The 6 Leadership Styles: Participative (Part 4 of 6)

The Six Leadership Styles: A Six Part Series

Leadership Style 4 of 6: Participative

Last week we continued our series on the Six Leadership Styles with a detailed look at the third style (Affiliative). We learned that building some relationship with people and adding credits into the relationship bank account is helpful but letting it overtake you and turning into the "disease to please," is not helpful. We also recapped that the style(s) a leader deploys shape 70% of the climate and the climate accounts for 30% of the results. We also learned that a one-trick pony doesn’t cut it as a leader, rather the most effective leaders utilize 4-6 of the Six Leadership Styles and can shift gears seamlessly as different situations arise. This week, in the fourth part of our series, we explore the ParticipativeStyle.

  Overview

The Participative style is grounded in the idea that, “People support what they help create.” The participative style is also symbolized by the statement, "Let's decide together" as it draws on input from the team.

Pros

If you are going to lean heavily on a particular style, the Participative Style is a good choice as research suggests that of all the styles, this one has the strongest positive effect (highest correlation) with employee engagement and results. When using the participative approach, the leader models decision making as a group process and will hold meetings to get people involved and give them input into the options available and the path chosen. The leader will take his/her lead from this input, often going where the group wants to go.

This style is very powerful because it’s based on the idea that if you give people input into a decision/direction they are much more likely to own it, lead it, support it, and champion the result. It gets people involved and gives them a voice, thereby creating a substantial amount of buy-in and support for the direction, and as a result is very effective for creating consensus, commitment, and fostering innovation and change.

It is highly effective and recommended if you are leading seasoned veterans, and/or anytime the group has the best interests of the project and/or organization in mind, and in cases where the leader is open to options. High performers and experienced professionals in general will insist on this style from their leaders.

It is also well suited to situations when the leader is genuinely uncertain about the best direction to take and needs ideas and guidance from others. Even if the leader has a strong direction already in mind, the Participative Style works well to generate ideas for executing that vision.

Cons

It’s not an instant-result style. The Participative approach will take longer (does it really take longer or is it actually time saved?), and can be over-used by some leaders to mask their own inability to make decisions. For example, most of us have experienced the following situation: once the committee(s) have kicked it around and identified 2-3 options as well as the pros/cons of each option, and there is no clear/obvious choice, someone has to make a decision. A leader with too much Participative Style might just form another committee!

Sometimes too much of a player’s coach is not in the best interests of the players. Not everything needs the input of everyone. In some instances, people actually appreciate when the leader takes a stand and says, “Here’s how we’re going to do it.” If leaders overuse the participative approach, the danger is that people will think, “Why is this person our leader when he/she can’t make a decision and has to ask us everything? What value is he/she adding?”

Also, go-where-the-group-wants-to-go is fine as long as the group has the best interests of the organization in mind, but what if they don’t? What if the group wants to maximize their personal interests at the expense of the organization? In some cases, the overly participative leader can end up following the group off the road and into the ditch, without realizing how they got there, and may not have the courage to course correct the situation. The inmates run the asylum, so to speak!

This approach is not the best choice in a time of crisis/emergency. If a workplace safety incident occurs, immediate action needs to be taken, so this is not the time to run a focus group, or get 15 people together to discuss various options and vote.

Finally, using the Participative Style to get feedback on how to approach a project when the decision has already been made is a very bad idea. Instead, be open and transparent about what has already been decided, and then get input on how to move forward from that point.

 Application

There are many practical applications of leadership styles including:

• Recruitment: Asking behavioural interview questions that discover which style(s) a leader prefers.
• Leadership Development: Embedding leadership styles into programs via assessment tool, program content, e-learning, and coaching.
• Organizational Assessment: Aggregate data provides insights into organizational strengths and blindspots. Is your organization overly directive? Overly participative? Implications?
• Succession Planning: Can be strengthened by using objective assessment data and comparisons to global standards of leadership.

Summary

Every leader should strive to have a full toolbox of leadership styles. Outstanding leaders use four or more of the six styles. The more leadership styles you have command over, the more situations you can manage effectively. Like each of the Six Leadership Styles, every leader needs to be comfortable using the Participative Style. Overall, the Participative Style is highly correlated to creating effective workplace climates and employee engagement.

Next week in the 5th of the series, we’ll explore the Pacesetting Style.

Brent Pederson is a Senior Client Partner with the Hay Group division of Korn Ferry, a global management consulting firm, and can be reached at 1-306-359-0181 or [email protected].