The leadership style that I most identify with is the Entrepreneurial leadership style. The strong and weak traits that I have all associate with this style. I have also taken the time to ask my current manager, wife, and associates to choose the style that they feel I most identify with and they all choose the Entrepreneurial leadership style. The first strength that I have as a leader is my strong achievement drive and relentless dedication to complete each job successfully. When I am given a task or set a goal that I either need or want to accomplish I will work every possible minute to accomplish the task or meet my goal. If I reach a road block while working on a task I will search endlessly for a solution and fall back on resources if needed. I believe that nothing can keep me from accomplishing any goal that I set. My second strength that I have as a leader would be my visionary perspective and my strong eye on the future.
I will always keep the big picture of the task or goal in mind while working through the details and will try not to get hung up on the smaller items. I will share my visions with upper management as well as associates so that they understand some of the decisions that I make and also to let them see the larger picture and vision that I possess. Having a strong Entrepreneurial leadership style has many strengths but it also possesses many weaknesses, which I hold. The first weakness that I possess as a leader is a strong dislike of hierarchy and bureaucracy. My strong achievement drive has pushed me to be extremely self-sufficient and I have a very difficult time taking advice or listening to the management team of my company. I feel constrained in my position by the bureaucratic system of my company and feel that I would be far more successful if I could work more independently and not have to report back to anyone. My current manager knows this weakness of mine and he has allowed me to run on my own with very minor interferences.
Comparing leadership styles, I will show the similarities and differences between Participative leadership and Entrepreneurial leadership. Participative leadership takes in all team members opinions and work and then combines it and forms decisions as a team, compared to entrepreneurial leadership where most decisions are made independently. In the most common form of participative leadership the “team” will propose a decision and the leader or manager will make the final decision. The principle that the leader will be making the final decision is similar to the entrepreneurial style where one individual makes the decision. The biggest problem that can occur with participative leadership would be if a manager can ask for a group’s solution and opinions then completely ignore them. This situation could occur if the leader has a strong entrepreneurial style and likes to come to decisions on their own with no outside input. The opposite form of leadership from Participative is Autocratic leadership. Autocratic leaders will keep most of the authority in making decisions and typically assume that team members will agree and comply with the decisions that they make.
Autocratic leaders are similar to entrepreneurial leaders because they can typically make quick authoritative decisions. Autocratic leaders are task driven and very focused on meeting goals which is shared with entrepreneurial leaders. Autocratic leaders often like to show their authority and tell employees what to do which can serve as a model for the company. Entrepreneurial leaders typically do not show much care for the employees because they are too busy thinking about the future and what the next stage in the business will be. There are many different leadership styles and with each person not only comes a different style but also a completely different personality. If you understand a person’s leadership style then you can be prepared for what to expect from that person. If you understand your own leadership style and can identify others styles then you will know how to work with that individual and you may be able to explain your style and their style to them so that solutions can be reached the quickest and most efficient way possible.
Understanding different leadership styles can avoid conflict in the work place as if you know you have an autocratic style and are teamed up with another leader that has an autocratic style then you will want to quickly identify that and determine each other’s key roles in the project to avoid a clash. As a manager, you will want and need to be able to identify leadership styles of employees because you will not want to pair three people together that will be unable to come to any conclusions on group projects. A problem that could be encountered in the work place with differences in leadership styles could be a stagnate work force. This could happen if the leader of the group is extremely autocratic and the peers have a very participative style and the leader does not listen or take the groups opinions into account. The group could shut down and leave all decisions up to the leader and they will not be very constructive or possibly fail if the leader is off the subject and misses the objectives.
This issue could be overcome by making the final decision of the group to be based on a majority instead of strictly the leader’s final call. The leader may carry more weight in the end decision but it will at least ensure that all parties are heard and taken into account. Another way to overcome this situation would be for management to put a different leader in charge of the group. By placing a different leader in charge of the group that has a different style can change the entire dynamics of the group and possibly change then final outcome decision. Another problem that could occur in the work force if there is a difference in leadership styles would be the creation of a hostile environment. A hostile work environment could be created if a manager has a transformational leadership style and the team members have an entrepreneurial style or autocratic style. Some leaders that have a transformational style will work extremely hard to push their ideas and concepts onto employees to change their way of thinking.
If the employees have an entrepreneurial or autocratic style then they may feel that their way of thinking and ideas are right and may grow resentful or hateful towards the leader that is trying to transform their thought pattern. One way to overcome this issue would be to create an open form and allow the team members to put their ideas up front, the manager then can review the ideas and have everyone collaborate to finish with the managers desired outcome. In this situation the manager could give the team members the final objective and let the team members decide how they will reach it. This will allow everyone to have strong input and the team will reach the managers desired goal without the team feeling like the manager is forcing them to change their thoughts. Another way to overcome a hostile work environment
would be to have the manager determine each employee’s strengths and then delegate the work out to each team member based on where their specific strengths are.
The employees could have the chance to choose their area of strength or work on a new area with some assistance. This solution will give each team member choices and freedom to choose what they work on and they will feel more valuable to the group when they excel. There are many advantages to having multiple leadership styles working together but in order to truly make each style function to its best potential then all parties involved needs to know and understand their own and each other’s leadership styles. Collaboration can link all of the employees powerful traits, visions, and goals to maximize the employees involvement which lead to more production and higher profitability for the company. The first potential advantage that could be created between two leadership styles would be a maximization of time. The second major advantage would be that each leadership style could be used to the best way possible to show each other’s strengths to make a well balanced team.
The third potential advantage of having different leadership styles working together would be in a group setting it may be possible for members to better connect and relate to one style instead of another to maximize the efficiency of the group. In order to capitalize on the maximization of time the correct combination of leadership styles would have to fit. The best combination for a team setting would be a team built of participative individuals that could all work together to make a solid joint decision and then have a democratic leader that could present the idea to management with convincing authority that it was the right decision to make. This combination of participative and democratic leadership styles works well because both styles are understanding and willing to listen to different ideas. This could maximize time because the decision would be made fairly quickly and everyone should be able to agree on it. If the combination was a participative group with a entrepreneurial leader then it may not work because the leader may not be open to listen and understand the groups ideas and decisions.