According to the findings, six different leadership styles directly impact the working environment and financial results in terms of revenue growth and profitability. Coercive, authoritative, affiliative, democratic, pacesetting, and coaching are the six leadership styles. More importantly, it shows that the most successful executives do not rely solely on one style but rather on the organisation’s circumstances. Managers need to transit between several forms of leadership to be effective. Flexibility, sense of responsibility, degree of standards, awareness of the accuracy of feedback, adaptability of rewards, clarity of ideas, and level of devotion to a single cause are all observable effects of all classes.

Coercive leaders, for starters, want quick cooperation. In most instances, the top-down decision-making technique is the least productive since it kills innovative ideas early. The difficulty with this technique is that the team may not act on its initiatives and lose ownership. On the other hand, this dominant power works best during turnarounds because it can disrupt bad business practices and get employees to align new ways of working in the same direction quickly. “When Steve Job was upset about anything, it got rectified at a pace I have never seen people react so fast out of fear,” one former Apple employee commented about Steve Jobs.

Second, authoritative leaders rally their followers behind a common goal. This style is the most effective technique in most business circumstances since it explains how people’s work fits into their overall picture. Followers are more committed to common goals because they understand why and what they do matters. The performance feedback is based only on the standards that revolve around that vision. “Classic entrepreneurs do more than everyone believes feasible with less than anyone thinks possible,” says John Doerr, an investor. People are also free to experiment, innovate, and take reasonable risks. When team members are more experienced and arrogant than the boss, however, this strategy fails.

Third, affiliative leaders foster emotional relationships and harmony among their followers. It centres around people by placing a higher value on people’s emotions than on activities and goals. The leader maintains control by forging deep emotional relationships and reaping the rewards of loyalty. Because people like one another, it has a beneficial effect on communication. They share ideas and inspiration, allowing for risk-taking and creativity. The leader inspires others by giving them lots of positive feedback in the form of praise and prizes. A leader must avoid overpraising; this action may backfire. Therefore, we cannot use this approach exclusively. If there is a lack of constructive advice on how to develop, people may feel lost.

Fourth, democratic leaders achieve consensus through involving their constituents. A leader increases trust, respect, and commitment by deciding on a group while increasing flexibility and accountability. In my personal experience, we have a leader eager to listen to followers’ concerns to keep morale strong and realistic about what we can do in the mobile app project. The disadvantage of this technique is that we cannot reach a consensus after lengthy sessions, leaving people confused and without a leader and intensifying disputes during crises. On the other hand, this strategy works best with capable personnel who can provide direction and produce new ideas.

Fifth, leaders who set the pace demand excellence and self-direction. The leader establishes exceptionally high-performance criteria and lives up to them. He is preoccupied with getting things done better and faster. Thus he expects more from underachievers. This leadership style can harm employees morale by constantly demanding excellent work. People frequently guess what the leader wants and do not trust them to work since they did not properly express the guidelines. According to research, when a boss loses their employees’ trust, workplace productivity falls. When the leader is away, and workers do not receive feedback, they have the feeling they are lost. However, the technique works well when all employees are self-motivated and highly talented and have little coordination.

Sixth, coaching leaders helps to produce future leaders. Employees are asked to discover their particular abilities and connect them to their personal and professional goals. They encourage staff to set long-term development goals and assist them in putting a plan in place to attain them. This approach would give employees a lot of instructions and assign them difficult tasks. Coaching improves company performance by increasing flexibility, responsibility, and commitment. This approach is most effective when employees are already aware of their flaws and want to change. It does not work on the contractionary if the personnel are unwilling to change their ways.

Leaders that are most successful lead by example in the art of utilizing a range of tactics. According to studies, the more leadership styles a person has, the better. The finest company performance comes from leaders who have mastered all four, notably authoritative, democratic, and coaching. The most successful leadership switch is among the leadership styles’ flexibility. They are aware of their impact on others and alter their behaviour accordingly to achieve the greatest results.

Few leaders take notice of all six leadership styles, and even fewer are aware of when and how to employ them. The leader can assemble a team of people who are aware of the styles they lack. Expansion of their techniques is another option. Leaders must recognize each emotional intelligence competency, and they must strive hard to improve their quotient. With practice, you can improve your emotional intelligence.

Leaders can use the data to acquire a clear picture of what it takes to lead effectively and how they can do it. Because the corporate environment is always changing, leaders must use the correct styles at the right time and in the right amount to achieve success.