Do you prefer a leader/boss that is more “bossy” or “buddy” like? There are a wide variety of leadership and management styles including individuals that are firm with their boss related responsibilities while others are much more like a friend. Have you ever thought about which style you would prefer? Which is best for an individual and/or why your boss may have chosen such a style? What is more important to individuals – having a boss who likes to dominate others or a boss who wants to be liked by everyone, all of the time?

Professor Jon K. Maner of the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University says that “Dominant leaders mandate a vision whereas individuals who seek reputation and wish to be liked be all choose to facilitate a group’s vision. (Korkki, 2016) He also notes that “Dominant leaders hoard information and ostracize talented group members. They closely monitor talented group members to make sure they don’t get out of line, and they prevent their subordinates from forming close social bonds with one another. (Korkki, 2016)

Over the years, I have worked closely with leaders who represent both of these positions. I have had managers who only seek work from their employees, never interacting with them on a personal level and holding them to high expectations including keeping personal lives out of work. To the other side of things, I have worked with managers who have struggled with their abilities to manage properly as they have spent far too much time befriending individuals, because they care far too much about their reputation and “face” than they do getting the work done.

Of course, I believe that there is a happy medium and that leaders and managers can be slightly dominant yet befriend individuals as well. This is the leadership/management method that I utilize but take into consideration who I am working with and the context of the situation. The article gives two current and good examples who the bossy and buddy leadership styles. With just days away until voting, with many people who have already voted, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have left impressions on individuals one way or another. Had you ever really thought about their leadership abilities though? Not just in a presidential way but how they interact with others? Donald Trump is a great example of dominant leadership as he wants to be heard, make the rules and keep things focused in the direction that he believes to be correct while Hillary Clinton is more friendly and buddy-like, hoping that she can befriend many individuals that she meets. I believe that we need a happy medium between those two for our president as well, someone who is firm and direct but still interacts and relates to other individuals.

The more dominant behavior relates closely to a few theories that Northouse (2016) discussed including but not limited to Power and Influence whereas the more friendly behavior relates closely to Behavioral Approach (task and relationship behaviors) and Path-Goal Theory (enhancing follower performance and satisfaction by focusing on what motivates them). Depending on who you would ask – both individuals have a little Narcissistic behavior in their leadership styles as well. I believe that each leader/manager who engages in the bossy or buddy like, although they may possess some other forms of management style could also benefit from additional leadership style knowledge including but not limited to Trait Approach (Intelligence, Self-confident, Determination, Integrity and Sociability), Skills Model (Individual Attributes, Competencies and Leadership outcomes), and Situational Approach. These same individuals would also benefit from having Authentic Leadership abilities. While the opinion would change depending on who you were speaking with, overall, each leader has their own way of displaying the same traits including but not limited to decision making, goal setting, confidence, motivation and judge of character.

The best way to think about those two forms of leaderships and really any form of leadership at all is relating it to a quote that was included in the article – “You see dominance across many species, including many other primates,” and “those species, the biggest and the strongest usually wins and ends up on top of the hierarchy” (Korkki, 2016) Leadership does not work in the same manner that animals do at all. Dogs, apes, tigers, lions and bears each have a different manner of becoming the most powerful and getting the results from others that they want. More often than not, those methods are based upon aggression, size and power. People on the other hand, while some behavior may work better on some than others, isn’t been suited with dominance, some individuals prefer a friendly mannered individual. So, managers need to find the best methods of management based upon their specific group – more similar to the Adaptive Approach.

Works Cited:

Northouse, Peter G. Leadership: Theory and Practice – 7^th edition. SAGE Publications. 2016.

Korkki, Phyllis. Bossy vs Buddy: Two Leadership Styles, Each With Its Place. Retrieved from the New York Times on November 5, 2016 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/30/jobs/bossy-vs-buddy-two-leadership-styles-each-with-its-place.html

Have you ever thought about power and influence related specifically to body language? When an individual attempting or currently holding a powerful position needs to speak to a group, how are they perceived? Are they speaking clear, confidently and keeping the focus and attention of their listeners? Are they saying the correct things that others want to hear? But more importantly, is their body language giving the same message that their words are. When individuals are planning a speech or presentation, they more often than not, plan what they will say but not how their bodies will appear. Impressions, however, are only made up of 7% of what you say while the rest is the appearance and look that you have supplied. (Gruenfeld, 2016)

Our body language often doesn’t match our words and/or the impression that we are hoping to supply. This is a behavior that individuals need to be more “in touch” with. Realizing that they may be giving off an “I don’t care” opinion when actually they are passionate about the subject, or a “this is comical” feeling when it is of a serious matter. The comfort level of many individuals and their body language, especially within a powerful position is one that is important. There are two main types of body language that individuals, especially of power, should be seeking. People want to portray themselves as authoritative yet approachable. This is an important balance as it allows the people listening to hear and see that you are in control, that you are there for a reason and that you should be taken seriously as you have the correct and most accurate information at that time however you also need to see approachable. This is important because it will allow others to want to work with you directly and relate to you on a more personal and enjoyable level. (Gruenfeld, 2016)

There are two main types of power body language which include high and low. An individual who is holding a more powerful body language (high) will maximize themselves into a largest amount of space, hold their head high, speaking in complete and clear sentences from beginning to end. At times, these individuals may want to see dominant as well, making eye contact for long periods of time, especially when speaking to one individual. Whereas an individual who is minimizing the amount of space that they are utilizing, avoiding eye contact, may be talking with their hands or scattered with their movements are taking on a lower form of body language power however giving themselves the ability to gain respect and status from others, including situations where they may be seeking a higher form of power position. (Gruenfeld, 2016)

The last thing that I want to discuss is body language power and gender. It is natural for a man to be assumed to have a more powerful position than a woman. However, with the growing amount of female ‘power positions’ and leaders, that is changing. When you think about it, body language really does play the most important role. If you were sitting in a group setting waiting to hear two people speak: Person #1 is loud, talks with their hands, doesn’t speak in complete sentences, never makes eye contact and is shaky in their movements. Person #2 stands strait up, makes eye contact, speaks slow, loud and in complete sentences. Which would you prefer to listen to? Subject dependent? Gender dependent? I thought about who I would take more “seriously” in a powerful position and ultimately, that is person #2. This could be a man or a woman, however, the clear, concise and direct body language would keep my attention longer. I would listen to what it is that they have to say and take them seriously. I would be less likely to get side tracked as I would from watching an individual who in my opinion, didn’t seem as confident in their discussion.

I believe the importance of matching our tone, body language and subject matter is great. This allows an individual to make an impression and to maintain (or gain) whatever level of power that they choose. I often think of a police officer who is direct in both their words and posture but are approachable as well.

Works Cited:

Gruenfeld, Deborah, H. Lean In. Power & Influence: There is a body language of power. Retrieved from http://leanin.org/education/power-influence/ on October 9, 2016.

Northouse, Peter G. Leadership: Theory and Practice – 7^th edition. SAGE Publications. 2016.

The trait approach is primarily used for personal awareness and self-development. (Northouse, 2016) As we have learned time and time again, there are certain personality traits that individuals have that are more likely to play a role in an individual’s failure when seeking a position such as a leadership role. “Some research suggests that as many as 30-50% of managers and leaders fail” (Pennsylvania State World Campus, 2016) A study in the 1980s found that there are five trait groups that effectively disqualify individuals for successful leadership. (Pennsylvania State University, 2016) These traits groups are Inability to build relationships, Failure to meet business objectives, Inability to lead and build a team, Inability to adapt and Inadequate preparation for promotion.

“Inability to build relationships: These leaders are insensitive to the needs of their followers and are overly competitive and demanding. They are very arrogant and embrace the “my way or the highway” school of management.

Failure to meet business objectives: These leaders handle setbacks ineffectively. They engage in finger-pointing and blame others for the downturn. They are untrustworthy, tend to get distracted and lose focus.

Inability to lead and build a team: These leaders do not build strong teams. They either hire members that are just like themselves, or hire staff less capable than they are. Others micromanage their staffs, even when not expert themselves in the tasks.

Inability to adapt: These leaders cannot adapt to new bosses, businesses, cultures, or structures. Some leaders cannot adjust their styles to changing followers and situations. When solving problems, they often implement past solutions that are no longer viable.

Inadequate preparation for promotion: These leaders have narrow technical backgrounds and lack the leadership breadth and depth necessary for their new positions.” (Pennsylvania State University, 2016)

The most important yet difficult thing to remember about individuals who fail to become leaders is that they typically don’t understand and/or are not aware of why they are failing or how they have failed. According to Northouse (2016) there are 5 major leadership traits – Intelligence, Self-confidence, Determination, Integrity and Sociability. Many individuals consider themselves leaders, however, more often than not, they fit into the categories that fail them more than the ones that allow them to succeed. Finally, it is important for individuals to remember that just because they have failed once does not mean that they will never have the opportunity to succeed in such a position again. Many people believe that leadership comes naturally, which to a certain extent it does, however, it can also be a learned position with proper ambition and attention. Then again, there are some people who just shouldn’t be leaders. (Myatt, 2013)

For many, many years, I worked in retail management. There were managers over the years that were clearly leaders and who left the store, moving on to bigger and better things, however, there were some, who barely made it (successfully) as a manager and do not in fact have any leadership traits at all and have only ever fit into the failed trait categories including inability to build relationships, failure to meet business objectives, inability to adapt to change as well as inadequate preparation for promotion. Most of these individuals saw greatness in themselves however others did not see that which is why they were not successful in promotion and/or are still stuck in the same position that they have been in for years.

Works Cited:

Pennsylvania State University. PSYCH 485 – Leadership. https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1803831/modules 2016.

Northouse, Peter G. Leadership: Theory and Practice – 7^th edition. Chapter 2 – Trait Approach. SAGE Publications. 2016.

Myatt, Mike. Why You’re Not a Leader. Forbes.com http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikemyatt/2013/01/23/why-youre-not-a-leader/#7443800d5a4e 2013.