Going deeper into their exploration of different leadership styles, and inspired by this article on the MindTools blog, Pilar and Tim look at the Emotional Leadership Theory pioneered by Daniel Goleman, Richard Boyatzis and Annie McKee. It ends up being another therapy session in the café as Pilar and Tim talk about their own preferences, strengths and weaknesses.
Understanding the nuances and subtleties of various approaches to leadership can make all the difference as a manager. One framework to consider is the theory of Emotional Leadership, which categorises leadership into six distinct styles: Visionary, Coaching, Affiliative, Democratic, Pacesetting, and Commanding.
The true power of the Emotional Leadership theory lies not in rigid adherence to a single style but in the fluidity it offers. Leaders aren’t pigeonholed into one specific approach; instead, they’re empowered to adapt and shift their style to match the evolving dynamics of their team and the challenges at hand. This theory is rooted in the deep connections leaders forge with their teams and the ripple effect their behaviours can create within these relationships.
A common misconception in the leadership domain is the overemphasis on visionary leadership, especially when addressing perceived leadership deficiencies. However, while the Visionary style can inspire and motivate, it’s just one of the six styles available. Recognizing its limitations and ensuring its alignment with the situation is crucial.
Different styles resonate with different people. Some may naturally lean towards the Coaching or Affiliative styles, valuing personal development and harmonious relationships. Others might wish to embrace the Democratic style more, understanding its potential in meshing individual goals with broader team objectives.
However, the Visionary style, while captivating, comes with its cautionary tales. Grand visions, if not anchored in reality, can drift into realms of impracticality, losing touch with the immediate needs and challenges. Such mismatches in leadership styles and organizational culture can lead to significant upheavals, emphasizing the importance of alignment.
The Pacesetting style, while efficient, has its pitfalls, especially when leaders become too hands-on, sidelining opportunities for team growth. Conversely, seamlessly transitioning between styles, such as from Democratic to Commanding based on situational demands, showcases true leadership adaptability. It’s also worth noting that personal triggers, like stress or insecurity, can inadvertently push one into styles like Pacesetting or Commanding, underscoring the intricate bond between leadership and emotional well-being.
Leadership is not merely about occupying a role but is a journey of continuous self-awareness, growth, and adaptation. As leaders traverse the diverse landscape of Emotional Leadership, understanding, embracing, and effectively leveraging these six styles becomes pivotal to their success.
Read more below to find out about Tim and Pilar’s preferences.
TIME CODED SHOW NOTES
02:30 mins We step through the six styles of Emotional Leadership: Visionary (come with me), Coaching (try this), Affiliative (people come first), Democratic (what do you think?), Pacesetting (do as I do, now!), and Commanding (do what I tell you).
4:10 Tim likes that Emotional Leadership theory gives us permission to change styles to match the circumstances.
5:10 This theory is really about our connection to our team and the emotional impact of our behaviour on our team members.
6:40 Pilar thinks when people point to a “leadership crisis” it is code for wanting more visionary leadership. But as she points out, visionary is just one style among six. It doesn’t work in all situations.
8:10 Applying the wrong leadership style can create an emotional or cultural debt which is hard to undo. So it’s important that leaders think about the style they are using and it’s impact on the team.
9:15 Tim feels drawn to the Coaching and Affiliative styles. He’d like to be better at the Democratic. Pilar feels the Democratic style of leadership is essential to integrating the team goals and output with the need to support individuals within the team.
13:25 The Coaching style has long timelines which can be great for helping people who are trying to change.
16:40 Tim diverts to a long rant about the visionary leadership style with particular focus on Adam Neumann at WeWork. Visionary leaders and their followers can get swept away with big plans and future goals and lose touch with the messy reality of right now. Pilar reminds us of a similar situation at Basecamp where visionary leadership lead to a big cultural mismatch within the company. The founders chose a hard reset via the Commanding style to regain control and lost a third of their staff in the process.
20:40 Pilar is comfortable in the Pacesetting leadership style. In particular she relates to the danger of jumping in to fix things instead of having the conversation with the person. She remembers switching from Democratic to Command when the more collaborative style hasn’t worked. And she is strong at Affiliative leadership – although counterintuitively, she’s also found that sometimes friction might improve the quality of the work.
23:50 Tim goes to Commanding leader when he’s insecure or scared. And Pacesetting when he’s stressed. Pacesetting can lead to burnout but for Tim it can also be symptomatic of it.
26:20 Pilar and Tim reflect on how therapeutic they are finding these discussions of styles and their own patterns.
What about you, dear listener? What emotional leadership styles work best for you? We’d love to hear from you!
Get in touch through our Contact Form https://managementcafepodcast.com/contact/
managementcafepodcast.com 