Different Types of Management Styles

No two managers are the same, but there are a few distinct paths that someone might take when leading a team. There are three major styles of leadership, with distinctions within them. Learn about different types of management styles and their benefits or drawbacks.

Autocratic Management Styles

Another word for autocratic is authoritarian, and this leadership style is characterized by minimal input from group members, with most decisions being made by a single person or very small group. In this management style, communication comes from the top and makes its way down to the employees—who usually don’t have much say in what’s going on. A suggestion box would be incredibly out of place at an office with an autocratic leader, who would not encourage employee contributions.

Your Outlook can change everything

Spend less time organizing your life and more time enjoying it with Outlook

Learn more

While at first glance this may not seem like a particularly appealing management style, it does have its place. Unmotivated or new employees who might not understand the nuances of a company might appreciate the supervision and clear direction that are the hallmarks of autocratic leaders. In times of crisis or serious time crunches, a strong, singular message from leadership that projects confidence can help a team work quickly through a difficult situation. Roles and expectations in autocratic organizations are clearly defined, which can be helpful for those who are looking to rise within a company.

Conversely, this type of management is not ideal for all workers. Employee input is frequently discouraged, and workers may become discouraged by constant supervision and lack of autonomy. Not everyone reacts well to this type of leadership and an us-versus-them mentality may develop among the staff regarding management.

Democratic Management Styles

As the name suggests, this type of management style is oriented toward decisions made by a group to benefit that group. A democratic manager is still in charge and has the final say in decision-making but relies heavily on input from employees. This tends to work well because people want to have ownership of their work processes and this provides a sense of autonomy. This leadership style is in place to manage the American government and is intended to encourage people to work together for the common good. Communication from the top-down and the bottom-up is encouraged, which can lead to a more committed, cohesive team that makes informed decisions.

Of course, there are pitfalls of this type of management. Employees who are not well-informed may make bad decisions that poorly influence the group. Similarly, the voice and needs of a few may be shut out or overridden by majority rule, which can lead to resentment and lowered morale. It’s crucial for democratic leaders to be able to manage these types of conflicts as they arise; they may briefly have to take on a more traditional delegation style to get through a rough patch.

Laissez-faire Management

The term laissez-faire is defined as a policy to not interfere and let things take their own course. In the workplace, a laissez-faire manager takes a hands-off approach to getting things done. Instead of micromanagement, they may be present to initial delegate tasks, but will step back and allow employees to control how and when they work. Managers may resist getting involved in the process or an issue unless they are specifically asked.

For some highly motivated teams with deep skillsets, this may be an ideal scenario. For those who are less skilled or less sure of themselves, the lack of guidance can lead to a feeling of chaos and confusion.

These three different management styles vary in terms of involvement by leadership and the degree of worker autonomy. Not every style is appropriate for every workplace; it’s important for team leaders to understand the needs of their group as well as their own communication styles.