Republic of the Philippines

BICOL UNIVERSITY POLANGUI

NURSING DEPARTMENT
Polangui, Albay
https://bicol-u.edu.ph/
Email: bupc.nursing@gmail.com

Name: Mitzi Gail P. Peñaflor Year & Block: BSN-4C Date: September 22, 2023

Activity: What are the different leadership styles?

Leadership is the capacity of a person to motivate, influence, and direct others toward a common
objective or vision that is advantageous to the organization as a whole. It includes a number of crucial
duties like giving instructions, assigning work, making judgments, creating priorities, and promoting a
productive workplace. Different approaches, styles, and behaviors are displayed by leaders in different
forms and leadership philosophies also differ in terms of decision-making authority, team participation,
motivational strategies, and overall leadership strategy. Depending on the circumstance, every style offers
advantages and disadvantages. In addition, the scenario, organizational culture, and the requirements of
the team or organization may all influence the choice of leadership style.

1. Democratic Leadership

It is also called participative or facilitative leadership. In a democratic leadership style, the team
member input is considered by the team leader when making choices. Each participant has an equal voice
in a project's direction, yet the leader ultimately has the final say.
Pros: The democratic leadership style is one of the most effective because it encourages everyone to take
part in all activities, voice their thoughts, and feel heard by the leader. Members are also encouraged to
participate since they are assured that their opinions will be heard.
Cons: It can take a lot of effort, time, and democratic communication to come to an agreement. Decision-
making may also be impacted since certain team members may lack the necessary knowledge to make
important choices.

2. Autocratic Leadership

It is also called authoritarian, coercive, or commanding leadership. The democratic leadership is the
opposite of an autocratic one. In this type of leadership, the leader makes decisions alone, without
consulting anyone who reports to them.
Pros: Instead of being used as a stand-alone leadership approach, this kind of leadership performs best
when an organization needs to manage particular circumstances or make difficult decisions. It might work
well, for instance, in emergency or crisis scenarios where prompt and decisive action is required. In
addition to compensating for a team's lack of expertise, responsible parties can make a choice and provide
members with a clear sense of direction.
Cons: A hegemonic culture like this is rare in organizations because doing so would result in member
departures, which would be detrimental to morale and innovative problem-solving.
 3. Laissez-Faire Leadership

It is also called delegative or hands-off Leadership. The French term “laissez-faire” literally translates
to “let them do.” Leaders that practice it delegate almost all authority to their followers and rarely speak
up until necessary. The member’s accountability is a hallmark of laissez-faire executives. Numerous
workers are encouraged to perform at their highest level as a result.
Pros: The workplace culture is frequently more laid-back under this kind of leadership. While
concentrating on how the group is run as a whole, they may have great faith in their members. Members
who serve laissez-faire leaders feel appreciated as a result of this high level of trust. They get the data
they require, then put their knowledge and resources to work to accomplish their objectives.
Cons: Letting people work whatever they choose can empower them, but there are drawbacks to this style
of leadership. Inexperienced or new team members who might benefit from assistance as they ramp up
may find it challenging and it can impede team development. Uncertainty over roles and duties can also
lead to a culture of working in silos, where individuals may operate independently rather than as a
cohesive team.

4. Strategic Leadership

This type of leadership needs flexibility, competitive awareness, and vision. While accepting the
responsibility of executive interests, these leaders also make sure that the working environment is secure
for everyone else. Strategic leaders try to steer their organization in the direction of its long-term
objectives. By employing this leadership approach, they may build a forward-thinking, agile, and adaptive
organization that will succeed in the fast-paced business environment of today.
Pros: Leadership that is strategic ties team management to plans for growth and strategy. They conceive
and put into practice tactics, consider potential progress, and pose questions.
Cons: Strategically-minded leaders run the risk of taking on too much and looking too far ahead,
neglecting important concerns that are happening right now. It's crucial to understand how to delegate
using this leadership style and distribute the responsibility of making decisions.

5. Transformational Leadership

Transformational leaders inspire team members and guide them toward achieving organizational
objectives by earning their trust and confidence. The ultimate objective of a transformational leader is to
have a good influence that lasts, inspire their team to reach their greatest potential, and promote
organizational success.
Pros: This is a very empowering style of leadership where followers are helped and inspired to realize
their potential. All members might receive a list of objectives to complete and a timeline for doing so
when they begin working for this kind of leader. The objectives may start out being quite straightforward,
but as team members advance and achieve their objectives, leaders will give them more difficult tasks to
complete as they advance in their careers.
Cons: Instead, then focusing on the objectives of the task, transformational leaders may overlook
everyone's individual learning curves. It's crucial to work with the team to update standards because
member burnout can also become a problem.

6. Transactional Leadership

In order to encourage and guide behavior, transactional leadership relies on rewards and penalties.
These leaders establish clear guidelines and benchmarks and keep a close eye on the productivity of their
members. Maintaining the status quo and making sure that set standards and goals are met are priorities
for this leadership style.

Pros: Members may feel safer because they understand expectations when transactional leaders provide
useful clarity and structure of expectations. Members also understand exactly what they get in return for
reaching goals.
Cons: This approach focuses more on rewarding behavior and less on cultivating team spirit, coaching,
and member connections. It can be challenging to keep a varied team engaged if just some members are
driven by rewards, and this might result in low innovation and a fear of punishment.

7. Coaching Leadership

It is also called conscious leadership. A coaching leader focuses on discovering and enhancing each
team member's unique abilities and creating plans that will help teams collaborate more effectively.
Although it stresses individual member success, this leadership style is comparable to democratic and
strategic leadership.
Pros: Due of their sense of community within the team, this leadership style can inspire workers.
Building relationships with their team members and fostering trust are the main coaching goals for
leaders. They promote an atmosphere of open dialogue and psychological safety that motivates people to
exchange ideas, solicit feedback, and collaborate on shared goals. It acknowledges the individuality of
each participant and enables the formation of interesting, diverse teams where each person contributes
something unique.
Cons: This leader prioritizes high performance, working with team members who can communicate
effectively and value specialized skill sets. Additionally, they inspire team members to look for new
opportunities, gain information from their mistakes, and keep developing their abilities.

8. Bureaucratic Leadership

The guidelines are followed by bureaucratic leaders. Unlike authoritarian leadership, they might hear
what employees have to say and take it into consideration, but they might also disregard it if it conflicts
with the company's policies or historical practices.
Pros: Larger, more established, or conventional businesses that are successful in their current operations
are most suited for using this model. For some people, this leadership approach can be difficult, but it has
lots of advantages. Favoritism is less likely to occur because of its core responsibilities, job stability, and
predictability. Some team members may be highly creative as a result of this effective and transparent
leadership approach.
Cons: Although members may not feel as in control as they would under autocratic leadership, there may
still be limitations on how much freedom individuals have in their jobs.

9. Visionary Leadership
It is also called affiliative leadership.

Long-term objectives are the primary focus of visionary leadership. In order for their team to realize a
common vision, they hope to inspire and lead them. Collaboration, emotional intelligence, and teamwork
are fostered under this style of leadership. They also encourage people to adopt fresh viewpoints and
methods by fostering an environment that values innovation and change.
Pros: Visionary leaders can lay out a detailed plan that team members can follow and carry out. They
may motivate teams toward significant growth because they are effective and convincing communicators.
If a team has a goal in mind, they may accomplish more and work more effectively. This kind of leader
provides vision statements and other resources to enthuse and encourage teams to participate in their task.

Cons: By focusing on long-term goals instead of immediate concerns, visionary leaders might avoid
potential future problems by avoiding potential impediments. Hyper-concentration on a particular
objective is another frequent difficulty, which can prevent people from considering other suggestions that
might be equally beneficial to the organization.

10. Pacesetting Leadership

A pacesetter sets high expectations and expects followers to carry them out exactly as they have specified.
These leaders demand efficiency and excellent work from their team members, and they may even
intervene to make sure everything is finished on time and correctly.
Pros: This kind of leader establishes challenging objectives with a clear emphasis, so followers
understand exactly what is expected of them. Additionally, these leaders might support their group and
encourage performance, which would raise morale. They make fulfilling goals feel urgent and exciting by
utilizing the skills of skilled and motivated team members. Seeing their leader putting in a lot of effort
with them can also inspire the squad.
Cons: If targets aren't realistic, pacesetting leaders may inadvertently overwhelm and demotivate
members by fostering a high-stress work atmosphere. This may lower engagement and cause burnout,
which makes it difficult for individuals to meet expectations and perform to standard. Members may not
feel empowered to use their knowledge to suggest alternate goals or solutions since goal-focused thinking
can hinder creativity and diversity of opinion.

11. Situational Leadership

Situational leaders adapt their leadership techniques to the demands of the situation or team. With this
leadership method, they analyze particular circumstances, evaluate people's ability and dedication, and
then modify their leadership strategy as necessary. It is proactive and understands that the only constant is
change.
Pros: This style of leadership can inspire team members and guarantee that nobody is forced to work in
an unproductive manner. Additionally, it is helpful for startups that want expertise that is adaptable and
changeable support. Situational leaders are excellent communicators and base their judgments on team
input.
Cons: To make judgments, leaders must have extensive knowledge of all corporate activities and
procedures and the ability to change course swiftly. It's crucial to keep in mind long-term objectives while
also attending to immediate requirements; however, not all leaders are capable of doing this successfully.