It shows you the best style to use, based on how capable people are of working autonomously, and how creative or "programmable" the task is.
The matrix is divided into four quadrants – each quadrant identifies two possible styles that will be effective for a given situation, ranging from "autocratic/benevolent autocratic" to "consensus/laissez-faire."
MORE IDEAS FROM THE ARTICLE
Means following rules rigorously, and ensure that their people follow procedures precisely.
It works for work involving serious safety risks (working with machinery, with toxic substances), or with large sums of money. Bureaucratic leadership is also useful for managing employees who perform routine tasks. Not very effective in teams that rely on creativity, flexibility and innovation.
You must adapt your approach to fit the situation.
This is why it's useful to develop a thorough understanding of other leadership frameworks and styles - the more approaches you're familiar with, the more flexible you can be.
A "servant leader " is someone, regardless of level, who leads simply by meeting the needs of the team.
These people often lead by example. They have high integrity and lead with generosity. Their approach can create a positive corporate culture, and it can lead to high morale among team members, but it doesn't work in situations where you have to make quick decisions or meet tight deadlines.
Often the most effective style to use.
Transformational leaders have integrity and high emotional intelligence . They motivate people with a shared vision of the future, and they communicate well. They're also typically self-aware , authentic , empathetic , and humble .
Charismatic leaders inspire and motivate their team members. But they often focus on themselves and their own ambitions, and they may not want to change anything.
Charismatic leaders might believe that they can do no wrong, even when others warn them about the path that they're on.
With this, you can identify the best leadership approach to use, based on your people's needs, the task that they're doing, and the environment that they're working in.
For example, highly-capable people, who are assigned to a complex task, will need a different leadership approach from people with low ability, who are assigned to an ambiguous task. (The former will want a participative approach, while the latter need to be told what to do.)
The "transaction" usually involves the organization paying team members in return for their effort and compliance on a short-term task. The leader has a right to "punish" team members if their work doesn't meet an appropriate standard.
It clarifies everyone's roles and responsibilities, but it can be amoral and can lead to high staff turnover
The best style to use is one that has both a high concern for people and a high concern for the task.
Psychologist Kurt Lewin developed his framework in the 1930s, and it provided the foundation of many of the approaches that followed afterwards
These type of leaders ensure that they are the ones to impose expectations and define outcomes. Although it is efficient there are some disadvantages:
Leadership theories try to explain how and why certain people become leaders. Some theories focus on leaders' characteristics, while others attempt to identify behaviours that people can adopt.
Previously, debates on the psychology of leadership suggested that these were inherent skills. However, recent theories propose that while certain traits may help natural leaders, experience and situational variables also play a vital role.