You can express leadership in many different styles and techniques. There is no one correct way to be a leader, as the various forms each get the job done. Leadership can also change from nation to nation worldwide. The way leaders operate in Asia is entirely different than the way they operate in the U.S. However, there are common facts and values that mostly all leaders engage in. Below, we will look at some of the most common leadership styles featured in an article on Hubspot.
This leadership style is widely known as being very commonly effective. This type of leader forms his decision-making process and outcome based on the feedback and concerns of his team members. The leader will, of course, make the final call on what the decision is, but the team members tend to have equal representation and influence on the direction of a project. This style is highly effective because it allows employees of lower levels to express authority that they will need to refine to move up in the company. Usually, democratic leadership meetings consist of open discussions and questions asked from the leader to their team.
This is a stark contrast to democratic leadership, and it is known to be very rarely practical. In this style, the leader makes all of the decisions without any regard or consideration of input from their team at any level. The employees are not involved in virtually any aspect of the decision-making process, and it tends to be a very frustrating process to endure for employees. This leadership style was more popular years ago, whereas now, being this type of leader will likely cost you your employees and brand reputation.
This is another leadership style where just like the first one listed, is commonly adequate. This leadership style is desirable to many employees because it supports various types of employees at once. Strategic leaders sit at the intersection between growth opportunities and a business’s primary operations. They can focus on the significant executive decisions while ensuring stable work conditions for their entire team. The only downfall with this style of leadership is it might not be practical for larger teams.