ASSIGNMENT I have different type of leadership styles prevalent in my organization with examples. I have also mentioned the style of my choice which i will practice as a leader.

The leader is the most important person in the organization, and subordinates monitor, magnify, and even mimic his every move. He needs to stay in tune with this relentless attention and use it to his advantage. The success and influence as a leader depends on correctly reading those with whom you interact most frequently and intensely. Because the leadership style reverberates throughout the organization, ultimately it will bolster or undermine company performance and culture. Leaders matter because they set the tone for their followers and organizations.They also matter because more than 95 % of all people in the workforce have leaders, are leaders or both. Currently I am working with Standard Chartered Bank in the sales domain; I have clubbed my experiences in my current organization as well as previous organization to define various leadership styles. I have also taken the help of Blake and Mouton's model to define some of these styles. I have also taken help from a articles published in Mc Kinsey quarterly entitled " Why good bosses tune into their people" by Robert Suton.

Autoctratic StyleIt is the classical approach. The features are as follows: I.The manager retains as much power and decession making authority as possible. II.He does not consults staff nor allowed to give any inputs. III.Staff is expected to obey orders without giving any explanations. IV.Structured set of rewards and punishments. V.Such type of leaders are greatly criticized. This leadership style can be effective under following circumstances : VI.When the staff is new and untrained. VII.When the staff does not respond to any other leadership style. VIII.A leader's power challenged by staff. Example:During my stint in the previous organization the work was done in a similiar fashion. The national head of my vertical did almost all the talkings in the meetings, interrupted everyone and silenced the dissenting underlings. His direct reportees who were the Regional heads complained about him behind his back but when he left the room the most powerful of the regional head started behaving the very same way. When the regional heads left the meeting the next boss in hierarchy began imitating him in turn. The ripple effect of national head's autocratic style reverbrated throughout the organization.

Bureucratic Style

Such leaders do everything by the book. They work in accordance to rules or policies. They believe in enforcing the rules.Such type of leadership is most effective where operational risk is involved like handling of cash in a bank. Example:In my organization this is the style followed by people who are teller manager (who oversee collection and payment of cash/instruements) and people from the domain of auditing.

Laissez Faire StyleThis is also known as hands off style. The manager provides little or no direction and gives staff as much freedom as possible. All authority and power are given to staff and they determine goals,make decessions and resolve problems on their own. It is a effective tool when staff is highly skilled, experienced, trustworthy and educated. Staff take pride to do their work and are self motivated. It is highly ineffective when the leader does not understand his or her responsibilities and hopes that staff will cover for him or her. Example: This was the style which was practised by my first boss. He hardly took any weekly or monthly meetings. There was a mixed reaction from the followers some appreciated it while some were always in a maze regarding what to do and what not to.

Impoverished ManagerThese type of leaders make minimum effort to get the work done. He has a lazy approach that avoids as much work as possible. He has low concern for task and low concern for people. They care about protecting themselves, keeping their job and collecting paychecks. Their tactics are to act as messengers, simply passing on information from higher management to the employees. As merely messengers, they can say dont blame me, this is what they want done. When conflicts arise, they do not get involved and let others work things out. These managers do not expect very much out of the employees and in turn, give little of themselves. Example: The boss of one of my colleague behaves in a similair fashion. His involvement with his reportees is low. As a result his followers are low on motivation and have unresolved grievances.

Country Club managerThis type of leader pays thoughtful attention to needs of people for satisfying relationship.It creates a comfortable and friendly atmosphere in the team which leads to work tempo. Example: My previous manager used to follow this style. He had a habit to throw out parties at regular intervals. Successes were celebrated and failures

never discussed in these parties. This attitude rejuvenated the team and inspired each member to give their best shot.

Team ManagerThe team manager relentlessly thanks others for making him look good and gives credit to his team and downplays his own contribution. He routinely gives credit to his followers probably even more than they deserve.He only manages the team,s external boundary. He knows how to fuel the illusion (and reality) that he is in charge.He accepts responsiblities for the errors and does not blames his followers. Such leaders are praised for their clarity compassion and control. He is not a boss but part of the team. Example: My present manager follows this style. Infact he prefer not to be addressed as a boss but as a facilitator.

Paternalistic ManagerPaternalistic managers give more attention to the social needs and views of their workers. Managers are interested in how happy workers feel and in many ways they act as a father figure (pater means father in Latin). They consult employees over issues and listen to their feedback or opinions. The manager will however make the actual decisions (in the best interests of the workers) as they believe the staff still need direction and in this way it is still somewhat of an autocratic approach. I am unable to find a real time example of this style in my organization.

Situational leaderIt was proposed by Hersey and Blanchard. It argues that successful leadership is achieved by selecting the right leadership style which is contingent on level of follower's readiness. The most effective leaders devote enormous effort enormous effort to understand that how their moods, quirks, skills and actions affect their followers performance and humanity. They constanly make adjustments to be a bit more helpful and constructive tomorrow that they were yesterday. Example: Such is the style of one of my colleague's manager. He does not show any of the distinctive style to manage his people. He has different style for new joinees and different for people who are already the part of system.

Opportunistic ManagerAn opportunistic manager does not give credit to his people. His stlyle aims to maximise self benefit. He believes in getting the credit of all good work done.He uses subtle tactics to get credit such as collabrating with people who

are likely to praise him. He always downplay's the contribution of his team when the company has performed good. He wants to have the lion's share of credit beacuase of the romance of leadership. The immediate team of such bosses does not regard them as truthful. Example: One of my colleagues ex manager exhibited the above type of behavior. He used to take the credit of the good work done and shy away to take the responsiblities of the faults. His team's job was to retain the top customers of the bank and to increase revenue from them. In one of the meetings he expalined that since he himself keeps personal contacts with the top customer as a reason behind retention of these customers.

Transformational leaderWorking for a Transformational Leader can be a wonderful and uplifting experience. They put passion and energy into everything. They care about you and want you to succeed. The followers of these leaders can talk about their half baked ideas, test them and even make big mistakes without the fear of ridicule. Transformational Leadership starts with the development of a vision, a view of the future that will excite and convert potential followers. This vision may be developed by the leader, by the senior team or may emerge from a broad series of discussions. The important factor is the leader buys into it, hook, line and sinker. The next step, which in fact never stops, is to constantly sell the vision. This takes energy and commitment, as few people will immediately buy into a radical vision, and some will join the show much more slowly than others. The Transformational Leader thus takes every opportunity and will use whatever works to convince others to climb on board the bandwagon. Following are traits of transformational style : IX.People will follow a person who inspires them. X.A person with vision and passion can achieve great things. XI.The way to get things done is by injecting enthusiasm and energy. XII.They provide psychological safety to their followers. Example: The national head of my present comapny constantly talks about the vision for next two hears. He never talks about monthly or quaterly performances. He is adept at protecting the time of the employees e.g. by eliminating needless meetings. He always keeps the meetings short. He always takes time to express appreciation.

Charismatic LeadershipIt is also a type of transformational leadership style which is hard to teach and also extremly powerful. The Charismatic Leader gathers followers through dint of personality and charm, rather than any form of external power or authority.It is interesting to watch a Charismatic Leader 'working the room' as they move from person

to person. They pay much attention to the person they are talking to at any one moment, making that person feel like they are, for that time, the most important person in the world. Charismatic Leaders pay a great deal of attention in scanning and reading their environment, and are good at picking up the moods and concerns of both individuals and larger audiences. They then will hone their actions and words to suit the situation. Charismatic Leaders use a wide range of methods to manage their image and, if they are not naturally charismatic, may practice assiduously at developing their skills. They may engender trust through visible self-sacrifice and taking personal risks in the name of their beliefs. They will show great confidence in their followers. They are very persuasive and make very effective use of body language as well as verbal language. Example: One of my ex manager had similiar skills. He had excellent listening skills and used to pay attention to persdon when he is talking.

Quiet LeaderThe approach of quiet leaders is the antithesis of the classic charismatic (and often transformational) leaders in that they base their success not on ego and force of character but on their thoughts and actions. Although they are strongly taskfocused, they are neither bullies nor unnecessarily unkind and may persuade people through rational argument and a form of benevolent Transactional Leadership. The basic traits of a quiet leader are as follows: XIII.The actions of a leader speak louder than his or her words. XIV.People are motivated when you give them credit rather than take it yourself. XV.Ego and aggression are neither necessary nor constructive. Example: This type of style was practised by one of my previous manager. He used to fullfill the promises made to the team within given timeframe and in turn expected the same from the team members to deliver in given timeframe.

Participative leadershipIt is a democrative type leadership style. A Participative Leader, rather than taking autocratic decisions, seeks to involve other people in the process, possibly including subordinates, peers, superiors and other stakeholders. Often, however, as it is within the managers' whim to give or deny control to his or her subordinates, most participative activity is within the immediate team. Following are the advantages of this model : Involvement in decision-making improves the understanding of the issues involved by those who must carry out the decisions. The best bosses boost performance by watching their people's back; making it safe for them to learn, act and take intelligent risks and doing hundred little things that help them achieve one win after another and feel pride and dignity along the way.

XVI.People are more committed to actions where they have involved in the relevant decision-making. XVII.People are less competitive and more collaborative when they are working on joint goals. XVIII.When people make decisions together, the social commitment to one another is greater and thus increases their commitment to the decision. XIX.Several people deciding together make better decisions than one person alone. Example: This is one of the qualities of my present manager. Before taking any business decessions like realigning key business drivers or to work late for month ends he takes the opinion of the team members into account. He lets everyone speak and hears their views. This induces a sense of ownership in the team members. This also ensures that key decessions are implemented smoothly without any hassles.

In future I will practice the situational model of leadership as leader.I will adjust my style to the situation and then people being led.