Apart from the financial opportunities of an organization, its successful operation largely depends on the management component. It means that the work of a high-quality leader can make a considerable contribution to a company’s achievements.
In other words, a leader should have superior characteristics, which can inspire employees to achieve an organization’s goals.
Hence, such traits like sense of community, responsiveness, honesty, creativity, confidence, or a positive attitude towards workers create leadership models for a powerful leader.
So what are these models and how do they work?
When a leader follows the transformational model of managing employees, they can provide quite effective support of the company’s operation by inspiring workers.
Although such managers can be considered quite demanding, they motivate individuals to perform their job duties “beyond the expected levels” and “think beyond self-interest” since they show “positive qualities and ethics”, as it was noted by Opoku and Ahmed in Leadership and Sustainability in the Built Environment.
Such a model of leadership is quite effective in achieving organizational goals.
The charismatic model of leadership is no less effective than a transformational one since it also includes creating enthusiasm for the team.
However, in contrast, this one implies that a leader shapes the values of other people instead of making them work beyond requirements.
So a charismatic leader can achieve a company’s goals via personal “characters and behaviors” because they are communicative and responsive.
Consequently, such a leader is following their own ethics, providing employees with both fair rewards and reasonable criticisms.
Moreover, ethical leaders are good at decision-making because their way of thinking is primarily moved by logic and justice, but not always emotions and feelings.
There may be no doubts that the manager, following an ethical leadership model, will perform consistently for the team and the company’s goals.
A laissez-faire model of leadership contains both the pros and cons of its implementation.
On the one hand, laissez-faire leaders let their employees do the job and make decisions by themselves. And it can be considered as a positive and beneficial action when workers are entirely educated, experienced, and skilled.
On the other hand, such passiveness in performing leadership duties can lead to such an issue as uncontrolled production. I can note that laissez-faire leaders have a lack of motivational influence on employees.
For instance, when the manager takes a small part in performing a job, their opinion about work can be considered insufficient.
The bureaucratic leadership model is quite useful in the field of production. Such leaders are primarily moved by established rules, standards, and norms.
Thus, while working with mechanisms requires following safety regulations and properly using the equipment, the bureaucratic leader can control these processes effectively.
However, it is also necessary to take into account that the bureaucratic leadership model has a lack of flexibility. So it can have an adverse impact on performance if the leader works with creative tasks.
In contrast to more passive models of leadership like laissez-faire and bureaucratic, a democratic model can really motivate team members to work effectively. This model goes about involving employees in the decision-making process.
So employees become more motivated to work, knowing their mission at a company. Despite the fact that such a model of leadership can lead to slow performance, the results pay off.
This way of being a leader can be used in various fields of activity, both creative and routine.
One more model of leadership is autocratic, which is quite different from the above-noted models.
To exemplify, if a person is following the autocratic model, then their team members will not have any chance to make suggestions concerning work.
While in creative work, the autocratic model of leadership is not an effective way to manage employees, a routine job with no necessity for specific skills can benefit from such an approach.
However, my personal experience has shown that an autocratic leader lacks strong communication with employees, which has an adverse impact on relations between workers and managers.
In conclusion, it is worth saying that the listed models of leadership are effective in performing management. It is evident that all of them can not be without cons, but can be implemented in all fields of activity.
Nevertheless, these models follow organizational goals and are useful in managing your team.
Which Leadership Models Work for You?
If you have ideas that you feel like sharing that might be helpful to readers, share them in the comments section below. Thanks!
Would you like to contribute a post?