HKSM

This page uses cookies. ACCEPT

7.1 Why Leadership Style Matters

Why Leadership Style Matters

Leadership style is more than just a preference or personality trait; it is one of the most influential factors shaping how a project team behaves, performs, and responds under pressure. The way a leader communicates, makes decisions, and sets expectations impacts how others show up to the work. Leadership style affects morale, trust, and even how safe team members feel sharing their ideas or raising concerns.

For example, a highly directive leader may move fast and bring order to a chaotic situation, but that same style could shut down creativity in a brainstorming session. By contrast, a more democratic leader who invites discussion might build stronger commitment, yet risk losing time when quick action is needed.

In real project environments, no single leadership style works in every situation. Projects move through different phases, teams vary in experience, and pressure, conflict, and uncertainty rise and fall; as a result, adaptability matters. Effective project leaders observe the situation, understand their team, and adjust how they lead, shifting from coaching to directing or from being hands-off to highly involved—based on what the project needs to succeed at that moment.

Leadership is not about asserting control or projecting authority; it is about facilitating the best possible outcomes. That includes enabling others to do their best work and making it safe for people to contribute and grow.

Great project leaders don’t just have a style—they choose one intentionally to match the moment, the team, and the mission.

7.2 Classic Leadership Models

Classic Leadership Models Overview

Four classic leadership models continue to shape how project teams are led. Each provides a distinct lens on leadership, and understanding when and how to apply them is a sign of maturity as a project leader.

• Transformational Leadership.
• Transactional Leadership.
• Charismatic Leadership.
• Situational Leadership.

Transformational Leadership

Transformational leaders inspire and motivate their teams through vision, purpose, and personal example, aiming to elevate performance by aligning people with values and meaning—not just tasks. Key characteristics include being vision-driven and emotionally engaging, focusing on growth and change, and building trust and commitment.

Transformational Leadership: Advantages

This approach drives high team engagement and loyalty, encourages innovation and creativity, builds a strong, purpose-oriented culture, and is effective in driving organizational or project change.

Transformational Leadership: Disadvantages

It can be overly idealistic or disconnected from day-to-day needs, may not suit short-term, tactical environments, and requires emotional intelligence and communication skill.

Transformational Leadership: Best Used When

A project needs a strong vision or strategic direction, the team is motivated by purpose, change and innovation are essential, or the effort involves leading a transformation or building something new.

Transformational Leadership: Doesn’t Work Well When

The team needs immediate task clarity or discipline, the organization is risk-averse or focused on compliance, or the leader lacks credibility or emotional maturity.

Transactional Leadership

Transactional leaders manage through structured systems, clear expectations, and a system of rewards and consequences, emphasizing getting things done efficiently and correctly. This style is rule- and performance-oriented, uses rewards and penalties to influence behavior, and prioritizes stability and measurable results.

Transactional Leadership: Advantages

It provides clarity and structure, ensures compliance with processes, is useful for managing deadlines, risks, and budgets, and is effective in regulated or operational environments.

Transactional Leadership: Disadvantages

It may limit creativity and team autonomy, can feel impersonal or demotivating over time, and tends to focus on short-term performance rather than growth.

Transactional Leadership: Best Used When

Deliverables and outcomes are well defined, tasks are routine or highly structured, timelines and compliance are critical, or accountability or performance must improve quickly.

Transactional Leadership: Doesn’t Work Well When

A project requires innovation or big-picture thinking, team members are experienced and seek autonomy, or the culture values flexibility or co-creation.

Charismatic Leadership

Charismatic leaders influence others through personal charm, energy, confidence, and emotional appeal, often becoming symbolic figures within a team or organization. They communicate with strong presence, build emotional connections, show high confidence and optimism, and are often vision-driven like transformational leaders, but with an emphasis on personality.

Charismatic Leadership: Advantages

This style can rapidly build trust and motivation, unite teams in high-pressure or crisis moments, inspire loyalty and emotional investment, and help launch new initiatives or build momentum.

Charismatic Leadership: Disadvantages

It can create dependency on the leader, carries the risk of overconfidence or ignoring dissent, may lack sustainability if the leader exits, and relies heavily on personal appeal.

Charismatic Leadership: Best Used When

A team must be mobilized quickly around a challenge, uncertainty calls for confidence, change needs energy to overcome resistance, and the leader is personally aligned and passionate about the mission.

Charismatic Leadership: Doesn’t Work Well When

A team prefers collaborative or data-driven approaches, long-term success depends on systems rather than personality, or the leader is more focused on self than on enabling others.

Situational Leadership

Situational leadership is a flexible model in which the leader adapts style based on the readiness and capability of the team. It focuses less on personality and more on matching behavior to context. No single style works all the time; leaders shift between directive and supportive behaviors depending on the situation.

Situational Leadership: Key Behaviors

• Directing: High task focus and low relationship focus, suited to team members who are new or uncertain.
• Coaching: High task and high relationship focus, helpful when motivation is low but potential is high.
• Supporting: Low task and high relationship focus, useful when the team is capable but needs reassurance.
• Delegating: Low task and low relationship focus, appropriate when the team is experienced and motivated.

Situational Leadership: Advantages

It is tailored to each team member’s needs, encourages both development and delivery, and builds trust and empowerment over time.

Situational Leadership: Disadvantages

It requires constant attention and emotional intelligence, can be misapplied if the leader misjudges team readiness, and does not provide a consistent leadership identity that some teams may prefer.

Situational Leadership: Best Used When

Team experience and confidence vary, projects move through different phases quickly, or the goal is to build team capability over time.

Situational Leadership: Doesn’t Work Well When

The leader lacks self-awareness or flexibility, there is no time to adapt the approach per individual, or the environment demands rigid consistency.

Exploring Five Additional Leadership Styles

This chapter explores five leadership styles often seen in project and organizational settings. Some are more traditional, while others are people-centered or highly flexible. Each has strengths and limits depending on the situation, and understanding these styles helps leaders adapt to the needs of the team and context.

• Autocratic Leadership.
• Directive Leadership.
• Democratic Leadership.
• Laissez-Faire Leadership.
• The Servant Leader.

Autocratic Leadership

Autocratic leaders make decisions unilaterally, relying on authority and control to ensure compliance and performance. This approach features a clear hierarchy, centralized decision-making, fast decision speed, and little collaboration or discussion, and it is often seen in high-risk or high-pressure environments. The style offers quick decisions in urgent situations, clarity and consistency of direction, strong control over results and standards, and usefulness during crises or command-style operations. However, it can demoralize team members, suppress creativity and feedback, reduce trust and collaboration, and create high dependency on leader presence. It is best used when a fast, decisive response is needed, the team lacks experience or training, tasks are routine, urgent, or safety-critical, and there is no time for discussion or debate. It does not work well when innovation, input, or morale is a priority, the team has strong expertise and wants autonomy, or long-term motivation and growth are essential.

Directive Leadership

Directive leaders provide strong guidance, instructions, and expectations while remaining involved in how work gets done. Unlike autocrats, they are more structured and supportive, typically hands-on and detail-oriented, setting clear goals and standards, offering regular oversight and performance feedback, and proving useful in early stages of team development. Advantages include reduced ambiguity and confusion, strong alignment that keeps work on track, habit and discipline building in new teams, and effective support for junior team members. The drawbacks are the risk of stifling initiative and ownership, potential micromanagement, and limited flexibility and empowerment. This style is best used when the team is new or lacks clarity, tasks require tight coordination, or the environment is complex or deadline-driven. It does not work well when the team is mature and self-directed, tasks are creative or exploratory, or over-guidance causes frustration or disengagement.

Democratic Leadership

Democratic leaders involve the team in decision-making, valuing collaboration, group input, and shared ownership of outcomes. The approach emphasizes open dialogue and participation, decisions reached through consensus or voting, inclusion and respect, and the building of morale and engagement. It encourages creativity and idea-sharing, builds high team commitment, increases satisfaction and trust, and promotes diverse viewpoints that lead to better solutions. Its limitations include slower decision-making, the risk of indecision or diluted accountability, and unsuitability for high-stakes or urgent decisions. It is best used when collaboration and ownership are desired, the team is experienced and engaged, diverse perspectives improve decisions, and building buy-in and morale is important. It does not work well when time is short and action is needed, the team is inexperienced or unengaged, or there is a lack of consensus or shared purpose.

Laissez-Faire Leadership

Laissez-Faire leaders take a hands-off approach, offering little guidance or structure so that team members manage their own work. This style involves minimal intervention or oversight, high autonomy and self-direction, and is often used with expert teams or individual contributors, though there is a risk of leader disengagement. Advantages include promoting independence and creativity, working well with highly skilled and self-motivated individuals, reducing micromanagement, and allowing space for innovation. Disadvantages include the potential for confusion and misalignment, low accountability and productivity, perceptions of a lack of leadership, and difficulty managing performance or supporting growth. It is best used when the team is highly skilled, mature, and self-driven, tasks require innovation and personal ownership, and the culture values autonomy above structure. It does not work well when clear direction, coordination, or feedback is needed, the team lacks confidence or experience, or outcomes are slipping or underperforming.

The Servant Leader

Servant leaders prioritize the needs, development, and well-being of the team above personal authority or recognition, serving by supporting. This people-first mindset builds trust, safety, and empowerment, focuses on long-term growth and collaboration, and rests on strong ethics, humility, and empathy. The approach builds strong, loyal, and motivated teams, encourages growth, learning, and initiative, creates a high-trust, high-performance culture, and aligns well with Agile, Lean, and inclusive environments. Potential drawbacks include a lack of visible urgency or authority, the risk of being misinterpreted as passive or indecisive, and the time required to build culture and results. It is best used when the goal is to develop people, not just deliver results, when collaboration and trust are critical, and when building a long-term, values-driven culture. It does not work well when quick decisions and control are required, the team is not ready to take initiative, or the organization does not value empowerment or growth.

Key Takeaway

Each leadership model offers valuable tools, yet none are one-size-fits-all. What matters is how well a leader can assess the situation and choose the right model—or a blend—for the task, the team, and the moment.

Each style reflects a distinct leadership mindset: some prioritize control and efficiency, while others elevate collaboration, growth, or personal connection. Effective project leaders assess the needs of the team and environment and adapt, choosing the right approach at the right time rather than relying on a single style.

7.3 Recognizing Leadership Styles in Practice

Applying Leadership Styles in Real-World Projects

Having explored the strengths and limitations of classic and modern leadership styles, the emphasis now is on applying them in day-to-day work. Theory matters only insofar as it translates into action in real project environments. In practice, leadership is not about adhering to a textbook model but about being responsive. Effective project leaders do not ask which style they prefer; they ask what the team needs right now. The capacity to switch between styles—or combine them—defines mature, adaptive leadership.

When to Blend Styles

Consider a software development project with a looming deadline. A directive approach may clarify roles and priorities at the outset. As the team finds its stride, a democratic or coaching stance can encourage ownership and problem-solving. If morale dips, drawing on transformational or servant leadership can rebuild momentum. Blending styles is not inconsistency; it is intentionality. A kickoff meeting may lean charismatic to generate energy, whereas a crisis meeting can require autocratic decisiveness. The aim is to provide what the team needs to succeed, rather than to perform a rigid model.

Leadership by Project Phase

Leadership needs shift across the project lifecycle. During initiation, a visionary (transformational) or directive stance sets expectations and direction. Planning benefits from democratic or situational approaches that foster buy-in. Execution often relies on transactional leadership to keep commitments and deadlines on track. Closing a project is an opportunity for servant leadership to recognize contributions and support transitions. Understanding how the role evolves enables proactive adjustment of tone, involvement, and expectations without reinventing oneself.

Adapting to Team Dynamics and Maturity

Team experience and culture strongly shape effective leadership behaviors. A brand-new team may require more structure and directive support, while a seasoned team responds better to delegation and empowerment. Cultural norms also matter—some groups expect clear hierarchy, others value collaboration. Use observation to identify what the team needs, and let the answers guide how you show up as a leader. Consider:

• Whether the team is energized or burnt out.
• Whether they need clarity or creativity.
• Whether they want autonomy or reassurance.

Reading the Room: Signals That It’s Time to Shift

• Decisions stall or meetings go silent (you may be too autocratic or not democratic enough).
• The team seems disengaged or anxious (they may need more inspiration or support).
• You are firefighting constantly (a shift from servant to directive or transactional may be needed).

Leadership operates as a feedback loop; if something is not working, adjust. Styles are tools, not static roles.

Practical Tip: Style Check-In

A monthly leadership style check-in builds awareness; self-awareness is the first step toward adaptability. Reflect on:

• Which style you have leaned on most this month.
• Whether it served the team’s needs—or yours.
• Which style you have avoided that might be useful now.

Your Style Is a Toolkit

Leadership is not about finding a favorite label; it is about building a toolkit of behaviors to deploy as circumstances change. The most effective leaders do not try to master a single model; they master sensing what people need and adjusting accordingly. Reflect on recent projects: which styles did you use—consciously or unconsciously—and what might you have done differently? Such reflection turns theoretical models into living leadership practices.

7.4 Servant Leadership in Project Environments

Servant leadership is one of the most impactful leadership styles in modern project management. It flips traditional leadership on its head: instead of leading from the front with authority, the servant leader supports from behind—removing obstacles, enabling success, and putting people first.

What Is Servant Leadership?

The idea was popularized by Robert Greenleaf in the 1970s. He said, “The great leader is seen as servant first.” In project terms, this means the primary role of a leader is not to control the work, but to create an environment where the team can thrive. It is about lifting others up, not standing above them, so that people have what they need to do their best work.

Core Belief

At the heart of servant leadership is one core belief: the leader exists to serve the team—not the other way around. This does not mean being passive. It means taking active responsibility for the team’s success, health, and development.

Key Servant Leader Practices

Four common behaviors illustrate this approach:

• Bring Food and Water. This is a metaphor for anticipating and providing what the team needs—before they ask.
• Remove Impediments. The servant leader acts as a buffer between the team and outside pressures, eliminates red tape, defuses conflict, and makes space for focused work.
• Create a Safe Environment. Psychological safety is critical; build trust, listen deeply, and create a space where it is acceptable to speak up, disagree, and take smart risks.
• Practice Humility and Empathy. Engage closely rather than directing from a distance, asking questions such as “What’s in your way?” and “How can I help?”

Tools and Techniques

Several simple but powerful tools support these behaviors and foster ownership, clarity, and trust:

• Active Listening. Pay full attention when team members speak, reflect back what you heard, and confirm understanding.
• Daily Check-ins. Use daily standups or brief one-on-ones to ask, “What’s blocking you?”
• Support-focused 1-on-1s. Shift from status updates to career support, personal goals, and team dynamics.
• Transparent Decision-Making. Let people see how and why decisions are made, and involve the team when possible.

Summary Insight

Servant leadership is not about doing everything for the team; it is about empowering people to do it themselves—with support behind them.

• Self-managing.
• Accountable.
• Resilient.
• Motivated.
• Deeply engaged in delivery.

As a project leader, servant leadership can help create teams that not only meet expectations, but exceed them because they feel respected, trusted, and heard.

7.5 Leadership in Agile Environments

Leadership in Agile Environments

Leadership looks very different in Agile environments. In traditional or plan-driven projects, a project manager often acts as the driver—assigning tasks, controlling timelines, and monitoring performance. In Agile, the role of leadership is not to direct; it is to enable. The emphasis shifts from centralized control to creating the conditions in which teams can do their best work.

From Command-and-Control to Enable-and-Empower

Agile leadership is built on trust, collaboration, and adaptability. It does not rely on authority; it depends on influence, facilitation, and coaching. Instead of asking, “How do I control this project?” Agile leaders ask, “How do I help my team succeed?” The mindset moves from managing people to serving the team. Servant leadership is especially relevant in this context, and Agile leaders are often described as servant-leaders by design.

Agile Leadership Core Values

These values drive Agile leadership:

• Collaboration over control.
• Adaptability over rigidity.
• Customer focus over process perfection.
• Trust over supervision.

These values align directly with the Agile Manifesto and the principles behind frameworks like Scrum, Kanban, and SAFe.

Key Behaviors of Agile Leaders

• Encourage autonomy and self-organization. Agile teams are expected to make decisions, and the leader’s role is to provide clarity and support rather than micromanage.
• Facilitate retrospectives and improvement. Effective leaders foster reflection by supporting regular retrospectives and guiding small, continuous improvements.
• Prioritize real-time communication. Agile favors direct, frequent conversations over long documents, and leaders model this by being available, transparent, and engaged.
• Remove process waste. Leaders help streamline workflows by asking, “What’s getting in our way?” and eliminating bottlenecks.
• Model flexibility and responsiveness. Change is expected in Agile, so leaders are comfortable with uncertainty and adjust priorities as new information emerges.

Comparison: Traditional vs. Agile Leadership

The traditional project manager focuses on planning, tracking, directing the team, controlling processes, and reporting to higher management. In contrast, the agile project manager acts as a coach and facilitator, serves and supports the team, works to improve systems, and provides support directly at the operational level.

• Traditional: Planner and tracker. Agile: Coach and facilitator.
• Traditional: Directs the team. Agile: Serves the team.
• Traditional: Controls the process. Agile: Improves the system.
• Traditional: Reports up the chain. Agile: Supports at the ground.

In Agile, leadership is less about making decisions and more about creating the conditions for good decisions to emerge.

Final Thought

Agile leadership is not soft or passive. It requires clarity, courage, and confidence, and channels those qualities into building a high-trust environment where empowered teams can deliver value faster and more sustainably.

7.6 Matching Style to Team and Situation

Matching Style to Team and Situation

Leadership is not one-size-fits-all. Effective leaders flex their approach to fit the people, the task, and the environment. Matching style to context typically centers on three factors that shape what the team needs and how decisions are best made. Considering these factors helps align direction, support, and autonomy with the realities of the work and the capability of the people involved.

• The maturity of the team.
• The urgency and complexity of the project.
• The stage of the project lifecycle.

Match to Team Maturity

A skilled, confident team does not need the same kind of leadership as a new or uncertain one. Inexperienced or junior teams may need more directive or coaching leadership and benefit from clarity, structure, and regular feedback. Experienced, high-performing teams often thrive under supportive, democratic, or servant leadership and seek autonomy and trust. Misjudging maturity leads to frustration: too much direction with a mature team feels like micromanagement, while too little direction with a new team feels like neglect.

Match to Task Urgency and Project Complexity

Not all project situations are equal; some are stable and predictable, while others are volatile, political, or moving fast. In high-urgency or crisis situations, directive or even autocratic leadership may be necessary—temporarily—because the goal is speed, not consensus. In complex, creative, or evolving environments, transformational, democratic, or servant styles are more effective, inviting contribution and supporting adaptation. A useful question is whether the moment calls for control or for collaboration.

Match to Project Lifecycle Stage

Projects move through stages, and leadership should shift as the project evolves to meet changing needs of direction, execution, and learning.

• Startup phase. Energy and direction are vital; a visionary or transformational style sets a compelling goal and rallies the team.
• Execution phase. Discipline and accountability matter; a pacesetting, directive, or transactional style helps keep things on track.
• Closeout phase. Reflection and recognition become important; democratic or servant leadership fosters team learning and ends the project on a positive note.

Bringing It Together

Consider a short-turnaround compliance project with a newly formed team. It may begin with directive leadership to clarify expectations and set structure. As the team builds confidence, the approach can shift toward supportive coaching. During the final phase, applying servant leadership can help the group reflect and transition out successfully. This illustrates adaptive leadership in action.

Flexibility and Effectiveness

The more flexible the leadership style, the more effective it becomes. The goal is not to be an expert in one style, but to read the room, understand the work, and guide the team in the way they need, when they need it.

7.7 Flexing Your Style as a Project Leader

Flexing Your Style as a Project Leader

Leadership flexibility is not a soft skill—it is a strategic one. Great project leaders flex their style to fit the moment, not inconsistently but intentionally, purposefully, and in response to the needs of the team and the project. Leadership style can be viewed as a toolkit: each style is a different tool, and the more tools a leader knows how to use, the more effectively real-world challenges can be addressed. Four common situations illustrate how matching style to context improves outcomes.

Supporting Team Autonomy — Servant Leadership

Mature teams that know what they are doing do not need control; they need support. A servant leadership approach builds trust, removes barriers, and creates space for the team to own outcomes.

Creating Vision and Alignment — Transformational Leadership

When a project is vague or people seem disconnected, articulating a compelling vision helps unify the team around shared purpose, energize effort, and create emotional commitment. Transformational leadership provides that unifying vision and alignment.

Addressing Accountability Gaps — Transactional Leadership

When facing missed deadlines, unclear roles, or inconsistent delivery, structure and clarity are essential. Transactional leadership uses clear goals, feedback, and consequences to rebuild performance discipline.

Working in Iterative, Agile Environments — Agile and Coaching Styles

In Agile teams, the leader functions as a facilitator rather than a taskmaster. Coaching and servant leadership dominate, empowering self-organization, promoting learning, and supporting continuous improvement.

Flexible Leadership in Practice

Leadership flexibility does not mean being reactive or scattered; it means choosing the right approach with intention. Great leaders do not just respond; they adapt with purpose. Useful questions include:

• What does my team need right now?.
• What kind of leadership will unlock their best performance?.
• Am I willing to step outside my comfort zone?.

Flexibility is not weakness; it is strategic leadership in action.