👋 Hey, Kyle here! Welcome to The Influential Project Manager, a weekly newsletter covering the essentials of successful project leadership.
Today’s Overview:
Most leaders default to one or two leadership styles, missing 70% of opportunities to build trust and drive results.
Using the wrong leadership style not only hurts performance—it destroys team morale, creates turnover, and can derail critical projects.
Master these six research-backed leadership styles and know exactly when to use each one: (1) Commanding, (2) Authoritative, (3) Affiliative, (4) Democratic (5) Pacesetting, and (6) Coaching.
🗣️ The 6 Styles of Leadership
Filed under: Leadership & Managing People
Ask any group of business people the question “What do effective leaders do?” and you’ll hear a sweep of answers.
Leaders set strategy; they motivate; they create a mission; they build a culture.
Then ask seasoned professionals the same question. You'll likely hear one response: get results.
Leadership is the ability to inspire, motivate, and empower others to produce desired outcomes more efficiently and effectively to achieve a common or aligned goal.
How we manage every situation to get there can be different.
For years, I thought effective leadership meant being consistent—stick to what works, right? I defaulted to 1-2 approaches that felt "authentic": painting the vision and letting people run with it, building strong relationships, and getting everyone's input before decisions. This was "my leadership brand."
Then reality eventually caught up to me.
Underperformers took advantage of my collaborative approach.
During crises, my team looked to me for decisive action while I was still trying to build consensus.
I spent hours coaching people who frankly didn't want to be coached, while neglecting others who were hungry for development.
Everything changed when I discovered situational leadership—matching your approach to what the situation actually demands, not what feels comfortable.
The results? Night and day difference.
Leadership Styles
You get promoted from project manager to team lead. Suddenly you're responsible for people, not just tasks.
So what do you do? You probably copy what you've seen work before. Maybe you're naturally collaborative, so you try to get everyone's input on everything. Or you're detail-oriented, so you focus on high standards and precise execution.
But here's the thing: your comfort zone isn't the point. Your team's needs are.
The person struggling with confidence needs something completely different from your star performer who's getting bored. The crisis situation demands a different approach than the long-term planning session.
Situational Leadership is a methodology wherein you adapt your leadership approach across various leadership styles depending on the situation or who you’re dealing with, be it your team or senior management.
There’s value in every leadership style, and a truly effective leader knows how to leverage each, at the appropriate time, to get optimal results. That’s what Situational Leadership is all about.
The consulting firm Hay/McBer studied a random sample of almost 4,000 thousand executives and found there are six dominate leadership styles that impact company culture differently.
Think of these as tools in a toolbox. You wouldn't use a hammer for every job, right? Leadership styles are like golf clubs—each one designed for specific situations and distances.
1. Commanding Leadership: "Do What I Tell You"
Use sparingly—only when the building is literally on fire.
When to use it: When the data breach happens at 2 AM and every second counts. When someone's repeatedly ignored safety protocols. When immediate compliance is non-negotiable.
In a crisis, when it’s “all hands on deck,” commanding leadership may be the best way to move forward quickly. This type of leader asks for fast action without much discussion—they expect orders to be followed, not questions.
Commanding leadership can work well when the organization or project needs to solve an urgent issue. However, when an organization is not in an immediate crisis, commanding leadership can have many downsides.
Opinions are routinely squashed, and individuals have no room to contribute outside the strict parameters the boss has laid down. Commanding leadership can have a counterproductive effect on employees if they constantly feel a level of fear or resentment.
That’s why commanding leadership should be used sparingly and only when necessary.
2. Authoritative Leadership: "Come With Me"
This should be your go-to style in most situations.
When to use it: When kicking off a new project and everyone needs to understand the vision. When your team has the skills but needs direction. When you need to rally people around a common goal.
Authoritative leadership is generally the most effective of the six leadership styles. A true authoritative style is upbeat, fueled by enthusiasm, and most importantly, a strong vision.
The authoritative leader used these tools to mobilize their people achieving objectives and empowers them to do so independently. Individuals understand how their work fits int the “big picture” of what the organization is trying to accomplish.
As with any leadership style, authoritative is not effective in all cases. This style can flounder if the leader is overbearing, pompous, or supervising a more experienced group.
3. Affiliative Leadership: "People Come First"
Perfect for healing, dangerous for accountability.
When to use it: After a layoff when morale is shattered. When building a new team that needs to gel quickly. When someone's going through a personal crisis that's affecting their work.
An affiliative leader tends to create positive, personal bonds with their team members, demonstrating empathy to create harmony.
While this is all good, an affiliative leader may lean on positivity and relationships more than results.
You may be overusing it if performance standards slip, difficult conversations get avoided, and your high performers start getting frustrated that mediocrity is tolerated. A leader with this style may focus too much on avoiding conflict and not creating bad vibes.
As a result, they may tolerate too much mediocrity.
4. Democratic Leadership: "What Do You Think?"
Great for planning, terrible for emergencies.
When to use it: When planning your Q4 strategy and you need buy-in from multiple departments. When the solution isn't obvious and collective wisdom beats individual expertise. When you want people to own the outcome.
The democratic leader tried to build consensus through participation. This leader needs to have everyone on board with the team’s agenda.
The possible downside with this style is the potential for endless meetings, decisions take forever, and urgent opportunities slip away while you're still gathering input.
5. Pacesetting Leadership: "Do As I Do, Now"
Powerful in short bursts, toxic as a steady diet.
When to use it: When you have a high-performing team working on a tight deadline. When everyone has the skills and just needs to execute at high speed. When you're modeling the standard you expect.
A pacesetting leader is all about excellence—they demand it from themselves and their team. It is a particularly effective approach when time is of the essence.
However, leaders who misuse it tend to badger those who are underperforming. When the underachievers don’t start delivering at the level the leader expects, they are gone.
Naturally, this erodes trust and can pressure employees to function abnormally and produce poor results. When team members feel expendable, it’s usually for a good reason—the leader has acted as if they’re expendable.
6. Coaching Leadership: "Try This"
The most underused style with the highest long-term payoff.
When to use it: When someone has potential but lacks specific skills. When a high performer is ready for their next challenge. When someone keeps making the same mistake and needs development, not discipline.
A coaching leadership style revolves around helping people grow and flourish as individuals. These leaders help employees employees to develop personal goals and a workable plan. They will overlook once-and-done mistakes as long as the error helps the individual learn and succeed.
Since this style focuses on personal improvement instead of organizational goals, many distrust the coaching style. However, studies have shown that coaching can positively impact results and employees.
Trouble only comes when the coaching leader runs into someone who has no interest in changing.
The Simple Implementation Framework
Before your next leadership moment, ask yourself these three questions:
Is this urgent? (Crisis = Commanding, Planning = Democratic)
Do they have the skills? (Yes = Authoritative or Pacesetting, No = Coaching)
What does the relationship need? (Healing = Affiliative, Direction = Authoritative)
The leader who can become anyone can lead everyone.
Conclusion
The system or person with the most flexibility of behavior will have the most influence on the system.
No effective leader uses one style 24/7. The wise ones practice situational leadership—they read the room and adapt accordingly.
In building a culture of trust, leaders will most often turn to the authoritative, affiliative, democratic, and coaching styles, because they aim to connect with individuals more meaningfully.
Alternatively, if a leader is interested in power and dominance, the commanding and pacesetter styles would be their preference. Of the six styles, these two should be used most sparingly. Sometimes it’s necessary for a leader to lay down the law if someone continually fails to perform or a crisis demands immediate action. You can build trust with these styles when demonstrating your authority and demanding its respect, but constant top-down management can take its toll on team members.
The styles that leaders use the least is coaching. Why?
Because most bosses don’t think they should invest that kind of time in a single employee. They believe the return on investment won’t justify the effort. But the time investment isn’t as substantial as they fear. Generally, setting clear expectations and having a few one-on-one sessions with an employee will get the ball rolling. And only quick check-ins, with proper guidance, are needed after the initial discussions.
Even when managing a large team, connecting with each member on this deeper level is a powerful tool with a decidedly positive impact on culture and performance. It’s also potentially the best way to build trust.
All great coaches know not to try and control the entire game—what leads to victory and success is the coaching of individual players. The players are the ones who are going to make great things happen.
Upon reflection on your leadership, do you rely too much on any one style? Can you identify previous situations when it may have been better to use a different style to build greater trust?
Until next week,
Kyle Nitchen
Whenever you’re ready, here are 4 ways I can help you elevate:
Read my Book. No Bullsh*t Project: A Project Manager’s guide to successful project leadership.
Install ProjectOS. My complete operating system for project leaders and their teams. A done-for-you toolkit—templates, agendas, KPI’s, and workflows—to run complex projects like a pro. (Our most popular product).
Join Antifragile Project Management. Supercharge your project leadership. My flagship program combining training, tools, and community. Book a discovery call to learn more.
Promote Your Business. Get your brand in front of 8,000+ highly engaged construction leaders and decision-makers with a 51% open rate.