'Management is doing things right. Leadership is doing the right thing.' Peter Drucker
Most successful companies in the past were led by leaders who displayed a mix of leadership styles that were principally autocratic in their nature. Historically this style worked well and may still continue to do so for some organisations but for many it is now time to change.
Changing economic, demographic, and societal needs, particularly the moves towards greater social equality and worker wellbeing offer a different set of challenges for leaders. If we look at the leading successful businesses of today such as Google, Amazon, Apple, Twitter, Coca-Cola, Pepsi Co, and IBM they all favour, and aim to practice, an inclusive and participative leadership style far different to that of the past.
The leaders of these dynamic organisations have grown up in a new world and are predominantly consensus builders and flexible explorers who as egalitarian types feel comfortable sharing decision-making, mediating disagreements, and rolling up their sleeves when needed to get things done. These leaders have moved to a ‘democratic leadership’ style typified by behaviours that:
Accepts and invites input from team members/people
Encourages upward and downward communication
Seeks the inclusion and participation of all people in the organisation
Provides direction but offers feedback, support, and guidance as required
‘Walks the talk’ by being visible and makes themselves available to all
Understands that people are motivated when they feel involved and valued
Asks others for ideas or solutions
Wants people in the organisation to feel involved and that through their daily work they can add something to the organisation
Is interested in helping people to reach their potential
There is actually nothing new in democratic leadership.
The noted behavioural and group researcher, Kurt Lewin, along with his colleague, Ronald Lippitt in the late 1930s first started to look at the issue of autocracy and democracy[1] and a year later along with Ralph White,[2] carried out interviews with business leaders and employees concluding that three factors determine a leader’s choice of one of three possible leadership styles:
The autocratic style based upon how leaders make decisions. They do not consult their followers or involve them in the decision-making process. Having made a decision they impose it and expect obedience.
The democratic style involves others, their thoughts, and opinions whilst taking an active role themselves in the decision-making progress. However, they do not put things to a vote and take full responsibility for seeing the decisions achieve the desired outcomes.
The laissez-faire style involves the leader having very little involvement in decision-making themselves, they leave matters to their followers.
They established that there was more originality, group-mindedness, and friendliness in democratic groups and that this the most preferred and effective leadership style favoured by followers. Reflecting nearly a decade later Lewin wrote after experimental group work with children:
‘There have been few experiences for me as impressive as seeing the expression in children’s faces change during the first day of autocracy. The friendly, open, and co-operating group, full of life, became within a short half-hour a rather apathetic looking gathering without initiative. The change from autocracy to democracy seemed to take somewhat more time than from democracy to autocracy. Autocracy is imposed upon the individual. Democracy he has to learn.’ [3]
This small body of work on leadership style, and in particular the democratic style, was not developed further until 1994 when John Gastil wrote a clear definition of the democratic style saying that it is about: ‘Distributing responsibility among the membership, empowering group members, and aiding the group’s decision-making processes’.[4]
The organisational psychologist, Edwin Locke, along with his colleague, David Schweiger, importantly added in 1979 ‘participative’ to the democratic leadership lexicon by saying that this style of leadership is : ‘any power-sharing arrangement in which workplace influence is shared among individuals who are otherwise hierarchical unequal’s’.[5]
Importantly, Locke and Schweiger warn that leaders need to be careful when using this style of leadership saying that it can ‘backfire’ if people feel that their input is being ignored, saying that it: ‘can actually lead to lower employee satisfaction and productivity.’[6]
To avoid this, leaders must recognise that the democratic leadership style can be time-consuming and difficult to maintain as it can involve a lot of discussions with often no optimum solutions to many problems and issues. Additionally, low or poor leader self-awareness can lead to over reliance upon, or the leader looking to please, the follower for their input – a potential ‘tipping point’. If the leader moves too far towards the follower they risk their style of leadership becoming ‘laissez-faire’ in practice - a style that Lewin, his colleagues, and others[7] counsel to be ineffective with a poor record of success.
Despite the potential pitfalls of the democratic leadership style it is when practiced well, ‘good leadership’ – leadership doing the right thing. Research in 2008 by Kuoppala and colleagues found that ‘the impact of ‘good’ leadership on the wellbeing of employees is staggering’.[8]
Whilst Kuoppala and colleagues[9] found no direct relationship between leadership style and performance, other recent research has shown this[10], their research showed that the bottom-line is impacted indirectly through reduced days lost through sickness and a decline in staff turnover along with improved job satisfaction and greater engagement.
What the leading organisations of today such as Google, Amazon, Apple, Twitter, Coca-Cola, Pepsi Co, and IBM have found, and what supports their continuing success, is leadership that includes followers as if they really matter, rather than just say it. They have become organisations in which everyone wins and significantly, are employers of first choice for people, and in particular top talent, to work for.
Effective leadership - 'doing the right thing' - is all about the style.
The ‘Beliefs and Attitudes Mindset Questionnaire’© has been created to help people understand how their beliefs and attitudes impacts their effectiveness and what they can change and develop to heighten their performance as leaders, sales people, team members, and in most fields in life. This can be purchased for internal use or facilitated in bespoke development interventions.
[1] Lewin, K. & Lippitt, R. (1938). ‘An experimental approach to the study of autocracy and democracy. A preliminary note’. Sociometry 1, pp 292-300.
[2] Lewin, K., Lippitt, R. & White, R.K. (1939). ‘Patterns of aggressive behaviour in experimentally created social climates’. Journal of Social Psychology, 10, pp 271-301.
[3] Lewin, K. (1948). ‘Resolving social conflicts; selected papers on group dynamics’. Gertrude W. Lewin (Ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
[4] Gastil, J. (1994) ‘A definition and illustration of democratic leadership’. Human Relations, 47/8, ppp 953-975. Reprinted in K K. Grint (1997). ‘Leadership’, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[5] Locke, E.A. & Schweiger, D.M. (1979). ‘Participation in decision-making: One more look.’ In B. M. Straw (Ed), ‘Research in Organisational Behaviour’, Greenwich: JAI Press, pp.265-339
[6] Ibid
[7] Op cit.
[8] Kuoppala, J., Lamminpaa, A., Liira, J. & Vaino, H. (2008) ‘Leadership, job wellbeing, and health effects – A systematic review and meta-analysis’. The Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 50, pp 904-915.
[9] Ibid
[10] Igbaekeman, G.O. & Odivwri, J.E. (2015). ‘Impact of leadership style on organisation performance: A critical review.’ AJBMR, 5:142 doi:10.4172/2233-5833.1000242