6 leadership styles

Goldman identified six leadership styles. These included:
1. Coercive-the leader demands compliance. “Do what I tell you.”
2. Authoritative- the leader mobilizes people toward a vision. “Come with me.”
3. Affiliative- the leader creates harmony and builds emotional bonds. “People come first.”
4. Democratic-the leader forges consensus through participation. “What do you think?”
5. Pacesetting-the leader sets high standards for performance. “Do as I do, now.”
6. Coaching-the leader develops people for the future. “Try this.”


The text mentions that coercive and pacesetting styles negatively affect climate and performance in the study. Coercive style leads to resentment and resistance while pacesetting style results in people getting overwhelmed and burned out. Authoritative style includes enthusiasm and a clear vision. Goldman’s data show that the authoritative leader had a positive impact on climate and performance. In order to effectively implement change, it seems that affiliative style will touch people’s emotions, therefore they may be more likely to willingly be involved in the process. The same may be true for democratic style. This style gets people to participate and forms a consensus. In this instance, participants may feel as if they have a stake in the process, therefore may truly put forth an concerted effort to implement change. I question authoritative style because although the leader moves people toward a vision, they may not have a valued stake in making the vision work or be a success. I believe the key to implementing change is to get people to realize the value of that change and how it will affect them and the organization. Once workers can envision change and see it as valuable to themselves and the organization, they will have a vested interest in seeing it work. Pacesetting and coercive styles could delay or even prevent the change process. Perhaps a mixture of authoritative, affiliative, democratic and coaching styles is best for implementing change.
I have seen affiliative and coaching styles at work after implementing a new accounting system. Workers feared and resisted the new system and it was up to leaders to express the importance of the team and show them the way. I have also been in a situation where the leader assumed that their way of completed a report was correct. Instead of asking for the input of others who work with the reports daily, the leader displayed a coercive and pacesetting style.