the individual’s career and personal development, not to the project or team. Generally, team members respond well to a coaching style, and this style may benefit future projects as well as the current one. As harsh as this may sound, a good PM must be willing to delay a team member’s personal development if it interferes with the objectives of the project. For example, a PM may ask a team member to defer taking a class to acquire a new skill if that skill is not needed to complete the project on schedule.

Empowering: Gives team members authority and tools to do their jobs. This is similar to a coach, but is less focused on teaching and directing. In contrast to a Directive style, the Empowering leader asks team members to make decisions, to choose tasks, and even to determine how those tasks are done. This person evaluates the maturity and skill of individual team members and gives them appropriate levels of authority and freedom to accomplish the project goals. An Empowering PM helps team members learn skills needed to accomplish project goals or acquire needed tools to do their jobs.

Facilitating: Coordinates the input of others. A facilitating leader is primarily an organizer and dispenser of project information. This person does not make decisions for the team, exert authority nor direct activities. He/she simply is a contact point for team members to coordinate their individual efforts. Generally speaking, this person has little personal authority, and simply communicates the decisions or orders of higher management. This style is appropriate for a novice manager, but may also reflect a lack of management support for true collaboration-leadership discipline.

Laissez Faire: Leaves the team alone. Has a hands-off policy and the team is entirely self-directed in their activities. As with a laissez-faire decision-making style, this style is only appropriate for very mature self-motivated teams. For any other team, it is a formula for failure and a sign of lazy or over-tasked leader. Team members will generally interpret this style as a lack of interest, and the project will suffer accordingly.

Supporting: Provides assistance along the way. This individual is more of a teammate than a leader, but may have great success as a result. He/she pitches in and does some of the actual work of the project, as well as coordinating the project overall. Frequently, this style is combined with the Facilitating style.

To be continued…

Jeff Hodgkinson is a Senior Program Manager at Intel. He is a 30 year veteran with Intel and holds an MBA along numerous credentials in Program and Project Management including the IPMA-B certification. He is located in Chandler, Arizona, USA.  Jeff or ‘Hodge’ is known both inside Intel and in the PM community for his successful coaching and mentoring of aspiring project managers.  You can read more about Jeff per his profile on LinkedIn or follow his handle on Twitter.