# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Leadership is both a research area and a practical skill encompassing the ability of an individual or organization to "lead" or guide other individuals, teams, or entire organizations. Specialist literature debates various viewpoints, contrasting Eastern and Western approaches to leadership, and also (within the West) United States versus European approaches. U.S. academic environments define leadership as "a process of social influence in which a person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task".

Studies of leadership have produced theories involving traits, situational interaction, function, behavior, power, vision and values, charisma, and intelligence, among others.

Sanskrit literature identifies ten types of leaders. Defining characteristics of the ten types of leaders are explained with examples from history and mythology.

Pro- aristocracy thinkers have postulated that leadership depends on one's "blue blood" or genes. Monarchy takes an extreme view of the same idea, and may prop up its assertions against the claims of mere aristocrats by invoking divine sanction (see the divine right of kings). On the other hand, more democratically inclined theorists have pointed to examples of meritocratic leaders, such as the Napoleonic marshals profiting from careers open to talent.

In the autocratic/ paternalistic strain of thought, traditionalists recall the role of leadership of the Roman pater familias. Feminist thinking, on the other hand, may object to such models as patriarchal and posit against them emotionally attuned, responsive, and consensual empathetic guidance, which is sometimes associated with matriarchies.

Leadership is a matter of intelligence, trustworthiness, humaneness, courage, and discipline ... Reliance on intelligence alone results in rebelliousness. Exercise of humaneness alone results in weakness. Fixation on trust results in folly. Dependence on the strength of courage results in violence. Excessive discipline and sternness in command result in cruelty. When one has all five virtues together, each appropriate to its function, then one can be a leader. - Jia Lin, in commentary on Sun Tzu, Art of War

Machiavelli's , written in the early 16th century, provided a manual for rulers ("princes" or "tyrants" in Machiavelli's terminology) to gain and keep power. In the 19th century the elaboration of anarchist thought called the whole concept of leadership into question. (Note that the Oxford English Dictionary traces the word "leadership" in English only as far back as 1821.) One response to this denial of élitism came with Leninism - Lenin (1870-1924) demanded an élite group of disciplined cadres to act as the vanguard of a socialist revolution, bringing into existence the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Other historical views of leadership have addressed the seeming contrasts between secular and religious leadership. The doctrines of Caesaro-papism have recurred and had their detractors over several centuries. Christian thinking on leadership has often emphasized stewardship of divinely provided resources-human and material-and their deployment in accordance with a Divine plan. Compare servant leadership.

For a more general take on leadership in politics, compare the concept of the statesperson.

The search for the characteristics or traits of leaders has continued for centuries. Philosophical writings from Plato's to Plutarch's have explored the question "What qualities distinguish an individual as a leader?" Underlying this search was the early recognition of the importance of leadership and the assumption that leadership is rooted in the characteristics that certain individuals possess. This idea that leadership is based on individual attributes is known as the " trait theory of leadership".

A number of works in the 19th century - when the traditional authority of monarchs, lords and bishops had begun to wane - explored the trait theory at length: note especially the writings of Thomas Carlyle and of Francis Galton, whose works have prompted decades of research. In Heroes and Hero Worship (1841), Carlyle identified the talents, skills, and physical characteristics of men who rose to power. Galton's Hereditary Genius (1869) examined leadership qualities in the families of powerful men. After showing that the numbers of eminent relatives dropped off when his focus moved from first-degree to second-degree relatives, Galton concluded that leadership was inherited. In other words, leaders were born, not developed. Both of these notable works lent great initial support for the notion that leadership is rooted in characteristics of a leader.

Cecil Rhodes (1853-1902) believed that public-spirited leadership could be nurtured by identifying young people with "moral force of character and instincts to lead", and educating them in contexts (such as the collegiate environment of the University of Oxford) which further developed such characteristics. International networks of such leaders could help to promote international understanding and help "render war impossible". This vision of leadership underlay the creation of the Rhodes Scholarships, which have helped to shape notions of leadership since their creation in 1903.

New methods and measurements were developed after these influential reviews that would ultimately reestablish trait theory as a viable approach to the study of leadership. For example, improvements in researchers' use of the round robin research design methodology allowed researchers to see that individuals can and do emerge as leaders across a variety of situations and tasks. Additionally, during the 1980s statistical advances allowed researchers to conduct meta-analyses, in which they could quantitatively analyze and summarize the findings from a wide array of studies. This advent allowed trait theorists to create a comprehensive picture of previous leadership research rather than rely on the qualitative reviews of the past. Equipped with new methods, leadership researchers revealed the following:

Individuals can and do emerge as leaders across a variety of situations and tasks.

Significant relationships exist between leadership emergence and such individual traits as:

While the trait theory of leadership has certainly regained popularity, its reemergence has not been accompanied by a corresponding increase in sophisticated conceptual frameworks.

Specifically, Zaccaro (2007) noted that trait theories still:

Focus on a small set of individual attributes such as "The Big Five" personality traits, to the neglect of cognitive abilities, motives, values, social skills, expertise, and problem-solving skills.

Fail to consider patterns or integrations of multiple attributes.

Do not distinguish between the leadership attributes that are generally not malleable over time and those that are shaped by, and bound to, situational influences.

Do not consider how stable leader attributes account for the behavioral diversity necessary for effective leadership.

Considering the criticisms of the trait theory outlined above, several researchers have begun to adopt a different perspective of leader individual differences-the leader attribute pattern approach. In contrast to the traditional approach, the leader attribute pattern approach is based on theorists' arguments that the influence of individual characteristics on outcomes is best understood by considering the person as an integrated totality rather than a summation of individual variables. In other words, the leader attribute pattern approach argues that integrated constellations or combinations of individual differences may explain substantial variance in both leader emergence and leader effectiveness beyond that explained by single attributes, or by additive combinations of multiple attributes.

In response to the early criticisms of the trait approach, theorists began to research leadership as a set of behaviors, evaluating the behavior of successful leaders, determining a behavior taxonomy, and identifying broad leadership styles. David McClelland, for example, posited that leadership takes a strong personality with a well-developed positive ego. To lead, self-confidence and high self-esteem are useful, perhaps even essential.

Kurt Lewin, Ronald Lipitt, and Ralph White developed in 1939 the seminal work on the influence of leadership styles and performance. The researchers evaluated the performance of groups of eleven-year-old boys under different types of work climate. In each, the leader exercised his influence regarding the type of group decision making, praise and criticism ( feedback), and the management of the group tasks ( project management) according to three styles: authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire.

The Michigan State Studies, which were conducted in the 1950s, made further investigations and findings that positively correlated behaviors and leadership effectiveness. Although they had similar findings as the Ohio State studies, they also contributed an additional behavior identified in leaders: participative behavior (also called "servant leadership"), or allowing the followers to participate in group decision making and encouraged subordinate input. This entails avoiding controlling types of leadership and allows more personal interactions between leaders and their subordinates.

The managerial grid model is also based on a behavioral theory. The model was developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton in 1964 and suggests five different leadership styles, based on the leaders' concern for people and their concern for goal achievement.

Positive reinforcement

B. F. Skinner is the father of behavior modification and developed the concept of positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement occurs when a positive stimulus is presented in response to a behavior, increasing the likelihood of that behavior in the future. The following is an example of how positive reinforcement can be used in a business setting. Assume praise is a positive reinforcer for a particular employee. This employee does not show up to work on time every day. The manager of this employee decides to praise the employee for showing up on time every day the employee actually shows up to work on time. As a result, the employee comes to work on time more often because the employee likes to be praised. In this example, praise (the stimulus) is a positive reinforcer for this employee because the employee arrives at work on time (the behavior) more frequently after being praised for showing up to work on time.

The use of positive reinforcement is a successful and growing technique used by leaders to motivate and attain desired behaviors from subordinates. Organizations such as Frito-Lay, 3M, Goodrich, Michigan Bell, and Emery Air Freight have all used reinforcement to increase productivity. Empirical research covering the last 20 years suggests that reinforcement theory has a 17 percent increase in performance. Additionally, many reinforcement techniques such as the use of praise are inexpensive, providing higher performance for lower costs.

Situational theory also appeared as a reaction to the trait theory of leadership. Social scientists argued that history was more than the result of intervention of great men as Carlyle suggested. Herbert Spencer (1884) (and Karl Marx) said that the times produce the person and not the other way around. This theory assumes that different situations call for different characteristics; according to this group of theories, no single optimal psychographic profile of a leader exists. According to the theory, "what an individual actually does when acting as a leader is in large part dependent upon characteristics of the situation in which he functions."

Some theorists started to synthesize the trait and situational approaches. Building upon the research of Lewin et al., academics began to normalize the descriptive models of leadership climates, defining three leadership styles and identifying which situations each style works better in. The authoritarian leadership style, for example, is approved in periods of crisis but fails to win the "hearts and minds" of followers in day-to-day management; the democratic leadership style is more adequate in situations that require consensus building; finally, the laissez-faire leadership style is appreciated for the degree of freedom it provides, but as the leaders do not "take charge", they can be perceived as a failure in protracted or thorny organizational problems. Thus, theorists defined the style of leadership as contingent to the situation, which is sometimes classified as contingency theory. Three contingency leadership theories appear more prominently in recent years: Fiedler contingency model, Vroom-Yetton decision model, and the path-goal theory.

The Fiedler contingency model bases the leader's effectiveness on what Fred Fiedler called situational contingency. This results from the interaction of leadership style and situational favorability (later called situational control). The theory defined two types of leader: those who tend to accomplish the task by developing good relationships with the group (relationship-oriented), and those who have as their prime concern carrying out the task itself (task-oriented). According to Fiedler, there is no ideal leader. Both task-oriented and relationship-oriented leaders can be effective if their leadership orientation fits the situation. When there is a good leader-member relation, a highly structured task, and high leader position power, the situation is considered a "favorable situation". Fiedler found that task-oriented leaders are more effective in extremely favorable or unfavorable situations, whereas relationship-oriented leaders perform best in situations with intermediate favorability.

Victor Vroom, in collaboration with Phillip Yetton (1973) and later with Arthur Jago (1988), developed a taxonomy for describing leadership situations, which was used in a normative decision model where leadership styles were connected to situational variables, defining which approach was more suitable to which situation. This approach was novel because it supported the idea that the same manager could rely on different group decision making approaches depending on the attributes of each situation. This model was later referred to as situational contingency theory.

The path-goal theory of leadership was developed by Robert House (1971) and was based on the expectancy theory of Victor Vroom. According to House, the essence of the theory is "the meta proposition that leaders, to be effective, engage in behaviors that complement subordinates' environments and abilities in a manner that compensates for deficiencies and is instrumental to subordinate satisfaction and individual and work unit performance". The theory identifies four leader behaviors, achievement-oriented, directive, participative, and supportive, that are contingent to the environment factors and follower characteristics. In contrast to the Fiedler contingency model, the path-goal model states that the four leadership behaviors are fluid, and that leaders can adopt any of the four depending on what the situation demands. The path-goal model can be classified both as a contingency theory, as it depends on the circumstances, and as a transactional leadership theory, as the theory emphasizes the reciprocity behavior between the leader and the followers.

Functional leadership theory (Hackman & Walton, 1986; McGrath, 1962; Adair, 1988; Kouzes & Posner, 1995) is a particularly useful theory for addressing specific leader behaviors expected to contribute to organizational or unit effectiveness. This theory argues that the leader's main job is to see that whatever is necessary to group needs is taken care of; thus, a leader can be said to have done their job well when they have contributed to group effectiveness and cohesion (Fleishman et al., 1991; Hackman & Wageman, 2005; Hackman & Walton, 1986). While functional leadership theory has most often been applied to team leadership (Zaccaro, Rittman, & Marks, 2001), it has also been effectively applied to broader organizational leadership as well (Zaccaro, 2001). In summarizing literature on functional leadership (see Kozlowski et al. (1996), Zaccaro et al. (2001), Hackman and Walton (1986), Hackman & Wageman (2005), Morgeson (2005)), Klein, Zeigert, Knight, and Xiao (2006) observed five broad functions a leader performs when promoting organization's effectiveness. These functions include environmental monitoring, organizing subordinate activities, teaching and coaching subordinates, motivating others, and intervening actively in the group's work.

A variety of leadership behaviors are expected to facilitate these functions. In initial work identifying leader behavior, Fleishman (1953) observed that subordinates perceived their supervisors' behavior in terms of two broad categories referred to as consideration and initiating structure. Consideration includes behavior involved in fostering effective relationships. Examples of such behavior would include showing concern for a subordinate or acting in a supportive manner towards others. Initiating structure involves the actions of the leader focused specifically on task accomplishment. This could include role clarification, setting performance standards, and holding subordinates accountable to those standards.

The Integrated Psychological theory of leadership is an attempt to integrate the strengths of the older theories (i.e. traits, behavioral/styles, situational and functional) while addressing their limitations, introducing a new element - the need for leaders to develop their leadership presence, attitude toward others and behavioral flexibility by practicing psychological mastery. It also offers a foundation for leaders wanting to apply the philosophies of servant leadership and authentic leadership.

Traits theories, which tend to reinforce the idea that leaders are born not made, might help us select leaders, but they are less useful for developing leaders.

An ideal style (e.g. Blake & Mouton's team style) would not suit all circumstances.

Most of the situational/contingency and functional theories assume that leaders can change their behavior to meet differing circumstances or widen their behavioral range at will, when in practice many find it hard to do so because of unconscious beliefs, fears or ingrained habits. Thus, he argued, leaders need to work on their inner psychology.

None of the old theories successfully address the challenge of developing "leadership presence"; that certain "something" in leaders that commands attention, inspires people, wins their trust and makes followers want to work with them.

Scouller proposed the Three Levels of Leadership model, which was later categorized as an "Integrated Psychological" theory on the Businessballs education website. In essence, his model aims to summarize what leaders have to do, not only to bring leadership to their group or organization, but also to develop themselves technically and psychologically as leaders.

The three levels in his model are Public, Private and Personal leadership:

The first two - public and private leadership - are "outer" or behavioral levels. These are the behaviors that address what Scouller called "the four dimensions of leadership". These dimensions are: (1) a shared, motivating group purpose; (2) action, progress and results; (3) collective unity or team spirit; (4) individual selection and motivation. Public leadership focuses on the 34 behaviors involved in influencing two or more people simultaneously. Private leadership covers the 14 behaviors needed to influence individuals one to one.

The third - personal leadership - is an "inner" level and concerns a person's growth toward greater leadership presence, knowhow and skill. Working on one's personal leadership has three aspects: (1) Technical knowhow and skill (2) Developing the right attitude toward other people - which is the basis of servant leadership (3) Psychological self-mastery - the foundation for authentic leadership.

Leader-member exchange theory

This LMX theory addresses a specific aspect of the leadership process is the leader-member exchange (LMX) theory, which evolved from an earlier theory called the vertical dyad linkage (VDL) model. Both of these models focus on the interaction between leaders and individual followers. Similar to the transactional approach, this interaction is viewed as a fair exchange whereby the leader provides certain benefits such as task guidance, advice, support, and/or significant rewards and the followers reciprocate by giving the leader respect, cooperation, commitment to the task and good performance. However, LMX recognizes that leaders and individual followers will vary in the type of exchange that develops between them. LMX theorizes that the type of exchanges between the leader and specific followers can lead to the creation of in-groups and out-groups. In-group members are said to have high-quality exchanges with the leader, while out-group members have low-quality exchanges with the leader.

In-group members

Out-group members

Out-group members often receive less time and more distant exchanges than their in-group counterparts. With out-group members, leaders expect no more than adequate job performance, good attendance, reasonable respect, and adherence to the job description in exchange for a fair wage and standard benefits. The leader spends less time with out-group members, they have fewer developmental experiences, and the leader tends to emphasize his/her formal authority to obtain compliance to leader requests. Research shows that out-group members are less satisfied with their job and organization, receive lower performance evaluations from the leader, see their leader as less fair, and are more likely to file grievances or leave the organization.

1. The mood of individual group members. Group members with leaders in a positive mood experience more positive mood than do group members with leaders in a negative mood. The leaders transmit their moods to other group members through the mechanism of emotional contagion. Mood contagion may be one of the psychological mechanisms by which charismatic leaders influence followers.

2. The affective tone of the group. Group affective tone represents the consistent or homogeneous affective reactions within a group. Group affective tone is an aggregate of the moods of the individual members of the group and refers to mood at the group level of analysis. Groups with leaders in a positive mood have a more positive affective tone than do groups with leaders in a negative mood.

3. Group processes like coordination, effort expenditure, and task strategy. Public expressions of mood impact how group members think and act. When people experience and express mood, they send signals to others. Leaders signal their goals, intentions, and attitudes through their expressions of moods. For example, expressions of positive moods by leaders signal that leaders deem progress toward goals to be good. The group members respond to those signals cognitively and behaviorally in ways that are reflected in the group processes.

The neo-emergent leadership theory (from the Oxford Strategic Leadership Programme) sees leadership as an impression formed through the communication of information by the leader or by other stakeholders, not through the true actions of the leader himself. In other words, the reproduction of information or stories form the basis of the perception of leadership by the majority. It is well known that the naval hero Lord Nelson often wrote his own versions of battles he was involved in, so that when he arrived home in England he would receive a true hero's welcome. In modern society, the press, blogs and other sources report their own views of leaders, which may be based on reality, but may also be based on a political command, a payment, or an inherent interest of the author, media, or leader. Therefore, one can argue that the perception of all leaders is created and in fact does not reflect their true leadership qualities at all. Hence the historical function of belief in (for example) royal blood as a proxy for belief in or analysis of effective governing skills.

Many personality characteristics were found to be reliably associated with leadership emergence. The list includes, but is not limited to (following list organized in alphabetical order): assertiveness, authenticity, Big Five personality factors, birth order, character strengths, dominance, emotional intelligence, gender identity, intelligence, narcissism, self-efficacy for leadership, self-monitoring and social motivation. Leadership emergence is the idea that people born with specific characteristics become leaders, and those without these characteristics do not become leaders. People like Mahatma Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, and Nelson Mandela all share traits that an average person does not. This includes people who choose to participate in leadership roles, as opposed to those who do not. Research indicates that up to 30% of leader emergence has a genetic basis. There is no current research indicating that there is a "leadership gene", instead we inherit certain traits that might influence our decision to seek leadership. Both anecdotal, and empirical evidence support a stable relationship between specific traits and leadership behavior. Using a large international sample researchers found that there are three factors that motivate leaders; affective identity (enjoyment of leading), non-calculative (leading earns reinforcement), and social-normative (sense of obligation).

The relationship between assertiveness and leadership emergence is curvilinear; individuals who are either low in assertiveness or very high in assertiveness are less likely to be identified as leaders.

Individuals who are more aware of their personality qualities, including their values and beliefs, and are less biased when processing self-relevant information, are more likely to be accepted as leaders. See Authentic Leadership.

Those born first in their families and only children are hypothesized to be more driven to seek leadership and control in social settings. Middle-born children tend to accept follower roles in groups, and later-borns are thought to be rebellious and creative

Those seeking leadership positions in a military organization had elevated scores on a number of indicators of strength of character, including honesty, hope, bravery, industry, and teamwork.

Individuals with dominant personalities - they describe themselves as high in the desire to control their environment and influence other people, and are likely to express their opinions in a forceful way - are more likely to act as leaders in small-group situations.

Individuals who take on leadership roles in turbulent situations, such as groups facing a threat or ones in which status is determined by intense competition among rivals within the group, tend to be narcissistic: arrogant, self-absorbed, hostile, and very self-confident.

Confidence in one's ability to lead is associated with increases in willingness to accept a leadership role and success in that role.

High self-monitors are more likely to emerge as the leader of a group than are low self-monitors, since they are more concerned with status-enhancement and are more likely to adapt their actions to fit the demands of the situation

Individuals who are both success-oriented and affiliation-oriented, as assessed by projective measures, are more active in group problem-solving settings and are more likely to be elected to positions of leadership in such groups

A leadership style is a leader's style of providing direction, implementing plans, and motivating people. It is the result of the philosophy, personality, and experience of the leader. Rhetoric specialists have also developed models for understanding leadership ( Robert Hariman, Political Style, Philippe-Joseph Salazar, L'Hyperpolitique. Technologies politiques De La Domination).

Different situations call for different leadership styles. In an emergency when there is little time to converge on an agreement and where a designated authority has significantly more experience or expertise than the rest of the team, an autocratic leadership style may be most effective; however, in a highly motivated and aligned team with a homogeneous level of expertise, a more democratic or Laissez-faire style may be more effective. The style adopted should be the one that most effectively achieves the objectives of the group while balancing the interests of its individual members. A field in which leadership style has gained strong attention is that of military science, recently expressing a holistic and integrated view of leadership, including how a leader's physical presence determines how others perceive that leader. The factors of physical presence are military bearing, physical fitness, confidence, and resilience. The leader's intellectual capacity helps to conceptualize solutions and acquire knowledge to do the job. A leader's conceptual abilities apply agility, judgment, innovation, interpersonal tact, and domain knowledge. Domain knowledge for leaders encompasses tactical and technical knowledge as well as cultural and geopolitical awareness.

Under the autocratic leadership style, all decision-making powers are centralized in the leader, as with dictators.

Autocratic leaders do not ask or entertain any suggestions or initiatives from subordinates. The autocratic management has been successful as it provides strong motivation to the manager. It permits quick decision-making, as only one person decides for the whole group and keeps each decision to him/herself until he/she feels it needs to be shared with the rest of the group.

The democratic leadership style consists of the leader sharing the decision-making abilities with group members by promoting the interests of the group members and by practicing social equality. This has also been called shared leadership.

In Laissez-faire or free-rein leadership, decision-making is passed on to the sub-ordinates. The sub-ordinates are given complete right and power to make decisions to establish goals and work out the problems or hurdles.

Task-oriented leadership is a style in which the leader is focused on the tasks that need to be performed in order to meet a certain production goal. Task-oriented leaders are generally more concerned with producing a step-by-step solution for given problem or goal, strictly making sure these deadlines are met, results and reaching target outcomes.

Relationship-oriented leadership is a contrasting style in which the leader is more focused on the relationships amongst the group and is generally more concerned with the overall well-being and satisfaction of group members. Relationship-oriented leaders emphasize communication within the group, show trust and confidence in group members, and show appreciation for work done.

Task-oriented leaders are typically less concerned with the idea of catering to group members, and more concerned with acquiring a certain solution to meet a production goal. For this reason, they typically are able to make sure that deadlines are met, yet their group members' well-being may suffer. These leaders have absolute focus on the goal and the tasks cut out for each member. Relationship-oriented leaders are focused on developing the team and the relationships in it. The positives to having this kind of environment are that team members are more motivated and have support. However, the emphasis on relations as opposed to getting a job done might make productivity suffer

Paternalism leadership styles often reflect a father-figure mindset. The structure of team is organized hierarchically where the leader is viewed above the followers. The leader also provides both professional and personal direction in the lives of the members. There is often a limitation on the choices that the members can choose from due to the heavy direction given by the leader.

The term paternalism is from the Latin pater meaning "father". The leader is most often a male. This leadership style is often found in Russia, Africa, and Pacific Asian Societies.

Another factor that covaries with leadership style is whether the person is male or female. When men and women come together in groups, they tend to adopt different leadership styles. Men generally assume an agentic leadership style. They are task-oriented, active, decision focused, independent and goal oriented. Women, on the other hand, are generally more communal when they assume a leadership position; they strive to be helpful towards others, warm in relation to others, understanding, and mindful of others' feelings. In general, when women are asked to describe themselves to others in newly formed groups, they emphasize their open, fair, responsible, and pleasant communal qualities. They give advice, offer assurances, and manage conflicts in an attempt to maintain positive relationships among group members. Women connect more positively to group members by smiling, maintaining eye contact and respond tactfully to others' comments. Men, conversely, describe themselves as influential, powerful and proficient at the task that needs to be done. They tend to place more focus on initiating structure within the group, setting standards and objectives, identifying roles, defining responsibilities and standard operating procedures, proposing solutions to problems, monitoring compliance with procedures, and finally, emphasizing the need for productivity and efficiency in the work that needs to be done. As leaders, men are primarily task-oriented, but women tend to be both task- and relationship-oriented. However, it is important to note that these sex differences are only tendencies, and do not manifest themselves within men and women across all groups and situations. Meta-analyses show that people associate masculinity and agency more strongly with leadership than femininity and communion. Such stereotypes may have an effect on leadership evaluations of men and women.

Many reasons can contribute to the barriers that specifically affect women's entrance into leadership. These barriers also change according to different cultures. Despite the increasing number of female leaders in the world, only a small fraction come from non-westernized cultures. It is important to note that although the barriers listed below may be more severe in non-western culture, it does not imply that westernized cultures do not have these barriers as well. This aims to compare the differences between the two.

Research and Literature Although there have been many studies done on leadership for women in the past decade, very little research has been done for women in paternalistic cultures. The literature and research done for women to emerge into a society that prefers males is lacking. This ultimately hinders women from knowing how to reach their individual leadership goals, and fails to educate the male counterparts in this disparity.

Maternity Leave Studies have shown the importance of longer paid maternity leave and the positive effects it has on a female employee's mental health and return to work. In Sweden, it was shown that the increased flexibility in timing for mothers to return to work, decreased the odds of poor mental health reports. In these non-western cultures that mostly follow paternalism, the lack of knowledge on the benefits of maternity leave impact the support given to the women during this important time in their life.

Society and Laws Certain countries that follow paternalism, such as India, still allow for women to be treated unjustly. Child marriage and minor punishments for perpetrators in crime against women, shape the society's view on how females should be treated. This can prevent women from feeling comfortable to speak out in both a personal and professional setting.

Glass Ceilings and Glass Cliffs Women who work in a very paternalistic culture or industry (e.g. oil or engineering industry), often deal with a limitations in their career that prevent them from moving up any further. This association is often due to the mentality that only males carry leadership characteristics. The glass cliff term refers to undesired projects that are often given to women because they have an increase in risk of failure. These undesired projects are given to female employees where they are more likely to fail and leave the organization.

In the past, some researchers have argued that the actual influence of leaders on organizational outcomes is overrated and romanticized as a result of biased attributions about leaders (Meindl & Ehrlich, 1987). Despite these assertions, however, it is largely recognized and accepted by practitioners and researchers that leadership is important, and research supports the notion that leaders do contribute to key organizational outcomes (Day & Lord, 1988; Kaiser, Hogan, & Craig, 2008). To facilitate successful performance it is important to understand and accurately measure leadership performance.

Job performance generally refers to behavior that is expected to contribute to organizational success (Campbell, 1990). Campbell identified a number of specific types of performance dimensions; leadership was one of the dimensions that he identified. There is no consistent, overall definition of leadership performance (Yukl, 2006). Many distinct conceptualizations are often lumped together under the umbrella of leadership performance, including outcomes such as leader effectiveness, leader advancement, and leader emergence (Kaiser et al., 2008). For instance, leadership performance may be used to refer to the career success of the individual leader, performance of the group or organization, or even leader emergence. Each of these measures can be considered conceptually distinct. While these aspects may be related, they are different outcomes and their inclusion should depend on the applied or research focus.

"Another way to conceptualize leader performance is to focus on the outcomes of the leader's followers, group, team, unit, or organization. In evaluating this type of leader performance, two general strategies are typically used. The first relies on subjective perceptions of the leader's performance from subordinates, superiors, or occasionally peers or other parties. The other type of effectiveness measures are more objective indicators of follower or unit performance, such as measures of productivity, goal attainment, sales figures, or unit financial performance (Bass & Riggio, 2006, p. 47)."

A toxic leader is someone who has responsibility over a group of people or an organization, and who abuses the leader-follower relationship by leaving the group or organization in a worse-off condition than when he/she joined it.

Most theories in the 20th century argued that great leaders were born, not made. Current studies have indicated that leadership is much more complex and cannot be boiled down to a few key traits of an individual. Years of observation and study have indicated that one such trait or a set of traits does not make an extraordinary leader. What scholars have been able to arrive at is that leadership traits of an individual do not change from situation to situation; such traits include intelligence, assertiveness, or physical attractiveness. However, each key trait may be applied to situations differently, depending on the circumstances. The following summarizes the main leadership traits found in research by Jon P. Howell, business professor at New Mexico State University and author of the book Snapshots of Great Leadership.

Determination and drive include traits such as initiative, energy, assertiveness, perseverance and sometimes dominance. People with these traits often tend to wholeheartedly pursue their goals, work long hours, are ambitious, and often are very competitive with others. Cognitive capacity includes intelligence, analytical and verbal ability, behavioral flexibility, and good judgment. Individuals with these traits are able to formulate solutions to difficult problems, work well under stress or deadlines, adapt to changing situations, and create well-thought-out plans for the future. Howell provides examples of Steve Jobs and Abraham Lincoln as encompassing the traits of determination and drive as well as possessing cognitive capacity, demonstrated by their ability to adapt to their continuously changing environments.

Few great leaders encompass all of the traits listed above, but many have the ability to apply a number of them to succeed as front-runners of their organization or situation.

One of the more recent definitions of leadership comes from Werner Erhard, Michael C. Jensen, Steve Zaffron, and Kari Granger who describe leadership as "an exercise in language that results in the realization of a future that wasn't going to happen anyway, which future fulfills (or contributes to fulfilling) the concerns of the relevant parties...". This definition ensures that leadership is talking about the future and includes the fundamental concerns of the relevant parties. This differs from relating to the relevant parties as "followers" and calling up an image of a single leader with others following. Rather, a future that fulfills on the fundamental concerns of the relevant parties indicates the future that wasn't going to happen is not the "idea of the leader", but rather is what emerges from digging deep to find the underlying concerns of those who are impacted by the leadership.

An organization that is established as an instrument or means for achieving defined objectives has been referred to as a formal organization. Its design specifies how goals are subdivided and reflected in subdivisions of the organization. Divisions, departments, sections, positions, jobs, and tasks make up this work structure. Thus, the formal organization is expected to behave impersonally in regard to relationships with clients or with its members. According to Weber's definition, entry and subsequent advancement is by merit or seniority. Employees receive a salary and enjoy a degree of tenure that safeguards them from the arbitrary influence of superiors or of powerful clients. The higher one's position in the hierarchy, the greater one's presumed expertise in adjudicating problems that may arise in the course of the work carried out at lower levels of the organization. It is this bureaucratic structure that forms the basis for the appointment of heads or chiefs of administrative subdivisions in the organization and endows them with the authority attached to their position.

In contrast to the appointed head or chief of an administrative unit, a leader emerges within the context of the informal organization that underlies the formal structure. The informal organization expresses the personal objectives and goals of the individual membership. Their objectives and goals may or may not coincide with those of the formal organization. The informal organization represents an extension of the social structures that generally characterize human life - the spontaneous emergence of groups and organizations as ends in themselves.

Leaders emerge from within the structure of the informal organization. Their personal qualities, the demands of the situation, or a combination of these and other factors attract followers who accept their leadership within one or several overlay structures. Instead of the authority of position held by an appointed head or chief, the emergent leader wields influence or power. Influence is the ability of a person to gain co-operation from others by means of persuasion or control over rewards. Power is a stronger form of influence because it reflects a person's ability to enforce action through the control of a means of punishment.

In contrast to individual leadership, some organizations have adopted group leadership. In this so-called shared leadership, more than one person provides direction to the group as a whole. It is furthermore characterized by shared responsibility, cooperation and mutual influence among the team members. Some organizations have taken this approach in hopes of increasing creativity, reducing costs, or downsizing. Others may see the traditional leadership of a boss as costing too much in team performance. In some situations, the team members best able to handle any given phase of the project become the temporary leaders. Additionally, as each team member has the opportunity to experience the elevated level of empowerment, it energizes staff and feeds the cycle of success.

According to the National School Boards Association (USA):

These Group Leaderships or Leadership Teams have specific characteristics:

Characteristics of a Team

There must be an awareness of unity on the part of all its members.

There must be interpersonal relationship. Members must have a chance to contribute, and learn from and work with others.

The members must have the ability to act together toward a common goal.

Ten characteristics of well-functioning teams:

Purpose: Members proudly share a sense of why the team exists and are invested in accomplishing its mission and goals.

Priorities: Members know what needs to be done next, by whom, and by when to achieve team goals.

Roles: Members know their roles in getting tasks done and when to allow a more skillful member to do a certain task.

Decisions: Authority and decision-making lines are clearly understood.

Conflict: Conflict is dealt with openly and is considered important to decision-making and personal growth.

Personal traits: members feel their unique personalities are appreciated and well utilized.

Norms: Group norms for working together are set and seen as standards for every one in the groups.

Effectiveness: Members find team meetings efficient and productive and look forward to this time together.

Success: Members know clearly when the team has met with success and share in this equally and proudly.

Training: Opportunities for feedback and updating skills are provided and taken advantage of by team members.

Mark van Vugt and Anjana Ahuja in Naturally Selected: The Evolutionary Science of Leadership (2011) present evidence of leadership in non-human animals, from ants and bees to baboons and chimpanzees. They suggest that leadership has a long evolutionary history and that the same mechanisms underpinning leadership in humans appear in other social species, too. They also suggest that the evolutionary origins of leadership are different from that of dominance. In a study Mark van Vugt and his team looked at the relation between basal testosterone and leadership versus dominance. They found that testosterone correlates with dominance but not with leadership. This was replicated in a sample of managers in which there was no relation between hierarchical position and testosterone level. Richard Wrangham and Dale Peterson, in Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of Human Violence (1996), present evidence that only humans and chimpanzees, among all the animals living on Earth, share a similar tendency for a cluster of behaviors: violence, territoriality, and competition for uniting behind the one chief male of the land. This position is contentious. Many animals apart from apes are territorial, compete, exhibit violence, and have a social structure controlled by a dominant male (lions, wolves, etc.), suggesting Wrangham and Peterson's evidence is not empirical. However, we must examine other species as well, including elephants (which are matriarchal and follow an alpha female), meerkats (which are likewise matriarchal), sheep (which follow castrated bell wethers) and many others.

By comparison, bonobos, the second-closest species-relatives of humans, do not unite behind the chief male of the land. The bonobos show deference to an alpha or top-ranking female that, with the support of her coalition of other females, can prove as strong as the strongest male. Thus, if leadership amounts to getting the greatest number of followers, then among the bonobos, a female almost always exerts the strongest and most effective leadership. Incidentally, not all scientists agree on the allegedly peaceful nature of the bonobo or with its reputation as a " hippie chimp".

According to some, leadership is determined by distinctive dispositional characteristics present at birth (e.g., extraversion; intelligence; ingenuity). However, according to Forsyth (2009) there is evidence to show that leadership also develops through hard work and careful observation. Thus, effective leadership can result from nature (i.e., innate talents) as well as nurture (i.e., acquired skills).

Although leadership is certainly a form of power, it is not demarcated by power over people - rather, it is a power with people that exists as a reciprocal relationship between a leader and his/her followers (Forsyth, 2009). Despite popular belief, the use of manipulation, coercion, and domination to influence others is not a requirement for leadership. In actuality, individuals who seek group consent and strive to act in the best interests of others can also become effective leaders (e.g., class president; court judge).

The validity of the assertion that groups flourish when guided by effective leaders can be illustrated using several examples. For instance, according to Baumeister et al. (1988), the bystander effect (failure to respond or offer assistance) that tends to develop within groups faced with an emergency is significantly reduced in groups guided by a leader. Moreover, it has been documented that group performance, creativity, and efficiency all tend to climb in businesses with designated managers or CEOs. However, the difference leaders make is not always positive in nature. Leaders sometimes focus on fulfilling their own agendas at the expense of others, including his/her own followers (e.g., Pol Pot; Josef Stalin). Leaders who focus on personal gain by employing stringent and manipulative leadership styles often make a difference, but usually do so through negative means.

In Western cultures it is generally assumed that group leaders make all the difference when it comes to group influence and overall goal-attainment. Although common, this romanticized view of leadership (i.e., the tendency to overestimate the degree of control leaders have over their groups and their groups' outcomes) ignores the existence of many other factors that influence group dynamics. For example, group cohesion, communication patterns among members, individual personality traits, group context, the nature or orientation of the work, as well as behavioral norms and established standards influence group functionality in varying capacities. For this reason, it is unwarranted to assume that all leaders are in complete control of their groups' achievements.

Despite preconceived notions, not all groups need have a designated leader. Groups that are primarily composed of women, are limited in size, are free from stressful decision-making, or only exist for a short period of time (e.g., student work groups; pub quiz/trivia teams) often undergo a diffusion of responsibility, where leadership tasks and roles are shared amongst members (Schmid Mast, 2002; Berdahl & Anderson, 2007; Guastello, 2007).

In most cases, these teams are tasked to operate in remote and changeable environments with limited support or backup (action environments). Leadership of people in these environments requires a different set of skills to that of front line management. These leaders must effectively operate remotely and negotiate the needs of the individual, team, and task within a changeable environment. This has been termed action oriented leadership. Some examples of demonstrations of action oriented leadership include extinguishing a rural fire, locating a missing person, leading a team on an outdoor expedition, or rescuing a person from a potentially hazardous environment.

Other examples include modern technology deployments of small/medium-sized IT teams into client plant sites. Leadership of these teams requires hands on experience and a lead-by-example attitude to empower team members to make well thought out and concise decisions independent of executive management and/or home base decision makers. Zachary Hansen was an early adopter of Scrum/Kanban branch development methodologies during the mid 90's to alleviate the dependency that field teams had on trunk based development. This method of just-in-time action oriented development and deployment allowed remote plant sites to deploy up-to-date software patches frequently and without dependency on core team deployment schedules satisfying the clients need to rapidly patch production environment bugs as needed.

Carlyle's 1840 " Great Man theory", which emphasized the role of leading individuals, met opposition in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Karl Popper noted in 1945 that leaders can mislead and make mistakes - he warns against deferring to "great men".

Noam Chomsky and others have subjected the concept of leadership to critical thinking and have provided an analysis that asserts that people abrogate their responsibility to think and will actions for themselves. While the conventional view of leadership may satisfy people who "want to be told what to do", these critics say that one should question why they are being subjected to a will or intellect other than their own if the leader is not a subject-matter expert ( SME).

Concepts such as autogestion, employeeship, and common civic virtue, etc., challenge the fundamentally anti-democratic nature of the leadership principle by stressing individual responsibility and/or group authority in the workplace and elsewhere and by focusing on the skills and attitudes that a person needs in general rather than separating out "leadership" as the basis of a special class of individuals.

Similarly, various historical calamities (such as World War II) can be attributed to a misplaced reliance on the principle of leadership as exhibited in dictatorship.

The idea of leaderism paints leadership and its excesses in a negative light.

Notes

1. ^ Cano, PE, Librado F. (2010). Transformation Of An Individual Family Community Nation And The World. Trafford Publishing. p. 134. ISBN 9781426947667.

2. ^ Singh, Ravinder; Rani, Ajita (2017). Human Behaviour. Notion Press. ISBN 978-1-946983-31-2. [...] emotionally attuned, responsive, and consensual empathetic guidance, which is sometimes associated with matriarchies, where the women rule.

3. ^ Saxena Dr., P.K. (2009). Principles of Management, A Modern Approach. New Delhi: Global India Publications PVT LTD. p. 30. ISBN 978-81-907941-5-2. Comparable to the Roman tradition, the views of Confucianism on "right living" relate very much to the ideal of the (male) scholar-leader and his benevolent rule, buttressed by a tradition of filial piety.

4. (Subscription or ^ "leadership". Oxford English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. September 2005. UK public library membership required.)

5. ^ Greenleaf, Robert K. (1977). Servant Leadership: A Journey Into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Mahwah, New Jersey: Paulist Press (published 2002). ISBN 9780809105540.

6. Benjamin Jowett's translation of Plato's ^ Republic does not use the word "leadership"; Plato discusses primarily a "guardian" class. See Plato (1892). The Dialogues of Plato translated into English with Analyses and Introductions by B. Jowett, M.A. 3. Oxford University Press.

7. See ^ Donald Markwell, "Instincts to Lead": On Leadership, Peace, and Education, Connor Court: Australia, 2013. ISBN 9781922168702 "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2017-02-22.

8. ^ Arvey, R. D.; Rotundo, M.; Johnson, W.; Zhang, Z.; McGue, M. (2006). "The determinants of leadership role occupancy: Genetic and personality factors". The Leadership Quarterly. 17: 1-20. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.333.3080. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.10.009.

9. ^ Tagger, S.; Hackett, R.; Saha, S. (1999). "Leadership emergence in autonomous work teams: Antecedents and outcomes". Personnel Psychology. 52 (4): 899-926. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00184.x.

10. Scouller, J. (2011). ^ The Three Levels of Leadership: How to Develop Your Leadership Presence, Knowhow and Skill. Cirencester: Management Books 2000., ISBN 9781852526818

11. ^ Sy, T.; Cote, S.; Saavedra, R. (2005). "The contagious leader: Impact of the leader's mood on the mood of group members, group affective tone, and group processes" (PDF). Journal of Applied Psychology. 90 (2): 295-305. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.2.295. PMID 15769239.

12. George J. M. 2006. "Leader Positive Mood and Group Performance: The Case of Customer Service". Journal of Applied Social Psychology 25(9): pp. 778-794

13. ^ Ola, Bolarinde (2017). "A Critique of Conceptual Leadership Styles'". In Godbole, Prasad; Burke, Derek; Aylott, Jill (eds.). Why Hospitals Fail: Between Theory and Practice. Cham (Swizerland): Springer International Publishing. p. 59. ISBN 9783319562247. Neo-emergent theory describes the use of intelligent information management to account for stewardship to benefit the leader. The practice is widespread, where for example, a leader or other stakeholders use sponsored advertisements, press releases and blogs on social media to create a good impression of leadership.

14. ^ Elgie, Robert (2016) [2015]. Studying Political Leadership: Foundations and Contending Accounts. Palgrave Studies in Political Leadership. Springer. ISBN 9781137347084. [...] some constructivists [...] question whether any such thing as leadership exists out there in the world. So for Gemmill and Oakley (2002), leadership is a myth equivalent to a belief in UFOs. For Spoelstra (2013), leadership is an invisible, non-objective phenomenon.

15. ^ Forsyth, Donelson (2010). Group Dynamics. Belmont, California: Wadsworth.

16. Chan, K., & Drasgow, F. (2001). Toward a theory of individual differences and leadership: Understanding the motivation to lead. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 481-498. ^ doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.481

17. ^ Ilies, Remus; Morgeson, Frederick P.; Nahrgang, Jennifer D. (2005-06-01). "Authentic leadership and eudaemonic well-being: Understanding leader-follower outcomes". The Leadership Quarterly. 16 (3): 373-394. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.318.5548. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.002. ISSN 1048-9843. Archived from the original on 2017-02-16.

18. ^ Philippe-Joseph Salazar, L'Hyperpolitique. Technologies politiques De La Domination, Paris, 2009

19. Aycan, Z. Paternalism: Towards conceptual refinement and operationalization. London: Cambridge University Press. pp. 445-446.

20. ^ Chatrerji; Markowitz (2004). "Does the Length of Maternity Leave Affect Maternal Health?" (PDF). Southern Economic Journal. 72 (1): 16. doi:10.2307/20062092. JSTOR 20062092.

21. ^ Vinkenberg; Engen; Eagly; Johannesen-Schmidt (2011). "An exploration of stereotypical beliefs about leadership styles: Is transformational leadership a route to womens promotion?" (PDF). The Leadership Quarterly. 22 (1): 10. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.12.003.

22. Van Vugt, M., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. (2008). "Leadership, followership, and evolution": Some lessons from the past. ^ American Psychologist, 63, 182-196.[1]

23. ^ Bart Barthelemy (1997). The Sky Is Not The Limit - Breakthrough Leadership. St. Lucie Press.

24. Richard Wrangham and Dale Peterson (1996). ^ Demonic Males. Apes and the Origins of Human Violence. Mariner Books

25. ^ Popper, Karl (1945). "Preface to the First Edition". The Open Society and Its Enemies (7 ed.). London: Routledge (published 2012). p. xxxiii. ISBN 9781136749773. [...] if our civilisation is to survive, we must break with the habit of deference to great men. Great men may make great mistakes; and [...] some of the greatest leaders of the past supported the perennial attack on freedom and reason. Their influence, too rarely challenged, continues to mislead [...]

26. For example: ^ Wheatcroft, Andrew; Overy, Richard (1989). The Road to War: The Origins of World War II (Revised ed.). London: Random House (published 2012). ISBN 9781448112395.

Books

Blake, R.; Mouton, J. (1964). The Managerial Grid: The Key to Leadership Excellence. Houston: Gulf Publishing Co.

Carlyle, Thomas (1841). On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic History. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 978-1-4069-4419-8.

Fiedler, Fred E. (1967). A theory of leadership effectiveness. McGraw-Hill: Harper and Row Publishers Inc.

Heifetz, Ronald (1994). Leadership without Easy Answers. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-51858-2.

Hemphill, John K. (1949). Situational Factors in Leadership. Columbus: Ohio State University Bureau of Educational Research.

Miner, J. B. (2005). Organizational Behavior: Behavior 1: Essential Theories of Motivation and Leadership. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.

Murray Hiebert, Bruce Klatt, The Encyclopedia of Leadership: A Practical Guide to Popular Leadership Theories and Techniques [1 ed.], 9780071363082, 0071363084, McGraw-Hill, 2000

Spencer, Herbert (1841). The Study of Sociology. New York: D. A. Appleton. ISBN 978-0-314-71117-5.

Vroom, Victor H.; Yetton, Phillip W. (1973). Leadership and Decision-Making. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. ISBN 978-0-8229-3266-6.

Vroom, Victor H.; Jago, Arthur G. (1988). The New Leadership: Managing Participation in Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. ISBN 978-0-13-615030-5.

Journal articles

Hadley Cantril (1958) "Effective democratic leadership: a psychological interpretation", Journal of Individual Psychology 14: 128-38, and pages 139-49 in Psychology, Humanism and Scientific Inquiry (1988) edited by Albert H. Cantril, Transaction Books.

House, Robert J. (1971). "A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness". Administrative Science Quarterly. 16 (3): 321-339. doi:10.2307/2391905. JSTOR 2391905.

House, Robert J. (1996). "Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory". Leadership Quarterly. 7 (3): 323-352. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(96)90024-7.

Lewin, Kurt; Lippitt, Ronald; White, Ralph (1939). "Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates". The Journal of Social Psychology: 271-301.

Spillane, James P.; Halverson, Richard; Diamond, John B. (2004). "Towards a theory of leadership practice". Journal of Curriculum Studies. 36 (1): 3-34. doi:10.1080/0022027032000106726.

Vroom, Victor; Sternberg, Robert J. (2002). "Theoretical Letters: The person versus the situation in leadership". Leadership. 13 (3): 301-323. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00101-7.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Leadership is both a research area and a practical skill encompassing the ability of an individual or organization to "lead" or guide other individuals, teams, or entire organizations. Specialist literature debates various viewpoints, contrasting Eastern and Western approaches to leadership, and also (within the West) United States versus European approaches.

# data[].attributes.body
Harvard Business Review

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The would-be analyst of leadership usually studies popularity, power, showmanship, or wisdom in long-range planning. But none of these qualities is the essence of leadership. Leadership is the accomplishment of a goal through the direction of human assistants-a human and social achievement that stems from the leader's understanding of his or her fellow workers and the relationship of their individual goals to the group's aim.

To be successful, leaders must learn two basic lessons: People are complex, and people are different. Human beings respond not only to the traditional carrot and stick but also to ambition, patriotism, love of the good and the beautiful, boredom, self-doubt, and many other desires and emotions. One person may find satisfaction in solving intellectual problems but may never be given the opportunity to explore how that satisfaction can be applied to business. Another may need a friendly, admiring relationship and may be constantly frustrated by the failure of his superior to recognize and take advantage of that need.

In this article, first published in HBR's September-October 1961 issue, W.C.H. Prentice argues that by responding to such individual patterns, the leader will be able to create genuinely intrinsic interest in the work. Ideally, Prentice says, managerial dominions should be small enough that every supervisor can know those who report to him or her as human beings.

Prentice calls for democratic leadership that, without creating anarchy, gives employees opportunities to learn and grow. This concept, along with his rejection of the notion that leadership is the exercise of power or the possession of extraordinary analytical skill, foreshadows the work of more recent authors such as Abraham Zaleznik and Daniel Goleman, who have fundamentally changed the way we look at leadership.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The would-be analyst of leadership usually studies popularity, power, showmanship, or wisdom in long-range planning. But none of these qualities is the essence of leadership. Leadership is the accomplishment of a goal through the direction of human assistants-a human and social achievement that stems from the leader's understanding of his or her fellow workers and the relationship of their individual goals to the group's aim.

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the Characteristics of a Good Leader?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the Characteristics of a Good Leader?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What are the characteristics of a good leader? We’ve found that great leaders possess these 10 core leadership traits.

# data[].attributes.headline
5 Qualities All successful Leaders Have in Common

# data[].attributes.subject
5 Qualities All successful Leaders Have in Common

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You've probably heard the expression "born leader." The phrase implies that the qualities that make a good leader are innate-you're either born with the skills it takes to be a leader, or you're not. And it's true that certain traits tend to be innate-such as charisma, humility, and a sense of humor. However, two research studies-one study with male twins and another with female twins -found that only one-third of the variance in leadership qualities is associated with heredity.

In other words, many key leadership qualities can be learned and improved over time, such as effective communication, goal-setting, and strategic thinking.

As a result of these findings, "the foundation of Northeastern's Master of Science in Organizational Leadership is that leaders can be developed," says Teresa Goode, EdD, associate teaching professor for the leadership program at Northeastern University. The program emphasizes experiential learning, or the acquisition of knowledge through observation and experimentation in a professional setting, as a key method to help students develop essential leadership qualities.

Many organizations, including higher education institutions like Northeastern, increasingly recognize the benefits of this approach and have put it to use to develop the leaders of tomorrow. "Instead of traits, our program is competency-based," Goode adds. "We break these key competencies down to behaviors that students can observe, practice, and get feedback on."

What Is A Successful Leader?

There are several essential qualities that mold a successful leader for any organization. A well-rounded leader is capable of providing guidance and inspiration to everyone around them. Their leadership style is made up of authority as well as a positive attitude to foster their team members' qualities and create a work environment where they can be open, honest, and productive.

Along with being authoritative and approachable, effective leaders possess a growth mindset. This means they're always focused on their company or organization's common goal and overall mission.

Download Our Free Guide to Effective Leadership in the 21st Century

Learn how to develop the skills required to lead effectively in today's digital, global world.

What Are The 5 Most Important Qualities of a Leader?

Successful leaders demonstrate the following five leadership qualities in their personal and professional lives, inspiring others to take action and set a course for future success. True leaders also practice key behaviors on a regular basis in order to strengthen the positive impact of these qualities.

1. They are self-aware and prioritize personal development.

Effective leaders focus on developing their emotional intelligence, Goode says. Leaders that work to refine this quality are more adaptive, resilient, and accepting of feedback from others. They also practice active listening, are open to change, and are capable of effective communication.

How To Develop Self-Awareness:

The following behaviors will help you focus on your self-awareness and personal development to develop this important leadership quality.

Set goals, prioritize goals, and take responsibility for accomplishing them. Also, take responsibility for falling short of your stated goals or making mistakes along the way.

Successful leaders focus on the big picture, avoid distractions, and don't get bogged down by small, tactical details. Practice these behaviors to promote effective management of your time and attention.

Set boundaries between your personal and professional lives. Remember that your organization will follow your lead-if they see you working long into the night, they will assume that they have to do the same.

Retain awareness of your strengths, weaknesses, and any potential sources of bias that may impact your thinking and decision-making. Conduct self-assessments and seek feedback from your team, and set improvement goals with measurable targets in areas where you have room to grow.

Accept that things can and will go wrong. This anticipation will help you respond in a thoughtful way that does not make a difficult situation even worse.

2. They focus on developing others.

This leadership quality builds on the principles of the situational leadership theory, which suggests that effective leaders adapt to whether an individual or group is ready, willing, and able to take specific action. Delegating, coaching, and mentoring are important tasks for situational leadership, Goode says.

How To Develop Others:

These behaviors will help you demonstrate leadership ability by developing others within an organization.

Recruit and develop a team with diverse skills and backgrounds, and give the team members the tools and the space to build trust among each other.

As a coach, demonstrate empathy as well as strength. Effective leaders know how to be assertive and kind at the same time.

Delegating responsibility can be harder than completing the task yourself, but it allows you to see what a team is capable of doing. Accomplishing difficult tasks helps a team build confidence and continue its path to growth.

Make genuine connections with those outside your organization. Actively seek out people who will make your team stronger, even if their expertise doesn't perfectly match the needs you have at the moment.

Prioritize training within your organization-and balance it with a culture that allows team members to thrive. As Richard Branson famously said, "Train people well enough so they can leave, but treat them well enough so they don't want to."

3. They encourage strategic thinking, innovation, and action.

"As a leader, you have to look forward. You have to think about where the organization is going," Goode says.

Leaders must consider internal organizational factors, such as product roadmaps and staffing needs, as well as external factors, including government regulations and technology advancement, when making strategic business decisions.

How To Develop Strategic Thinking:

Emphasizing the following behaviors will help develop leadership qualities related to strategic thinking, innovation, and action.

Maintain a flexible mindset and be willing to try new ideas. This is especially true for leaders at startups, where company goals are frequently changing and rigid plans may be hard to follow.

Take a genuine interest in your company and the business it operates in. Your team will feed off of your enthusiasm for what you do-or else take the wrong cues from your apathy.

Focus on the future, understand that change is occurring all around you, and maintain a positive outlook.

Encourage creativity and innovation in your team through exercises such as brainstorming or prototyping. Let business lines explore new ideas based on the output of these exercises.

Set a practical vision and suitable targets for your company. Consider SMART goals that are specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and timely.

Make informed decisions. Leaders often have to make risky decisions, but you must be able to justify the course of action you are taking. Your team will take notice if you are making reckless decisions-and they will be likely to follow your lead.

4. They are ethical and civic-minded.

Strong leaders consider the ethical consequences of the decisions that they make-for both their customers and their teams.

How To Be Aware Of Ethical Practices:

Taking these behaviors into account will increase your awareness of ethical practice and civic-mindedness, which reflects personal concern for the benefit of your entire organization and the community as a whole.

Use your power and authority appropriately. Remember the old saying: Honesty is the best policy. When leaders are honest with employees, they reciprocate this trust, and the entire organization operates with integrity.

Be open, transparent, and authentic. Your team should know what to expect from you no matter the circumstances.

Recognize the emotions that your team members are experiencing. Praise those who are succeeding and encourage those who are struggling. Never berate team members, publicly or privately.

Take responsibility for your mistakes, and expect that of others on your team. But don't stop there. Take the next step and make things right, even if it will hurt your organization's bottom line. In the long run, the benefits of protecting your organization's integrity and reputation will outweigh any short-term costs you might incur.

5. They practice effective cross-cultural communication.

Respected leaders are able to clearly communicate with individuals, business units, the entire company, and to stakeholders outside the organization. In an increasingly global economy, leaders must also acknowledge and respect different communication traditions, Goode says.

How To Develop Effective Communication:

Practicing these behaviors will help leaders increase the effectiveness of their communication.

Explain everything from organizational goals to specific tasks and objectives in concise language. If anyone on the team is unaware of your expectations and falls short of meeting them, you are at fault for failing to express those expectations. Communicate these goals and targets frequently so that everyone in the organization knows what you, and they, are working toward.

Understand the nuances of communicating over the phone, via email, and on social media. Identify your strengths and weaknesses for each mode of communication and work to improve where necessary.

Embrace enthusiasm, confidence, inspiration, and excitement when you communicate. Optimistic leaders show that they believe their organization is working toward a better future, and that they value team members' contributions to achieve that goal.

Adapt your communication style to different cultural traditions when necessary. Some cultures expect explicit, specific messages, while others tend to rely on context between the lines. Some cultures also show emotion more readily than others.

Remember that listening is just as critical to communicating as talking. Take the time to hear what others are saying-and make note of what they are not. Ask follow-up questions if you don't understand what they are trying to convey.

Want more actionable tips on how to improve these and other leadership skills? Download our free guide below.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 5 Qualities All Successful Leaders Have in Common

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There are common leadership qualities among successful leaders such as managers, coaches, and CEOs. With practice, you can be a good leader too.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Imagine the leaders that inspire you. Each is likely unique, with a different style they use to meet goals, motivate, and animate their teams. There are many different styles of leadership, and each can have a different impact on a company.

In this post, we'll cover the most common types of leadership, how they influence business, and give tools to help you figure out what styles are best for you.

Start reading, or jump to the section you're looking for:

Why It's Important to Know Your Leadership Style

Knowing your leadership style helps you provide adequate guidance and feedback to employees, and better understand your thoughts, how you make decisions and strategies you can consider implementing when making business decisions.

It can also help you understand how your direct reports see you and why they may give you specific feedback. For example, if employees feel stifled at work and don't have many opportunities to speak their minds, they may be telling you that you're an autocratic leader who can benefit from changing their style.

Knowing your leadership styles may help you improve with limited feedback. Each leadership style has its pitfalls, allowing you to proactively address areas of improvement. This is critical because some employees might hesitate to speak up, even in an anonymous survey.

Ready to find out your leadership styles? Check out the most common styles below.

1. Democratic Leadership

Also called: Participative or Facilitative Leadership

Democratic leadership is exactly what it sounds like - the leader makes decisions based on each team member's input. Although a leader makes the final call, each employee has an equal say in a project's direction.

Democratic leaders often have the following characteristics:

Inclusive

Collaborative

Effective communicator

Empowering

Supportive and empathetic

Trust-building

Emotionally intelligent

Why this leadership style works for businesses:

This leadership style resembles how leaders often make decisions in company board meetings.

For example, a democratic leader might give the team a few decision-related options in a company board meeting. They could then open a discussion about each option. After a discussion, this leader might consider the board's thoughts and feedback, or they might open this decision up to a vote.

Why this leadership style is good for the team:

The democratic leadership style is one of the most effective because it encourages everyone to participate in all processes, share their opinions, and know that you will hear them. It also encourages employees to be engaged because they know you will hear their feedback.

Team members feeling like they have space to participate can also increase employee empowerment, motivation, and participation.

Potential challenges for leaders with a Democratic style:

Reaching a consensus can take considerable time, resources, and communication with a democratic style. It can also impact decision-making because some team members may not have the right expertise to make critical decisions.

Featured resources:

2. Autocratic Leadership

Also called: Authoritarian, Coercive, or Commanding Leadership

Autocratic leadership is the inverse of democratic leadership. In this leadership style, the leader makes decisions without taking input from anyone who reports to them.

Autocratic leadership is typically characterized by:

Centralized decision-making

Direct and top-down communication

Minimal delegation

Limited autonomy for team members

Emphasis on hierarchy and status

Resistant to feedback or criticism

This style is most useful when a business needs to control specific situations, not as a standalone leadership style. For instance, it can be effective in emergency or crisis situations where quick and decisive action is necessary.

Why this leadership style works for businesses:

Autocratic leaders carry out strategies and directives with absolute focus. So, when a situation calls for it, an authoritative leader can make a quick best-fit decision for a business without needing to get additional input (helpful on a case-by-case basis).

Why this leadership style is good for the team:

This type of leadership is most effective when a company makes difficult decisions that don't benefit from additional input from others who aren't fully knowledgeable on the subject. Responsible parties can make a decision and give employees a clear sense of direction, and it can also make up for a lack of experience on a team.

Potential challenges for leaders with an Autocratic style:

Most organizations can't sustain such a hegemonic culture without losing employees, which can significantly lower morale and creative problem-solving.

An example of authoritative leadership gone bad could be when a manager changes the hours of work shifts for employees without consulting anyone.

Other challenges with autocratic leaders include:

Intimidation

Micromanagement

Over-reliance on a single leader

3. Laissez-Faire Leadership

Also called: Delegative or Hands-off Leadership

If you remember your high-school French, you'll accurately assume that laissez-faire leadership is the least intrusive form of leadership. The French term "laissez-faire" literally translates to "let them do."

Leaders who embrace it give nearly all authority to their employees and don't often interject unless the situation calls for it.

Some key characteristics of laissez-faire leadership include:

Limited guidance, direction, and feedback

Minimal interference and control

High autonomy and freedom

Empowerment and trust

Why this leadership style works for businesses:

Laissez-faire leaders make employees accountable for their work. This gives many employees an incentive to do their best work.

This type of leader often creates a more relaxed company culture. This makes it a good model for creative businesses like ad agencies or product design. It's also a good fit for a business with a highly-skilled team.

Why this leadership style is good for the team:

In a young startup, for example, you might see a laissez-faire company founder who makes no major office policies around work hours or deadlines.They might put complete trust in their employees while they focus on the overall workings of running the company.

Because of this high level of trust, employees working for laissez-faire leaders feel valued. They get the information they need and use their resources and experience to meet business goals.

Potential challenges for leaders with a Laissez-Faire style:

Although laissez-faire leadership can empower employees by trusting them to work however they'd like, there are downsides. It can limit team development and pose a challenge for new or inexperienced employees who would benefit from guidance as they get ramped up. Roles and responsibilities can also become unclear, and it can build a culture of working in silos where people might work autonomously rather than as a cohesive group.

This style can lead to overlooking critical company growth and learning opportunities, so keeping this leadership style in check is important.

Featured resources:

4. Strategic Leadership

Strategic leaders sit between a company's primary operations and its growth opportunities. This form of leadership requires vision, competitive awareness, and adaptability.

These leaders accept the burden of executive interests but also ensure that working conditions are stable for everyone else.

Strategic leaders aim to guide their organization toward its long-term goals. By utilizing this leadership style, you can create a forward-thinking, agile, and adaptable organization that can thrive in today's dynamic business landscape.

Why this leadership style works for businesses:

Strategic leaders tie plans for growth and strategy to how they manage a team. They ask questions, develop and execute strategies, and consider future growth. This approach supports popular business goals like:

Accountability

Productivity

Collaboration

Transparency

Why this leadership style is good for the team:

This is a desirable leadership style in many companies because strategic thinking supports many types of employees at once.

Strategic thinking supports many employees at once, so it's a desirable style for many companies. It encourages visualization, planning, and making the most of existing resources, and it can motivate employees.

Potential challenges for leaders with a strategic leadership style:

Leaders who work strategically might take on too much and risk thinking too far into the future of possibilities while missing critical present-day issues. It's important to learn how to delegate with this leadership style and share the weight of decision-making.

Compromise, communication skills, and consistent outreach are also essential.

Featured resources:

5. Transformational Leadership

Transformational leaders gain the trust and confidence of their teams, encourage team members, and lead employees toward meeting company goals.

Transformational leadership also always improves upon the company's conventions and motivates employees to grow and further develop their skills.

Ultimately, the goal of a transformational leader is to create a lasting positive impact, uplift their team to achieve their full potential, and drive success for the organization.

Why this leadership style works for businesses:

Transformational leaders can inspire their teams to think in new ways. This can help companies update business processes to improve productivity and profitability. It can also help with employee satisfaction, morale, and motivation.

Why this leadership style is good for the team:

This is a highly encouraging form of leadership where employees are supported and encouraged to see what they're capable of.

When starting a job with this type of leader, all employees might get a list of goals to reach and deadlines for reaching them. The goals might begin quite simple, but as employees grow and meet their goals, leaders will give them more tasks and challenges to conquer as they grow with the company.

Potential challenges for leaders with a Transformational style:

Transformational leaders can lose sight of everyone's individual learning curves in place of the company's goals. Employee burnout can also become an issue, so it's important to work with your team to update benchmarks.

Featured resources:

6. Transactional Leadership

Transactional leadership is based on reward and punishment to motivate and direct the behavior. These managers set specific rules and standards, and they closely monitor their employees' performance. They tell employees they can expect rewards if a goal is met. However, they may require more 1:1s or check-ins if people aren't meeting goals.

This leadership style is concerned with maintaining the status quo and ensuring that predetermined goals and standards are met. It also assumes that teams need structure and monitoring to meet business goals and that they are reward-motivated.

Why this leadership style works for businesses:

This style is popular in enterprise companies as it focuses on results, existing structures, and set systems of rewards or penalties. This leadership style also recognizes and rewards commitment.

Why this leadership style is good for the team:

Transactional leaders can offer helpful clarity and structure of expectations, which can help employees feel safe because they understand expectations. Employees also have a clear view of what they get in return for meeting business goals.

Potential challenges for leaders with a transactional style:

This style is more about using rewards to motivate and less about building relationships with employees, coaching, and developing team morale. Keeping a diverse team engaged can be hard if only some are reward-motivated, and it can lead to low creativity and fear of punishment.

7. Coaching Leadership

Also called: Conscious Leadership

A coaching leader focuses on identifying and nurturing the individual strengths of each member of the team and developing strategies that will enable teams to work better together.

This style is similar to strategic and democratic leadership, but it emphasizes individual employees' success.

A manager with this leadership style might help employees improve on their strengths by:

Giving them new tasks to try

Offering guidance

Meeting to discuss constructive feedback

They might also encourage one or more team members to expand on their strengths by learning new skills from other teammates.

Coaching leaders focus on building trust and establishing strong relationships with their team members. They foster an environment of open communication and psychological safety that encourages individuals to share ideas, seek feedback, and work together toward common objectives.

Why this leadership style works for businesses:

Coaching leaders actively support skill development and independent problem-solving. They meet ambitious business goals by creating a strong company culture and add to a business's long-term vision as valuable mentors, often even after leaving a company.

Why this leadership style is good for the team:

This leadership style can motivate employees as they feel supported on the team. It recognizes that each employee is unique and can build diverse and exciting teams where each employee offers something different.

This leader focuses on high performance, with employees that can communicate well and embrace unique skill sets to get work done. They also encourage team members to seek new challenges, learn from experiences, and continuously improve their skills and knowledge.

Potential challenges for leaders with a coaching style:

It can take a lot of time to develop employees with a coaching style, but mentoring isn't effective for every employee.

Featured resources:

8. Bureaucratic Leadership

Bureaucratic leaders follow the rules. Unlike autocratic leadership, they might listen and consider the input of employees, but they might reject input that doesn't align with company policy or past practices.

Some key features of bureaucratic leadership include:

Centralized decision-making

Strict adherence to rules and procedures

Clear chain of command

Limited autonomy

Why this leadership style works for businesses:

This style works best for larger, older, or traditional companies that are successful in their current processes. This leadership style works for these businesses because they want to maintain existing business models and processes because their current strategies are successful, and trying something new that doesn't work could waste time and resources.

Why this leadership style is good for the team:

This leadership style can be challenging for some, but it has many benefits. It lowers the risk of favoritism and replaces it with central duties, job security, and predictability.

This clear and efficient leadership style can lead to high levels of creativity for some employees.

Potential challenges for leaders with a bureaucratic leadership style:

Employees might not feel as controlled as autocratic leadership, but there can be a lack of freedom in how much people can do in their roles. This approach can shut down innovation and is not the right fit for companies chasing ambitious goals and quick growth.

Featured resources:

9. Visionary Leadership

Also called: Affiliative Leadership

Visionary leadership focuses on future and long-term goals. They aim to inspire and guide their team towards the achievement of a shared vision.

This type of leader encourages collaboration, emotional intelligence, and teamwork. They also foster a culture of innovation and change, encouraging individuals to embrace new ideas and approaches.

Why this leadership style works for businesses:

Visionary leaders can create a clear plan for employees to follow and execute. They are powerful and persuasive communicators, which helps them energize teams toward impactful business growth.

As the focus is on future growth, visionary leaders can forecast potential roadblocks and outline action plans, giving employees increased confidence during uncertainty or challenging times.

Why this leadership style is good for the team:

Teams can do more and enjoy their work more if they have a vision to work toward. This type of leader offers vision statements and other tools to inspire and motivate teams to engage at work.

Potential challenges for leaders with a visionary style:

Visionary leaders can skip over day-to-day issues to focus on long-term ideas, missing roadblocks that could build up and cause problems in the future. Another common challenge is hyper-focus on a single goal, which can impact consideration for other ideas that may be just as valuable to the business.

Featured resources:

10. Pacesetting Leadership

A pacesetting leader sets ambitious standards and expects employees to meet those goals in the exact manner they've laid out. These leaders expect productivity and high-quality outputs from employees, and they may step in to ensure things are done correctly and on time.

Some characteristics of a pacesetting leader include:

High performance standards

Leading by example

Results-oriented

Preference for speed and efficiency

Why this leadership style works for businesses:

This type of leader sets ambitious goals with a clear and focused effort, so employees know exactly what is expected of them. For example, pacesetting sales leaders set and exceed ambitious quarterly sales cadences.

These leaders might also work alongside their team and push performance, boosting team morale.

Why this leadership style is good for the team:

Skilled and experienced teams often thrive under this kind of leader. They use the abilities of motivated and competent team members and make meeting goals feel urgent and exciting.

It can also be gratifying for team members to see their leader working hard alongside them.

Potential challenges for leaders with a pacesetting style:

Pacesetting leaders can sometimes create a high-stress workplace environment if goals are unrealistic, which can overwhelm and demotivate teams. This can impact engagement and lead to burnout, where people struggle to meet goals and perform as expected.

Focusing on goals can also stifle creativity and diversity of thought, so employees don't feel they can use their expertise to suggest alternative goals or strategies.

Featured resources:

11. Situational Leadership

Situational leaders change their management style to meet the needs of the situation or team. It suggests that effective leaders must adapt their leadership style to match the readiness and development levels of their team members

This leadership style involves analyzing specific situations, assessing the competence and commitment of individuals, and adjusting the leadership approach accordingly. It is proactive and recognizes that change is the only constant.

Why this leadership style works for businesses:

This leadership approach can motivate employees and ensure that people aren't stuck working in a way that doesn't make sense for the situation. It's also valuable for startups or businesses requiring frequent changes and flexible talent and support.

Why this leadership style is good for the team:

Situational leaders are great communicators and use team feedback to make decisions. They also analyze market changes and can quickly evaluate and update processes to ensure success. This can create strong relationships and help employees see and feel their value to the business.

Potential challenges for leaders with a situational style:

Leaders need a high level of expertise in all business processes and functions to make decisions, and they must be able to pivot quickly. It's important to remember long-term goals and meet immediate needs; not every leader can do this effectively.

It can become confusing and stressful for teams if a leader's approach changes too often, as they won't know what to expect.

Featured resources:

Deciding Between Different Leadership Styles

There's no single "best" leadership style, so figuring out what is best for you and your environment is essential.

How to Understand Your Instinctive Leadership Style

Leaders need good instincts, and many leaders focus on their own experiences and habits as they develop a leadership style. As you start your path toward leadership, you may want to keep notes. Write down how you would handle specific situations or problems.

Doing this can help you be a confident and capable leader, but if you notice things aren't going as expected, you may want to reconsider your approach.

Your instincts and habits will always impact the way you lead. But if you find yourself in situations that you're unsure how to respond to, you may want to look at other leadership styles.

For example, if you're an extrovert with a shy member on your team, you may want to work on active listening. If you're an introvert leading a team of outgoing people, you may need to learn new ways to nurture, support, and inspire your team.

Can you change your leadership style?

While it may take some time and effort, you can always change your leadership style and improve your processes.

The first step to making changes is recognizing the need for change. Whether this comes from direct employee feedback, noticing that goals aren't being met, or people seeming to experience burnout, identifying this is the first step.

Next, you need to prepare yourself for changes. For example, your leadership style may be effective for your team, but you might have a more challenging time connecting with stakeholders. In this case, you wouldn't want to throw out your current style, but you'd want to identify what is and isn't working. Then, get curious, and begin the work of adjusting the way you lead.

How to Choose the Right Leadership Style for You

There are many ways to find a leadership style that works for you. Because of this, it can be tough to know where to begin. If you're not sure what leadership styles will work for you, these steps can help.

1. Get to know yourself.

Everyone has a unique path to self-discover. Some take risks and try new things and others prioritize quiet time, writing exercises, and listing strengths and weaknesses.

Another path to learning about yourself is through physical activity and spending time with other people. However you go about it, getting to know yourself is an important first step toward being a leader.

2. Outline your values and challenges.

Knowing yourself will help you understand what's important to you and where you struggle. Being a leader means working quickly and making decisions quickly, so having your values mapped out can be extremely helpful.

As you write out your values, look at pivotal moments in your life to date. Then, look for trends, people you're drawn to, and common themes. If your list is long, group similar ideas together.

Having an outline can help you see how you react, your strengths and weaknesses, and a base for your core values.

3. Watch leaders you respect.

Observing leaders you respect can also help you define your leadership style. As you watch them in meetings, client conversations, and presentations, take notes of what you like.

Another approach is to view their actions with specific leadership styles in mind, helping you figure out what their approach is and whether it will work for you.

4. Try different leadership styles.

A hands-on option is to try out different leadership styles. You can create an outline of what interests you and review your notes before your next meeting to see how you can incorporate it into your interactions.

5. Find a business coach or mentor.

Working with a business coach can also help you hone your leadership style.

A mentor can be someone in your workplace you respect and would appreciate feedback from, whether it's another leader or a colleague you respect. You can also check out this guide on how to find a business coach.

6. Ask colleagues and leaders for feedback.

Another way to find the best style for your needs is to ask other colleagues, leaders, and team members for feedback.

The best approach for this strategy is to plan out what you want to ask and why so you get the feedback you need. Think about how people might respond and also set clear guidelines and expectations.

When you get feedback, make sure to listen carefully. You'll gain valuable information about your strengths and weaknesses that will help you understand where you need to improve and the style that will help you improve.

7. Complete a leadership style assessment.

Leadership assessments are helpful tools for leaders, for yourself as an individual, and to assess your teams.

A leadership quiz can make it easier to understand your strengths and skills. It can surface habits and qualities you might not be aware of and give you a clear direction for growth.

If this is something you want to try, the leadership assessment below is a great place to start.

Leadership Style Assessment

Leaders carry a mix of the leadership styles mentioned above. At the root of these styles, leadership experts Bill Torbert and David Rooke say, are what are called "action logics."

These action logics assess "how [leaders] interpret their surroundings and react when their power or safety is challenged."

That's the idea behind the Leadership Development Profile, a popular management survey tool. Created by professor Torbert and psychologist Susanne Cook-Greuter - and featured in the book, Personal and Organizational Transformations - the survey uses a set of 36 open-ended sentence completion tasks to help researchers better understand how leaders develop and grow.

Below we've used open-ended sentences to outline six action logics that describe each one. Review the sentences, see how they resonate with you, and figure out which leadership style upholds based on the action logic you most align with.

1. Individualist

The individualist is self-aware, creative, and primarily focused on their actions and development as opposed to overall organizational performance. This action logic is exceptionally driven by the desire to exceed personal goals and constantly improve their skills.

Here are some things an individualist might say:

Individualist 1: "A good leader should always trust their own intuition over established organizational processes."

Individualist 2: "It's important to be able to relate to others so I can easily communicate complex ideas to them."

Individualist 3: "I'm more comfortable with progress than sustained success."

2. Strategist

Strategists are acutely aware of the environments they're in and have a deep understanding of the structures and processes that make their businesses tick. Still, they're also able to evaluate what could be improved.

Here are some things a strategist might say:

Strategist 1: "A good leader should always be able to build a consensus in divided groups."

Strategist 2: "It's important to help develop the organization as a whole, as well as the growth and individual achievements of my direct reports."

Strategist 3: "Conflict is inevitable, but I'm knowledgeable enough about my team's personal and professional relationships to handle the friction."

3. Alchemist

Rooke and Tolbert describe the alchemist as highly evolved and effective at managing organizational change. They differ from other action logics in their unique ability to simultaneously see the big picture and minute details. No department or employee gets overlooked with an alchemist leader.

Here are some things an alchemist might say:

Alchemist 1: "A good leader helps their employees reach their highest potential, and possesses the necessary empathy and moral awareness to get there."

Alchemist 2: "It's important to make a profound and positive impact on whatever I'm working on."

Alchemist 3: "I have a unique ability to balance short-term needs and long-term goals."

4. Opportunist

Opportunists are guided by a certain level of mistrust of others, relying on a facade of control to keep their employees in line. "Opportunists tend to regard their bad behavior as legitimate in the cut and thrust of an eye-for-an-eye world," Rooke and Tolbert write.

Here are some things an opportunist might say:

Opportunist 1: "A good leader should always view others as potential competition to be bested, even if it's at the expense of their professional development."

Opportunist 2: "I reserve the right to reject the input of those who question or criticize my ideas."

5. Diplomat

Unlike the opportunist, the diplomat isn't concerned with competition or assuming control over situations. Instead, this action logic seeks to cause minimal impact on their organization by conforming to existing norms and completing their daily tasks with as little friction as possible.

Here are some things a diplomat might say:

Diplomat 1: "A good leader should always resist change since it risks causing instability among their direct reports."

Diplomat 2: "It's important to provide the 'social glue' in team situations, safely away from conflict."

Diplomat 3: "I tend to thrive in more team-oriented or supporting leadership roles."

6. Expert

The expert is a pro in their given field, constantly striving to perfect their knowledge of a subject and perform to meet their own high expectations. Rooke and Tolbert describe the expert as a talented individual contributor and a source of knowledge for the team. But this action logic does lack something central to many good leaders: emotional intelligence.

Here are some things a diplomat might say:

Expert 1: "A good leader should prioritize their own pursuit of knowledge over the needs of the organization and their direct reports."

Expert 2: "When problem-solving with others in the company, my opinion tends to be the correct one."

Which Leader Are You?

So, which action logics above felt like you? Think about each sentence for a moment.

Now, check out which of the seven leadership styles you embrace on the right based on the sentences you resonated with on the left.

The more action logics you agree with, the more likely you are to practice a mix of leadership styles.

For example, if you agreed with everything the strategist said, this would make you a 66% strategic leader and 33% democratic leader. If you agreed with the third statement and everything the alchemist said, this would make you a 50% transformational, 25% strategic, and 25% democratic leader.

Keep in mind that these action logics are considered developmental stages, not fixed attributes - most leaders will progress through multiple types of leadership throughout their careers.

Learn Your Leadership Management Style to Become a Better Leader

Whether you manage a big or small team, your leadership style heavily impacts how your direct reports see you and how your team works together to achieve your company's goals. There are many different styles of leadership, so choosing one that works for you can make you a more effective leader.

If you want to be a leader that makes a difference, you'll need to keep growing and embrace change. Are you ready to get started?
Editor's note: This post was originally published in August 2016 and has been updated for comprehensiveness.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Leadership Styles: The 11 Most Common & How to Find Your Style [Quiz]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn about 11 types of leadership styles, and the traits they carry. Choose the leadership style for you and test to find out what type of leader you are.