Leadership Styles

The mystery of why one leader's style is more effective than another's is unsolved. Leadership style consists of a leader's general personality, demeanor, and communication patterns in guiding others toward reaching organizational or personal goals. Leadership style research has been dominated by self-report perceptions of subordinates about their leader's behavior patterns in decision making, interpersonal relations, planning, instructional leadership, and management efficiency. Among widely used instruments to assess leadership style are the organizational climate description questionnaire (OCDQ), leadership behavior description questionnaire (LBDQ), and the organizational health inventory (OHI). These instruments gather faculty and staff perceptions of the leadership style of the principal and other organizational dynamics in a school organization. The results of these perceptions have been helpful to principals who may see themselves as democratic, inclusive leaders, while the data reveal an authoritarian, aloof bureaucrat. A principal may organize for and believe in site-based decision making, but subordinates' perceptions may reveal that the principal “owns” the site and makes all decisions. The literature reveals little empirical research about why some leadership styles in certain situations are triumphant successes and others are dismal failures. Observers have pondered why some successful leaders use a consistent style in all situations and others use a more situational style. Research is silent in analyzing leadership styles across schools, school leaders, and situations, but there is general consensus that some leaders are better than others in reading the environment and adjusting their style to address issues.

Categories of leadership styles have increased in the postmodern literature. Among the more recent categories are charismatic leadership, social justice leadership, gender and race leadership, moral leadership, and spiritual leadership. The four rather global categories of leadership styles chosen for this entry, however, are authoritarian, participative, transactional, or transformational.

Authoritarian leaders employ coercive tactics to enforce rules, use Machiavellian cunning to manipulate people and decision making, and reward loyalty over merit. Control is the primary management strategy employed by authoritarian leaders. This form of leadership emphasizes objectivity in the workplace, tends to be impervious to human problems, is insensitive [Page 595]to race and gender, and displays little emotion or affection toward employees. Douglas McGregor's Theory X becomes the authoritarian's motif, believing that people must be forced to work, closely supervised, and rewarded or punished based on individual productivity. They believe in a top-down, line-and-staff organizational chart with clear levels of authority and reporting processes. Fred Fiedler found that authoritarian leaders can be viewed as successful in certain task situations—allowing for the extremes of consideration and ruthlessness, depending on the situation.

School boards looking for a “take charge” superintendent encourage authoritarian leadership types. When the focus is primarily on high stakes test scores and a board of education's mandate to “right the ship,” authoritarian leadership will rule and will be rewarded throughout the entire school district. Research is silent in analyzing leadership styles across school leaders and situations, but there is a general consensus that some leaders are better than others in reading the environment and adjusting their style to address issues. Regardless of more recent democratic leadership styles, scientific management and the ghost of Frederick Taylor continue to prevail in many schools across America. Excessive accountability demands by legislators, school boards, and communities can lead to top-down authoritarian environments.

...