Managers play vital roles in an organization.

They interact with employees while

performing their management roles. Managers also interact with top leadership of an
organization where they learn their roles in executing the organization’s strategies. Managers
are often held accountable for their roles. Their success or failure is used to evaluate
management’s role in organizational performance. Different managers have different styles
based on their innate traits and external factors such the management roles they are playing
and corporate culture.
Authoritarian management styles are often preferred by managers who are high in
conscientiousness but poor in agreeableness. Such managers can be characterized by traits
such as an eye for order, clarity, industrious and being less trusting. This style fits well in a
corporate structure that is based on hierarchy. The management provides orders to
subordinates and those employees who are insubordinate are punished. These managers use
several tactics to bring out compliance out of their employees. This includes creating an
atmosphere of fear, doubt as well as uncertainty. Subordinates are kept in a constant state of
fear. This ensures that the manager can use guilt and shame to coerce the employee to be
compliant. In this category, there are micromanagers who tend to focus on details. Employees
are forced into a rigid structure that adheres to the managers guidelines.
Another management category is extroverted management styles. This tends to be
practiced by managers who are high in agreeableness. The managers are also likely to be
more extroverted than introverted. Such managers tend to exhibit traits such as being
compassionate, considerate, and understanding. Charismatic managers fall under this
category. They rely on their charisma and personality to command subordinates.
Transformational management approaches rely on a mutual relationship where employees
and managers support each other. Transactional managers use rewards to control behavior.
These rewards such as bonuses, stock options, among other incentives incentivize
performance improvement among employees. Servant managers fall under this category.
These managers are cheerleaders and they go to work with coworkers to support them. A
complex adaptive management style works well where there is a flat organizational structure.
In this case, everyone is a leader. Each employee is therefore tasked with supporting,
influencing, motivating, and persuading each other.
Political management styles are practiced by managers who are conscientious. These
managers are low in agreeableness and they tend to be competitive, manipulative, outspoken,
calculating, and headstrong. Mushroom managers fall in this category. They emphasize on
information control. They prefer to let their team to know less such that they can allocate
blame and rewards as they will without having to it according to how it happened. For
instance, if something goes wrong, the managers can assign a subordinate blame and they can
take rewards for a good job. Campaigners rely on office politics to thrive in their powerful
positions. The primary objective of these managers is climbing the corporate ladder. As such,
they would like to keep close the subordinates who will further their cause.
Administrative management styles are highly conscientious. They focus on order as
well as following the rules. Process-driven managers follow a process that is outlined when
rolling out their mandate to maximize results. They ensure each step of the process is adhered
to as required. They focus on optimizing the process to achieve high-performance rates. Rule-
driven managers follow the set rules explicitly. As such, they expect nothing less from their
subordinates. They conform to all rules regardless of factors that may make it illogical to
follow the rule.
Democratic management styles are practiced by managers who prefer openness.
These managers also prefer diversity of ideas and they are also curious to get the input of
other people. They would also like to experiment and try new ways of doing things. These
managers are also eager to get feedback from their team. Participatory managers encourage
their coworkers and subordinates to get in and provide input as well as feedback on the issues
at hand. This can increase their influence as they will work with a team that knows that every
member’s input matters. Consensus managers prefer to make decisions by forming
committees to foster cooperation in assessing situations before making a decision.
Laissez-faire management styles are practiced by managers who are agreeable and
who trust others. They trust their coworkers and subordinates to perform well without the
constant involvement of the managers. Cowboys focus on results only. They are keen to
motivate, inspire and support employees but that is all they are involved in the management
process. Seagulls are managers who are completely hands-off and they only get involved
when things are not going on well. Other managers in this category trust their team to work
well but they check on the team periodically to verify that the team is on the right direction
and moving at the desired speed.
Cultural management is practiced in certain regions where cultural roles supersede
personality as well as preferences of individual managers. For instance, some countries have
a high power distance index. Power distance is one of the components of Hofstede’s cultural
dimensions. A high power distance implies that the society accepts an unequal hierarchical
distribution of power. As such, employees accept and expect power to be distributed unfairly.
They therefore conform to cultural norms and the hierarchy that exists.
Each of the above management styles has it upsides as well as limitations. More so,
there is no known silver bullet style that will work best for any organization anywhere. As
such, it is essential to consider the context before making a hiring decision for managers. It is
also essential to consider the prevailing circumstances. For instance, a manger can change
their style due to a need that has risen. Coercive management styles can be effective when
there is a crisis though they may not be effective when employees are highly skilled or
underdeveloped. More so, a manager can use variations of these styles or combinations of
several styles. It is essential for a manager to be flexible. Flexibility will allow the manager to
adapt to different situations.