Growing up, I was only exposed to one type of management style. My baseball coaches were some of the most ruthless and demanding people I\u2019ve ever met, pushing our team to our physical and emotional limits.<\/p>\n\n
When I started doing internships in college, I expected my managers to be like my coaches. Since the stakes are higher in a business, I was scared to mess up.<\/p>\n
But to my surprise, my managers in the working world were the complete opposite of my coaches. For the first time, I experienced different management styles.<\/p>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n Your management style impacts the team you oversee and sets the tone for your workplace environment.<\/p>\n Check out this overview of the top management styles to learn the pros and cons of each and how each style impacts your team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n A visionary manager casts a vision for a purpose and direction their employees can believe in. They inspire their team to work hard to execute that vision.<\/p>\n I think a visionary management style works best when the leader has excellent communication and charisma to communicate their long-term vision.<\/p>\n When they succeed, they\u2019ll gain buy-in and intrinsic motivation from employees.<\/p>\n When they don\u2019t, they risk disengagement and underperformance.<\/p>\n Visionary leadership<\/a> works best when managers give their employees autonomy<\/a> and freedom in executing the vision.<\/p>\n If you want to employ this style, I recommend you empower your team to take risks and make decisions to work toward your shared goal.<\/p>\n Autocratic management is the most top-down approach to management \u2014 employees at the top of the hierarchy hold the power to make decisions.<\/p>\n Once a decision is made, autocratic leaders expect acceptance and execution from their team.<\/p>\n I think the benefits of an autocratic management style are fast decision-making and clear direction, both useful during a crisis<\/a> or when training an inexperienced team. With clear directives and close supervision, an autocratic style can raise productivity quickly.<\/p>\n The risk of an autocratic management style is that employees may experience low morale if they don\u2019t understand or have a chance to contribute to the vision.<\/p>\n Turnover is likely if employees don\u2019t feel engaged and empowered. When implemented poorly, autocratic management can limit innovation and creativity.<\/p>\n Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella is known as a clear and decisive leader<\/a> who guided Microsoft from a struggling tech company to a market leader.<\/p>\n Nadella explains the benefit of clear, direct management this way:<\/p>\n \u201cThe most important attribute that any leader needs to have \u2014 and it is often underestimated \u2014 is the need to create clarity when none exists. You don\u2019t need a leader when everything is well-defined, and it\u2019s easy.\u201d<\/p>\n Being an autocratic leader doesn\u2019t mean that Nadella doesn\u2019t consider employees\u2019 points of view. He is also known<\/a> for his empathy and embracing a growth mindset at Microsoft. But, when it comes to hard decisions<\/a>, I respect that he takes full responsibility and leads with transparency.<\/p>\n In democratic management, the majority rules. Managers let their employees participate in the decision-making process because they value their team\u2019s diversity of ideas and understand that people are the key to a team\u2019s success.<\/p>\n Democratic managers ultimately approve decisions but allow employees to shape and influence their decision-making.<\/p>\n I\u2019ve found many employees prefer a democratic management style because they have a larger stake in and influence on the work they are doing.<\/p>\n But, when executed poorly, a democratic management style can be inefficient.<\/p>\n Consulting an entire team about a decision can slow down progress. Favoritism of choosing one employee\u2019s ideas over another can also cause factions and frustrations.<\/p>\n If you want your employees to feel like they\u2019re all leaders of your team, I suggest you make sure you are genuinely incorporating feedback and justifying your decisions.<\/p>\n Image Source<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n One example of a democratic management style is Reed Hastings, executive chairman and co-founder of Netflix.<\/p>\n During his 25 years as CEO, Hastings empowered Netflix employees to share innovative ideas from any department or level, even encouraging employees to go above their boss\u2019s head when necessary.<\/p>\n In his book No Rules Rules<\/a>, he shares how he built a culture of freedom and responsibility using continuous improvement and transparent communications.<\/p>\n Hastings also incorporates some elements of a visionary management style.<\/p>\n Before streaming existed, he needed to convince employees and investors that streaming would replace DVD rentals and led the company through that transformation.<\/p>\n Transformational management is one of the most popular leadership styles, embraced by business leaders from Alphabet\u2019s Sundar Pichai<\/a> to Proctor & Gamble\u2019s Jon Moeller.<\/a><\/p>\n Transformational managers believe that change and growth are the only way to stay ahead of the curve, so they constantly challenge their employees to perform better. They motivate employees to keep raising the bar, leading to improved team performance.<\/p>\n The best transformational leaders<\/a> continue to push employees while equipping them with the support and resources they need.<\/p>\n These teams are innovative, so they can adapt to drastic industry changes. But they can also risk moving too fast and spreading themselves too thin.<\/p>\n As a people manager, I believe it\u2019s important to understand the limits of how far you can push your employees before they start to burn out.<\/p>\n Pam Bump<\/a> is the head of content innovation, research, and growth at HubSpot. She oversees HubSpot Media\u2019s Content Innovation and Research team and identifies as a transformational manager.<\/p>\n \u201cBefore I was a manager, I always jumped at major problem-solving opportunities, ambiguous requests from leadership, and identifying big bets for my companies. Now, as a manager, I encourage my team to do the same,\u201d Bump explains.<\/p>\n Bump\u2019s approach follows a long tradition of transformational management at HubSpot from founding leaders like Dharmesh Shah.<\/p>\n One challenge of transformational management is balancing individual and team goals, but a successful manager can accomplish both.<\/p>\n \u201cTo balance ambitious overall, transformative team-wide goals, and individual teammate needs, I check in with my direct reports about their growth, what they\u2019re working on, and work that can help them grow their skills or visibility while also supporting team goals,\u201d shares Bump.<\/p>\n Beyond weekly 1:1s, Bump also holds semi-regular career chats to discuss their personal long-term goals and the tactics they can use to get there.<\/p>\n Transactional managers use incentives and rewards \u2014 like bonuses, stock options, or promotions \u2014 to motivate their employees to perform well. Their motto is \u201cIf you do this for me, I\u2019ll do this for you.\u201d<\/p>\n A transactional management style relies on extrinsic motivation, where employees are motivated to reach a goal by the promise of an external reward.<\/p>\n Research shows<\/a> that extrinsic motivation can boost productivity and help employees reach goals in the short term. However, studies show that a balance of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation works best to motivate employees.<\/p>\n Potential pitfalls of transactional management include lower creativity and employees becoming over-reliant on extrinsic rewards. I think it can also lead to a focus on short-term results over long-term success and loyalty.<\/p>\n Just like a sports coach, a coaching manager strives to improve their employees\u2019 long-term professional development. I love how they have a passion for teaching and watching their employees grow.<\/p>\n They remain positive and patient through short-term failure, as long as the team is learning and improving. The best coaching managers may adapt their approach according to an employee\u2019s communication style and needs.<\/p>\n Leaders with a coaching style have two main focuses: overseeing employees\u2019 individual development and bringing a team together as a collaborative force.<\/p>\n The best teams are the most united, and an employee experiences the most professional growth when both their coach and teammates invest in their development.<\/p>\n Jamie Juviler<\/a> is a marketing manager for HubSpot\u2019s Website Blog team and strives to help his team produce their best work while also pursuing their personal goals.<\/p>\n \u201cI spend a lot of my time thinking about how to help my reports develop in their areas of interest and align their strengths with the needs of the team,\u201d says Juviler.<\/p>\n \u201cI want to manage individuals who are happy with their career growth, since they\u2019ll be more invested in their work and willing to make a bigger impact than those who feel limited by their day-to-day tasks.\u201d<\/p>\n You can learn more about Juviler\u2019s management journey and approach here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Servant managers put people first and performance second. They prioritize their customers\u2019 and employees\u2019 well-being over team results.<\/p>\n One key element of servant management is leading by example: Servant leaders demonstrate humility and aren\u2019t afraid to roll up their sleeves and work alongside their teams.<\/p>\n I think the benefits of a servant management style are high trust in and respect for the leader. Teams with a servant leadership style often win over customers with a people-over-profits mentality.<\/p>\n One potential pitfall of servant leadership is that a focus on service may undermine results. This could make employees complacent, leading to average or even sub-par work.<\/p>\n Do Better Talks | Servant leadership and the builder mindset | A conversation with Joaqu\u00edn Duato<\/a><\/p>\n Joaqu\u00edn Duato, chairman and CEO of Johnson & Johnson, identifies as a servant leader.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s very important to realize that you are leading on behalf of others. Servant leadership is not about you; it\u2019s about others,\u201d he shares<\/a>. \u201cThat\u2019s a principle that we try to instill in every single leader at Johnson & Johnson.\u201d<\/p>\n To successfully adopt a servant management style, Duato advises that all managers must listen well and make an effort to connect with employees.<\/p>\n A brave management style, defined by author Bren\u00e9 Brown, is characterized by empathy, vulnerability, and trust.<\/p>\n The idea is that brave managers can build trust and lead with courage by vulnerably sharing their own struggles and failures amidst uncertainty.<\/p>\n \u201cThe number one consequence of a lack of brave leadership and courageous culture is we tap out of the hard conversations that we need,\u201d says Brown<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen people are afraid of being put down or ridiculed for trying something and failing, or even putting forward a radical new idea, the best you can hope for is a kind of status quo.\u201d<\/p>\n In her book Dare to Lead<\/a>, Brown describes brave management with this acronym:<\/p>\n Boundaries<\/strong>. Do I respect my own boundaries and others? <\/p>\n Reliability.<\/strong> Do I follow through on what I said I was going to do? <\/p>\n Accountability<\/strong>. Do I hold myself accountable? <\/p>\n Vault<\/strong>. Do I share information that isn\u2019t mine to share, or do I keep it in a vault? <\/p>\n Integrity<\/strong>. Do I act from a personal code of integrity? <\/p>\n Nonjudgment<\/strong>. Am I nonjudgmental when someone asks for help? <\/p>\n Generosity<\/strong>. Am I generous toward myself and others? <\/p>\n By following these principles, I\u2019m confident brave managers can build trust within their team and work toward shared goals, based on shared values.<\/p>\n Laissez-faire<\/em> is French for \u201cleave alone.\u201d Laissez-faire managers<\/a> monitor their team\u2019s activities, but they remain hands-off. They expect their team to do their jobs with broad autonomy and only seek guidance when they need help.<\/p>\n Laissez-faire management is the opposite of micromanagement. Some employees thrive with autonomy and are happier and more motivated.<\/p>\n But, the flip side of laissez-faire management is that employees can suffer from a lack of guidance and vision. In turn, their work performance suffers, and underperforming employees could get away with doing the bare minimum work.<\/p>\n On the plus side, with autonomy some employees are happier and more motivated to succeed. It\u2019s a double-edged sword, in my opinion, and has to be implemented in the right environment with the right team to be successful.<\/p>\n Legendary executive and investor Warren Buffet is one of the best examples of laissez-faire management in recent history.<\/p>\n1. Visionary Management Style<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n
2. Autocratic Management Style<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n
Example of the Autocratic Management Style in Action: Satya Nadella, Microsoft<\/strong><\/h4>\n
3. Democratic Management Style<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n
Example of the Democratic Management Style in Action: Reed Hastings, Netflix<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n
4. Transformational Management Style<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n
Example of the Transformational Management Style in Action: Pam Bump, HubSpot<\/strong><\/h4>\n
5. Transactional Management Style<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n
6. Coaching Management Style<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n
Example of the Coaching Management Style in Action: Jamie Juviler, HubSpot<\/strong><\/h4>\n
7. Servant Management Style<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n
Example of the Servant Management Style in Action: Joaqu\u00edn Duato, Johnson & Johnson<\/strong><\/h4>\n
8. Brave Management Style<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n
9. Laissez-Faire Management Style<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n
Example of the Laissez-Faire Management Style in Action: Warren Buffet, Berkshire Hathaway<\/strong><\/h4>\n