A Reflection on My Leadership Style
The exploration of personal leadership styles through various assessments provides insightful revelations into one’s approach to leadership and the theoretical frameworks that support these styles. I completed a leadership style assessment that categorized my tendencies into three distinct styles: Authoritarian, Democratic, and Laissez-Faire. My results were as follows: 13 points for Authoritarian, indicating a low inclination towards this style; 24 points for Democratic, suggesting that this style aligns most closely with my leadership approach; and 17 points for Laissez-Faire, indicating a moderate tendency towards this style. In this article, I will discuss these results in relation to my self-perception as a leader and critique Kurt Lewin’s leadership styles framework, particularly addressing its limitations in encapsulating the full spectrum of my leadership approach.
Reflections on My Leadership Style
The Democratic leadership style, which scored the highest in my assessment, resonates strongly with how I perceive my approach to leadership. Democratic leaders are known for their collaborative, participative, and empowering manner, which aligns with my personal leadership philosophy. I believe in fostering an inclusive environment where team members feel valued and empowered to contribute their ideas and expertise (Northouse, 2016). This approach not only encourages a sense of ownership among team members but also leads to more innovative and sustainable outcomes as diverse perspectives are considered.
In contrast, the low score in the Authoritarian leadership style confirms my self-perception that I do not favor a controlling or top-down approach to leadership. I find that such a style often stifles creativity and reduces team morale, leading to less effective team dynamics and poorer outcomes. The moderate score in the Laissez-Faire category suggests that while I lean towards a hands-off approach in certain situations, particularly when working with highly skilled or self-motivated teams, I do not wholly relinquish leadership responsibility.
Based on my experience as a leader within a SaaS startup development team in Japan, I’ve observed that my approach aligns closely with the democratic leadership style, particularly when I step into roles such as Project Manager or Product Manager. In these positions, I focus on providing support, guidance, and flexibility to my team. I believe that maintaining a balance is crucial; thus, I do not subscribe to the Laissez-Faire style of granting complete freedom. My experience has taught me that an effective PM must offer sufficient guidance and support. This involves engaging in thorough communication to ensure alignment and understanding across the team, which is essential for successful project outcomes.
Critique of Lewin’s Theoretical Construct
While Lewin’s framework of leadership styles — Authoritarian, Democratic, and Laissez-Faire — provides a foundational understanding of different leadership approaches, there are several aspects where it falls short in fully explaining my beliefs about leadership. First, Lewin’s model is somewhat simplistic and does not account for the fluidity and adaptability required in modern leadership contexts. Today’s leaders must navigate complex, dynamic environments where a rigid adherence to one style may not be effective (Zaccaro, Kemp, & Bader, 2004).
Second, Lewin’s model does not adequately address the situational factors that might influence the choice of leadership style. For instance, in crisis situations, a more directive or authoritarian approach might be necessary to quickly resolve critical issues, whereas in stable circumstances, a democratic approach could be more beneficial to engage team members and foster innovation. The model also lacks a detailed exploration of how different styles could be blended depending on the context, team composition, or specific goals (Germain, 2008).
Does Lewin’s Theory Fully Explain My Leadership Style?
While my previous primary leadership style was democratic/participative, I think that good leadership requires adjusting to changing conditions. Therefore I changed my leadership style from Democratic/Participative to Charismatic leadership style. I believe by fostering a motivated and engaged workforce was critical to my success as a product manager for Jobwher, a web service platform that connects Japanese companies with overseas developers. I actively engaged the team in decision-making processes, ensuring that their views and ideas were heard throughout Jobwher’s growth. This not only empowered them, but also strengthened their ownership of the project, improving their drive and dedication.
Furthermore, I saw the value of developing strong team ties outside of official work situations. To build a more collaborative and supportive workplace, I periodically scheduled team outing. We went to karaoke, restaurants, and picnics together. These informal contacts served to enhance team bonds, resulting in better communication, cooperation, and overall team spirit.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while my leadership assessment results align closely with the Democratic style, which Lewin’s model accurately identifies as my predominant approach, the model falls short in capturing the nuanced and adaptive strategies I employ in real-world scenarios. As leadership continues to evolve, it is imperative that theoretical models also adapt to better reflect the complexity and dynamism inherent in effective leadership practices. For future development, I will continue to refine my ability to adapt my leadership style to meet the changing needs of my team and organization, ensuring that my approach remains both relevant and effective.
References
Germain, M-L. (2008, February 20–24). Traits and skills theories as the Nexus between leadership and expertise: Reality or fallacy? [Paper presentation]. Academy of Human Resource Development International Research Conference in the Americas (Panama City, FL, Feb 20–24, 2008). http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED501636.pdf
Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2000). Five-factor model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 751–765.
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp, C., & Bader, P. (2004). Leader traits and attributes. In J. Antonakis, A. T. Cianciolo, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Nature of Leadership (pp. 101–124). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Note:
This article is written based on University of The People Leading in Today’s Dynamic Context (BUS 5411) written assignment by Fristy Tania in April 2024
