Find Your Personal Leadership Style
Have you seen the last shared posts by one of your LinkedIn or Twitter contacts showing the difference between a boss and a leader? You sure know these pictures:
- There are these infographics of the n (n > 0) most essential differences between a boss and a leader.
- Pictures in which, on the one hand, some enslaved people are pulling a rope to move a stone, and a guy is sitting on it, commanding the slaves. Well, that’s obviously the boss. On the other hand — the leader — a guy helping the people to pull on the rope. Noone is enslaved here.
… relax, I am not going to post those pictures here. But as I am constantly stumbling over such posts on LinkedIn, I see a lot of people commenting things like ‘Yeah! Fully agree!’ or ‘That’s modern leadership!’. Wait for a second — modern leadership? To me, at least the second example looks more like a servant-leader approach, primus inter pares, which was developed during the 1970s.
This article is not intended to deep dive into leadership theories. Instead, I provide a list of leadership theories that I find meaningful. I also describe how they complement each other.
Almost 60 years ago
If you want new ideas, read old books.
~ Ivan P. Pavlov
The following short and incomplete list clarifies that theories and thoughts that influence today’s thinking about modern leadership didn’t just appear during the last three years.[1]
- Douglas McGregor (†) published his book The Human Side of Enterprise in 1960, meaning McGregor wrote his book in the 1950s. However, McGregor’s ideas are more commonly known under Theory X and Theory Y.
- Robert K. Greenleaf (†) published his first essay named ‘The Servant as Leader’ in 1970. He published his book Servant Leadership in 1977.
- James McGregor Burns (†) conceptualized leadership as either transactional or transformational in his book Leadership in 1978.
- George B. Graen et al. first conceptualized the Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX) during the 1970s. Since then, the theory has been developed further.
- Bernard M. Bass (†) et al. published the Full Range of Leadership Model in 1991. Its differentiation of Laissez-Faire, Transactional Leadership, and Transformational Leadership combined with the definition of the 4 I’s — Idealized Influence, Inspirational Motivation, Intellectual Stimulation, and Individualized Consideration — was ground-breaking and continued Burns’ work.
- Ronald A. Heifetz published his book Leadership Without Easy Answers in 1994. There he presented his ideas about the adaptive work of leadership, also known as Adaptive Leadership.
We see that most leadership theories that influence our modern-day thinking are at least 25 years old. Sure, more recent leadership research, theories, and practical approaches are available. The book Leadership Agility, for instance, was published in 2006, and the book Co-Active Leadership was published in 2015. Also, leadership research around LMX or Transformational Leadership is still vital.
Gandhi — leadership superstar!
Another interesting observation shows that these 25-year-old theories continue to remain relevant today. If we compare leadership theories and approaches published today with existing leadership theories, one finds a lot of redundancies. For example, highly mature leaders show altruistic behavior, have a holistic view, and are systems thinkers.
Many leadership books and theories, whether they are old or new, list Mahatma Gandhi as a great leader because he acted following a given theory. That leads us to an interesting point: most leadership theories are — let’s say — at least compatible with each other, while some say they are redundant. “Old wine in new wineskins” is a German saying, meaning that old stuff just got repackaged in a new and shiny way.
Be careful with such sayings! A lot of leadership theories may be similar or compatible with each other. Most of them take a look at specific circumstances from a different angle. Remember that we explain our complex world by building our mental models, where these models are essentially incapable of explaining the vast complexity of reality.
However, these models achieve something remarkable: they try to explain a particular circumstance from a specific angle, which counts for leadership theories. Consequently, relying on multiple theories allows us to develop and enhance our leadership style because it will enable us to reflect on ourselves from various perspectives. That, in turn, helps us to become more self-aware.
Choose what works out for you
We should always be cautious if somebody tells us something about the one new leadership theory, especially if this person suggests discrediting previously learned insights! Keep in mind that we are all different. Thus every one of us develops an individual leadership style. As such, I rely on a mixture of the following theories and approaches.
- McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y
It provides a fundamental understanding of how a leader’s behavior and the idea of man influence a leader’s and her follower’s response. - The Full Range of Leadership Model
The differentiation between Transactional Leadership and Transformational Leadership provides a fundamental understanding of management and leadership. For me, Transactional Leadership stands for traditional efficiency-oriented management, suited for simple and complicated domains. Transformational Leadership, consisting of Idealized Influence, Inspirational Motivation, Intellectual Stimulation, and Individualized Consideration — also called the Four I’s — primarily focuses on intrinsic motivation and creative problem-solving. That means that Transformational Leadership is about implementing McGregor’s Theory Y. It is leadership suited for complex environments, where a leader acts as an agent for continuous improvement and change. It brings us directly to Adaptive Leadership. - Adaptive Leadership
It is best when people step out of their comfort zone and make a necessary change by themselves in complex environments. Combined with the ideas of Authentic Transformational Leadership and Servant Leadership, people take responsibility for themselves and focus on performing adaptive work because they are motivated to do so. - Leadership Agility
This theory brings personal development and self-awareness into the ring, as well as other factors. It is also true that only developed and self-aware leaders can be Authentic Transformational Leaders. - Co-Active Leadership
This approach sets out five dimensions — Front, Field, Beside, Behind, Field. It is a situational approach that I see complementary to the 4 I’s of Transformational Leadership. - The Art of Leadersheep Framework
It is a hands-on framework that describes concrete acts of leadership where a leader and her followers are illustrated as sheep.[2] I find it very complete, intuitive, and highly compatible with Transformational and Adaptive Leadership. The 4 I’s of Transformational Leadership can be seen as the glue between the acts of leadership described by the framework.
As I have already said, these theories and approaches can complement each other very well. However, if other leadership theories or combinations of leadership theories work out for you — indeed very well!
A word on pseudotransformational and authentic transformational leadership
Some people say that Transformational Leadership is about manipulating followers in a negative way. So let me clarify my position on this.
Transformation by itself is problematic as a frame for leadership. First, it encourages self-referential grandiosity–“I have a transformational vision and now I am going to sell it to you.”
Ronald A. Heifetz and Marty Linsky, 2017. Leadership on the Line.
There is a lot of truth in the statement of Heifetz and Linsky because Transformational Leadership indeed contains the risk of turning into an abusive form of leadership. However, I recommend always distinguishing between Pseudotransformational Leadership and Authentic Transformational Leadership. Following Bass’ approach, whenever I talk about Transformational Leadership, I mean Authentic Transformational Leadership as defined by the following quote.
[Transformational leaders] were authentic–true to themselves and true to others.
[…] Personalized, pseudotransformational tyrants demand domination over others at the other’s expense. [They] stress the convergence of values between leaders and followers [and] emphasize compliance (transactional) and identification (transformational).
Ronald E. Riggio and Bernard M. Bass (†), 2005. Transformational Leadership.
For instance, Hitler is an extreme example of a Pseudotransformational Leader where — of course — Mahatma Gandhi is a role model for Authentic Transformational Leadership. To understand why people act as either pseudotransformational or authentic transformational leaders, one may look at a leader’s psychological profile, motivation theory, and systems theory.
From a systems thinking perspective, one should ask what circumstances force a person/leader to behave in a certain way, meaning the leader acts according to the given system.
From a motivation theory perspective, we may take a trait approach like Reiss’ motivation theory of 16 basic desires.[3] For example, a strong drive for the basic desires power and status combined with a weak drive for honor and idealism seems to be an adverse condition for being an authentic transformational leader.
Self-awareness is the key
Do you know what the number-one approach to formal leadership development is? Developing self-awareness is the top approach, and it has been for long as there has been a leadership development industry. Why? Leadership is a relationship issue.
Christopher Avery, 2016. The Responsibility Process.
The above quote clarifies why self-awareness and personal development are essential for being a mature and genuinely authentic transformational leader. Tools like the Reiss Motivation Profile or Christopher Avery’s Responsibility Process are great for self-awareness training. And what part does knowledge about leadership theories play in this game? Let’s take a look at the following quote from Douglas M. McGregor.
Every managerial act rests on assumptions, generalizations, and hypotheses — that is to say, on theory. […] Another common way of denying the importance of theory to managerial behavior is to insist that management is an art.
Douglas M. McGregor (†), 1960. The Human Side of Enterprise.
You see, it’s not a waste of time to learn about leadership theories: it’s also about becoming more self-aware. And, as there are many mature and practical theories available, it’s not like we have to find the right one first. Instead, we must take responsibility and find a way of bringing the existing knowledge to life in our corporations. We have the chance to make our own work-life more enjoyable and productive if we, especially people in designated leadership positions, learn about leadership. We may also make the world a little better.
So do not let this chance go by. It’s up to you to take responsibility for yourself. To start with, you may look at the book recommendations below. I consider these books as essential reading on leadership development. Give it a try, so next time you read something about leadership on X (Twitter), LinkedIn, or experience a situation in your company, you can apply your knowledge critically and for the better.
Footnotes
[1] Based on the book Leadership: Theory and Practice by Peter G. Northouse. I strongly recommend reading the book to get a comprehensive overview of leadership theories.
[2] Learn more about The Art of Leadershipsheep Framework by it-agile GmbH.
[3] I am aware that the Reiss Motivation Profile (RMP) has been heavily criticized and is not considered a valid theory by current research, as it does not meet the Popper criterion and makes heavy use of the Barnum effect. However, compared to MBTI or DISG, Reiss at least tried to follow a scientific approach. I therefore recommend taking this model with a grain of salt and only using it for your own reflection. I used it in this article since it is an easy-to-understand model that helps to make my train of thought clear. One better relies on the Big Five Personality Traits — conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness (to experience), and extraversion.
Book recommendations
Leadership: Theory and Practice
Peter G. Northouse
The Human Side of Enterprise
Douglas M. McGregor (†)
Servant Leadership
Robert K. Greenleaf (†)
Leadership
James McGregor Burns (†)
Transformational Leadership
Bernard M. Bass (†), Ronald E. Riggio
Leadership Without Easy Answers
Ronald A. Heifetz
Leadership on the Line: Staying Alive Through the Dangers of Change
Ronald A. Heifetz, Marty Linsky
Co-Active Leadership: Five Ways to Lead
Karen & Henry Kimsey-House
Leadership Agility: Five Levels of Mastery for Anticipating and Initiating Change
William B. Joiner, Stephen A. Josephs
The Responsibility Process: Unlocking Your Natural Ability to Live and Lead with Power
Christopher Avery
Who Am I? The 16 Basic Desires That Motivate Our Actions and Define Our Personalities
Steven Reiss
The Normal Personality: A New Way o Thinking about People
Steven Reiss
Acknowledgments
My thanks go to Lee Harrison and Claus-Henning Brech, who reviewed this article for me. Thank you very much!
I also thank Ronald E. Riggio, Marty Linsky, Ronald A. Heifetz, and Christopher Avery for their feedback and the permission to quote from their books.
