Sometimes the Lion, Sometimes the Lamb

Alex Ferguson was the manager at Manchester United for 26 years and is the most successful manager in the history of the English Premier League. At the age of 71, Ferguson retired, but not before anointing his replacement, David Moyes. Moyes was another successful manager in the league, and was hand-picked by Ferguson, and subsequently confirmed by the Board. Manchester United had won the league the year Ferguson resigned, and Moyes, taking over largely the same team, could only manage to steer the team to a disappointing 7th the following year. Moyes was subsequently sacked. The difference may have been in the managerial personality and style. Ferguson was a hard driving, dominating character, who intimidated all, even the headstrong youth who were often perceived as Prima Donnas. Moyes was more collegiate and fared less well in corralling the youthful aspects of the overpaid egos he had to manage. Same team, different leader, markedly different results - the team dynamic suited the style of the old leader, but not that of the new.

There are typically recognized 3 different leadership styles:

?      Authoritarian (Autocratic) – Appropriate when the leader has all the information, time is critical, and team is already motivated.

?      Participative/Consultative (Democratic) – Normally used when part of the information is available and the employees can augment missing information. Used to build involvement. Requires skillful employees.

?      Delegative (Free Reign) Known as (Laissez Faire) – A manager should use this style when he has the full trust and confidence in the people below him. Laissez faire behavior is not really leadership at all. In fact, it is referred to as non-leadership, but as long as it is a conscious strategic decision, it can be utilized.

You don’t have to be one type of leader all the time, but if you did, it should be Participative.

Situational Leadership – Where you select the appropriate style for the particular situation:

?      Early in initiatives, it is likely that a more Autocratic style is used to combat early team indecisiveness.

?      As the team become involved, then Participative Leadership could be employed.

?      When completely confident that an initiative is on autopilot towards success, Delegative Leadership can be considered. 

Different needs demand different leadership styles. The project or team can be new, or existing and running smoothly, or in trouble, and each situation would play to different strengths of the new leader. For instance, in British peacetime before the second world war, Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain was an able administrator who favored conciliation and compromise. Faced with Germany’s aggression, Chamberlain went to Munich to try and appease Hitler and brokered the “Munich Agreement”. Once Hitler reneged on the agreement, Chamberlain doesn’t have the strength of personality or suitable temperament to be a wartime leader, and Churchill is elected in his place. Churchill autocratically builds strategies and international coalitions to defeat Hitler, but once the war is over, Britain elects a different Prime Minister since there is a perception that Churchill’s strength is not as a peacetime leader.

It is very challenging for a leader to be brought in to lead different types of projects, but expected to be universally successful. They must be versatile enough to know that what worked on the last project may not be appropriate for the next project. The team and the state of the project would be different so different approaches need to be exercised.

So it is great if you are like Churchill, but if the occasion demands, be ready to be like Chamberlain too.

About the author: 

Stuart regularly speaks on performance management and has guided professional athletes to meet their career goals.