Effectiveness depends on the situational demands of a specific environment. When the style of a leader is appropriate to a given situation, it is termed effective. On the other hand, when the style is inappropriate to a given situation it is termed ineffective.
The basic styles of leadership are further divided into eight styles according to their degrees of effectiveness i.e., as more effective and less effective styles. The following are regarded as more effective styles.
Executive : Used by a manager, this style attaches maximum importance to work as well as the people. Such a manager is able to motivate people and utilise the team effectively. He sets high standards of performance and can accomplish the goals successfully.
Developer : The manager adopting this style attaches greatest importance to the people at work and has minimum concern for work. He devotes maximum attention to the development of individual subordinates and believes in their capability.
Benevolent autocrat : The manager whose attitude and style are those of a benevolent autocrat has high concern for work and low concern for people. But he is able to achieve the goals without causing any resentment among the subordinates.
Bureaucrat : With a bureaucratic style the manager is able to control the work-situation and achieve goals by means of rules and procedure. He has minimum concern for people and work as such.
The less effective (or ineffective) styles are stated to be those which are not appropriate to the situation. These are as follows:
Compromiser : A manager who is equally concerned with people and work in a situation which requires emphasis on one of these, is a poor decision-maker due to pressures on both counts. Thus he is ineffective manager leader.
Missionary : The missionary manager is one who aims at harmonious relations among people as an ideal and is little concerned with work, although the situation requires greater emphasis on work. He is unable to get results.
Autocrat : An autocratic manager is interested only in work and results thereof, whereas the situation requires relation-orientation. Such a manager lacks confidence in his subordinates and depends on high-handed management. So his leadership fails in the long-run.
Deserter : The manager who is concerned with neither people nor work reflects a passive attitude towards his job. He is an escapist.
