Researchers studying the style approach to leadership generally agree on two main approaches: task behaviors, which facilitate goal accomplishment, and relationship behaviors, which help subordinates feel comfortable with themselves, their peers, and their surroundings (Northouse, 2013, p. 69). Various studies have been conducted over the years in an attempt to ascertain the feasibility of one type over another, but it should be apparent that no one behavior is conducive to leadership success in every situation. In fact, the dynamic nature of the leadership environment dictates that effective leaders should be able to balance a combination of both types of behaviors, varying the degrees to which each is applied in response to a myriad of potential stimuli.
To do so requires constant self-assessment on the part of the leader so that through assessment, “managers can determine how they are coming across to others and how they could change their behaviors to be more effective” (Northouse, 2013, p. 80). This self-assessment is key because, more often than not, a leader’s self-perception differs from that of the opinions of peers, subordinates, and supervisors. Because of this focus on leader development, the style approach is widely favored in today’s organizational settings (Northouse, 2013). All in all, leaders can learn much about themselves and others, and this knowledge can be used to enhance the quality of life in areas other than organizational settings. By keeping this in mind, leaders can then achieve balance between both approaches by viewing organizational tasks and relationships within the context of their personal lives. For example, when pushing subordinates to complete tasks necessary to enable goal attainment, the leader can conceptualize this process within that person’s personal life in order to understand the complex tug-of-war involved in achieving success while staying within the good graces of others. An individual would be hard-pressed to completely sacrifice personal life (family, friends, social life) in order to accomplish personal goals, so this mindset can be applied to understanding the needs of subordinates and peers while still moving to accomplish long-term goals as well as daily tasks.
Reference:
Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice, (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Thomas-
You demonstrate a substantial assessment of the style approach theory and how it appeals to leadership namely in the organizational setting. Have you ever had to use the style approach in your daily life or work setting? I am interested to understand how one chooses what theory and approach is best for which setting. Organization plays a large role in leadership, and apparently with this style approach it comes a bit easier to understand organization in a leadership dynamic.
I like how you compare a leader’s personal life and accomplishing personal goals while applying that to a leader’s want to accomplish goals that are long term by their subordinates. I believe that there always needs to be a good balance, work does not mix well with personal life and personal achievements, so the goals should be different for each, personal and work related. Leadership roles may stand to be similar due to having similar traits both in the work setting and the home setting.
How would you compare your leadership style to the style approach?
–Alina
The concept that others perceive you differently than you may perceive yourself is difficult for most manager’s to swallow. There is several blogs on this topic but I found this one interesting http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/04/youre_probably_wrong_about_how_others_really_see_you.html. Dorrie Clark says conducting 360 interviews is a good way to establish how your employees really feel (Clark, 2013). I recently just took a management class where a 360 development plan was introduced. I was shocked at how much my thought of how I came across as a manager differed from how my peers, manager, and directs thought.
This type of evaluation usually focuses on both the directive and supportive roles of a manager. It follows that situational approach that we studied and how we apply specific response and feedback off of specific situations (Northouse, 2013). When we are more inline with how we are viewed by our directs, I think our ability to manage them improves.
References:
Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice (6th edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Clark, D. (2013, April 5). You’re Probably Wrong About How Others Really See You. Retrieved May 22, 2013, from Harvard Business Review: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/04/youre_probably_wrong_about_how_others_really_see_you.html