To be awarding honours to business leaders will be predictably scorned by many ‘Daily Mail readers’ as an ‘outrage’ given the recession. But these people are completely missing the point. These business leaders have had careers that have spanned decades, and will probably not be defined by the last 5 years, as they may indeed continue for another couple of decades. Secondly, it would be a mistake to imagine that all businesses have done terribly during this recession! The recession is not a blanket of doom which covers the economic landscape. Believe it or not, fortunes are still made everyday just as before. If the economy contracts by 4% during the year, then 96% of the economy is still running! This may squeeze margins intolerably depending on the foresight and planning of leaders, but will not be sufficient to crush all businesses with a recession axe.

Indeed when you look at the surprising run that commodities have had in the past few years (Read How to Invest in Commodities if you’re unsure what I’m talking about), you’ll realise that some people who were in the right place at the right time have made a lot of money during the recession. And again, while the envious masses may scream and shout that these ‘evil people’ have made money at their expense, in reality – commodity owners were generally those who took fright at the financial crisis and invested in what they viewed was safe – this is hardly an ‘evil’ investment strategy, and I wouldn’t say commodity investing individuals deserve any form of punishment.

So let me end this opinion piece by just summing up what I’m trying to say here. A recession and tough economic climate does not make profitable business ‘unacceptable’, nor does it make it ‘evil’, and nor is it unlikely! If anything is keeping Britain in a continual state of depression, it’s this attitude that when 0.5% of the population are being made redundant, the other 99.5% must act like they’ve been pushed into poverty out of sympathy. The pursuit of bettering ones lot is the driver of economic growth and development. Rather than scorning at profits we should be lauding them, and rather than opening every letter, email and article with ‘in the current economic climate’, we should be getting straight to discussing business, growing income and creating jobs.

So when the paradigms that held an old regime, or leadership style in place, change radically – how is a leader supposed to retain control? Or perhaps more topically, how does a new leader successfully take the reigns – when a new direction may not even be clear? It is these questions we will be discussing in this article.

Change of Direction = New Leader?

Does a radical change in policy actually require a new leader? Would only a fresh set of eyes, ears and arms be able to take on the challenge of turning a country, business or community around? If we are to look to politics for the answer, it would seem the answer is yes. When a country decides that it wants a new direction, in a civil democratic state – it will typically choose to elect a new party. This is a vote of non confidence in the ability of the prevailing politician to be able to execute that change for themselves.When the USA decided that the Republican Party under the leadership of George Bush wasn’t sufficient as to meet their needs, they switched to the Democrats.

In part, I believe this doesn’t represent the actual reality. I believe that much like ‘savvy’ customers switching companies when bad service is received – ‘fast switchers’ are simply switching to the brand that hasn’t let them down. In a world dominated by >a href=”http://www.scribd.com/doc/3979762/Brand-Management”>brand, leadership is no different. Once a leader’s brand has been tarnished, the competitors brands will look far superior, regardless of their ability to execute real change. The lesson we can learn from this, is that perception is extremely important for a leader. When a leader can be switched out after one mistake, every decision that leader makes is absolutely crucial. Management change experts like Stephen Warrilow will explain that “A step change initiative needs to be led – and it needs to be seen to be led“, and herein lies the key technique.

For an existing leader to successfully lead change, and be allowed the time to execute change, it must be seen first. What follows is that leaders must identify change opportunities and jump on them as soon as possible, so as to regain the confidence of their followers. Otherwise, their leadership brand will be tarnished and followers could ‘jump ship’ to the apposing brand before the (potentially very competent) leader has had the chance to turn the ship.

There are 5 major leadership styles, and we’ll talk through them in this article.

Democratic Leadership Style

The democratic leadership style is probably the most popular leadership style in the 21st century management arena. It’s a style that remains popular due to the positive reaction employees have towards it. If you lean torwards the democratic leadership style, this means that you seek to consult your employees or team members over decisions that will effect them. Naturally, followers prefer this strategy for several reasons. Either their self-interest attracts them torwards managers that allow them to make the choices that benefit them, or it’s the euphoric confidence bounce they experience when they’re allowed to make decisions that were previously ‘above’ them.

However, be warned. The democratic leadership style isn’t perfect in every occasion. Democratic decisions aren’t perfect, in the sense that they take longer to make. When one only has to consult oneself, a decision can be made almost instantaneously. In a war-time, life-threatening or high-risk situation, ‘democratic’ debate simply isn’t relevant. It simply isn’t optimal. Examples of these high pressure decision-making jobs include surgeons, army generals, fire-marshals and air traffic controllers.

The democratic process is used best in simple manufacturing sectors, where a respite from the harsh and ‘robotic’ leadership styles recommended by Ford or other factory managers of times gone by.

The Autocratic Leadership Style

Management may not be the worlds ‘oldest profession’, but the autocratic leadership style is probably the original type of management style ever employed. Simple at heart, the autocratic style of management involves making the decisions yourself and passing them onto subordinates. In the autocratic world, leaders are there to make the decision, and followers are there to follow. This promotes an ‘obedient’ style of follower present in the army, and perhaps some of the ‘tougher’ working cultures such as farming, logging, haulage and fishing.

This isn’t to say that an autocratic leader would fail miserably in, say, customer service. However, the more that workers are left to do imaginative or creative tasks largely on their own, the less likely an autocratic leadership style would really ‘bring the best’ out of the average worker.

The Laissez-Faire Leadership Style

Laissez-Faire literally means ‘leave alone to act freely’. It’s the complete opposite to the autocratic style, and you’d expect as a result to find leaders in completely different industries. As I said above, autocracy doesn’t apply well to creative industries, so as you’d expect, fashion designers, film directors and photographers are given plenty of ‘room’ by their managers to do their day-to-day work, but the laissez faire leadership style isn’t just great for creative industries, it’s also useful in the professional jobs.

I’m talking about lawyers, doctors, accountants, surveyors, architects and also teachers. These are individuals whom have spent upwards of 3 years in a training contract and have emerged into either a well paid or respected job. As a result, they expect a certain degree of ‘laissez faire’ from management in the way they work. In other words, they expect to be entrusted with plenty of responsibility and be left to discharge their professional duties with less supervision than say, a sous chef.

The Bureaucratic Leadership Style

Bureaucratic leadership is often met with a wince from a management team. (Almost) everybody dislikes the idea of bureaucracy. Almost by definition, bureaucracy involves time-intensive and often time-wasting rules and procedures within a rigourous and slow framework. Employees operating within a bureaucracy are given very little choice as to how they perform their work. The vast majority of their day-to-day tasks will be governed by the rule book. You may be wondering who this actually benefits. The answer is you, as the bureaucratic manager! Forcing employees to perform tasks in an efficient and prescribed manner will usually faciliate in a speedy review by yourself, or perhaps lower maintenance costs, or even more productivity of workers who use the data further in the process. The restraint and ‘discipline’ put in by your bureaucratic workers will have the exact effect you designed the procedures have, therefore you have great control. The drawback is that your employees feel that they’re being controlled, each rule at a time. Also, in a high-wage economy, bureaucracy can be a very expensive use of employee time.

Are you pro-active? Are you re-active? Do you speak more, or do you listen more? Do you imagine, or do you empower? Are you kind, or are you ruthless? These are all characteristics within our personality, our habits and our projected-self. Some of these can be changed easier than others. Leadership development is concerned with identifying your weaknesses and one-by-one, proactively engaging in activities and experiences that will improve them. Perhaps your leadership style is too autocratic and you’re having difficulty delgating properly. Maybe you lack confidence when it comes to public speaking, which is undermining your teams confidence in your. Whatever the weakness, whatever the issue, you can work to resolve it, and you can become a greater leader.

Now, I fully understand why a lot of people would read the above and take a critical view of leadership development. To many, it must seem like a very negative, very harsh and perhaps even endless pursuit. But let me convince you otherwise. To  understand ones faults is only to know oneself better, and to appreciate that they exist is far more positive than to deny that there is anything wrong. Finally, to go on step further and engage in leadership development in order to actually reduce or remove those faults, is a very noble pursuit that will be beneficial to not just yourself, but to those who work with you.

It’s truely inspiring to work with someone who is commited to personal development and growth. I believe that personal development is infectious, just like a smile. Once you can see for yourself that progress is possible in some of the most set-in-stone characteristics in a man, you fully realise the true potential of personal development, and what it could hold for you. You don’t even need to stop at leadership skills. Development of yourself is a hollistic pursuit that will introduce more happiness into all areas of your life, be it health, relationships, wealth or business.

Read around, and discover more about what leadership development can do for you.