As a leader, understanding which leadership style best suits both yourself and your team can make all the difference in performance. Different approaches suit different situations or personalities so try them all until you find what suits best.

Explore each of the six action logics listed below and determine which you relate to most closely. Keep in mind that most leaders employ multiple leadership styles at once.

Participative

Participative leadership involves employees in decision-making and welcomes feedback from them. However, this can cause disagreement if team members do not reach agreement on a course of action, so strong conflict resolution skills are important for leaders. However, participative leaders can improve worker morale by giving employees more power in decisions that affect them personally - this leadership style originated with Hawthorne experiments conducted during the 1930s; which showed worker productivity increased when managers observed workers and asked for input.

Effective leadership involves helping employees feel emotionally empowered and increasing job satisfaction, as well as encouraging organizational citizenship behaviors such as helping co-workers when they're struggling, mentoring new employees or maintaining clean shared workspaces.

Transformational leadership is another effective style that emphasizes employee growth and development. Leaders demonstrating this type of leadership tend to be great listeners who provide opportunities for employees to learn from more experienced staff members, while making sure to thank employees for their hard work. One prime example of transformational leadership would be Bill Gates as founder of Microsoft who encouraged his staff members to share suggestions from within and be vocal with any opinions that come their way.

Transactional leadership emphasizes setting clear goals and monitoring performance. This strategy can be beneficial in large corporations with routine tasks, providing structure as well as motivating employees with rewards and penalties.

Transformational

Transformational leadership styles focus on altering group dynamics and encouraging team members to achieve their full potential. Such leaders tend to be energetic and passionate, often using personal charm to motivate and energise their teams. Studies have proven their effectiveness at helping team members develop positive mental states and find purposeful work environments.

At their offices, leaders ensure their teams have ample opportunities for creativity. By giving team members opportunities to take on new projects or initiatives, this encourages members to step outside their comfort zones and develop themselves professionally; ultimately helping the business expand.

Whoever wishes to become a transformational leader should seek to learn about and assess various leadership styles, their strengths and weaknesses, as well as emotional intelligence and agility required of successful transformational leaders. Furthermore, their style may need to adapt depending on the needs of their group.

Authoritarian leadership styles focus on command and control between leaders and followers. Goals and expectations are set, while performance monitoring ensures they are met. This style can often be found within enterprise businesses; its primary function being providing clarity and structure within the workplace environment while simultaneously managing large numbers of employees effectively; however, such methods may lack employee motivation and engagement.

Transactional

What makes transactional leadership style effective is when all employees understand their roles, the rules are clear, and leaders communicate precise goals to their teams and reward based on performance - such as meeting daily sales quotas for bonuses or even raises. This structure works particularly well in high-stress environments like first responders and military organizations, and highly repetitive work like manufacturing.

However, transactional leaders don't lend themselves to creative work well - employees may become disengaged and morale may suffer as there are no intrinsic rewards to drive employee motivation and productivity. Furthermore, transactional leaders often forget important long-term objectives; for example if their focus solely remains on meeting sales quotas instead of leadership development opportunities for their people then potential growth opportunities could be missed out on by the company.

Transformational leadership often comes hand-in-hand with democratic leadership. Leaders using this style involve their team members in decision making and are open to feedback from them, encouraging innovation within an organization as a result of the combination of both styles. One such leader was General Motors's CEO Mary Barra who used both styles during Flint Water Crisis - simultaneously using transformational as well as transactional styles - ensuring her employees had everything needed for an easy return to work - such as authoring playbooks on safety protocols while sending back-to-work packages which were both transparent and empathetic in nature - which enabled innovative and rapid adaptation during times of change within her company GM itself!

Laissez-faire

Laissez-faire (meaning, "Leave It Be") is an indirect leadership style which encourages team members to work independently and make decisions without too much supervision from their leader. It works especially well when teams of specialists in each field know each other well enough that minimal guidance from them is required from them as a leader. A well-known example of laissez-faire leadership was American businessman and investor Warren Buffett, who hired managers for each business of his portfolio that were given significant freedom in performing their duties without being constantly micromanaged.

Transactional leaders prioritize traditional workflow and meeting daily quotas, but also place equal weight on results, existing structures, rewards or penalties, and team morale. This approach creates clear roles and expectations for team members that may help increase morale; however, its main drawback lies in restricting creativity or out-of-the-box thinking within teams.

Democratic leadership, which requires team members to participate in decision-making processes and fosters open communication, can bring high job satisfaction; however, its implementation can make the decision-making process slower. Bass and Bass note that democratic leadership may improve job satisfaction but slows decision making processes down considerably.

Authoritarian leadership is another highly effective style, emphasizing strict rules and standards. Although often misconstrued as negative and close-minded, authoritarian leadership can prove highly advantageous in highly regulated or administrative environments with stringent guidelines that must be observed.