(e)

Change is no longer an irregular outing, an inconvenient upheaval to be undertaken once every ten years.
Change is something we have to learn to live with, to structure and to manage. Change is here to stay,
and the winners will be the ones who cope with it." (Bainbridge, 1996, p. 4)

Leadership has a direct cause and effect relationship upon organizations and their success. Leaders
determine values, culture, change tolerance and employee motivation. They shape institutional strategies
including their execution and effectiveness. Leaders can appear at any level of an institution and are not
exclusive to management. Successful leaders do, however, have one thing in common. They influence
those around them in order to reap maximum benefit from the organizations resources, including its most
vital and expensive: its people. In fact, the influence of leaders and their effectiveness in moving people to
a shared vision can directly shape the people.

Goleman's approach to Leadership styles

A key point behind Goleman's theory is that leaders need to consider how their management style,
behaviours and actions affect the emotional state of their subordinates. With people's emotional wellbeing
having a substantial impact on their job satisfaction and performance, a priority for managers is to ensure
they are leading their staff in the most emotionally beneficial way. As such, leaders need to be aware of
the different styles of leadership available, and how each affects emotion in different ways making a
particular style more appropriate for a particular scenario than others.

What do effective leaders do? According to Goleman (2000), it may depends on the style of the leader
and according to Cardinal (2015) a leadership style doesnt have anything to do with right or wrong, a
good leadership style depends on several factors such as people, responsibilities and circumstances that
need to be managed.
Researching different styles of management and leadership, it can be stated that six different
styles of leadership exists (Goleman 2000):

Coercive: It should be used only in cases of emergencies, due to its aggressiveness and
insensitivity.

Authoritative: it is considered to be the most effective, it is a clear and motivating style of

leadership that drives people to have better performance within a company.

Affiliative: that style focuses on people, it values employees and their emotions, rather
than their objectives. An affiliative leader wants a happy and harmonic environment for
his or her staff.

Democratic: a democratic leader builds trust and respect by listening to every members
decision or idea of the organization. By doing that a democratic leader is able to shape
flexibility and responsibility within the company and furthermore it creates a realistic
working environment due to the tendency of people to be truthful about goals and
objectives under a democratic leadership.

Pacesetting: as the coercive style, a pacesetting style should be used with caution. A
leader sets high standards and wants the goal to be reached in an excellent and fast way.
This kind of leadership doesnt improve results, on the other hand an employee could feel
upset and distressed, thus it could lead to a ruined working environment
 Coaching: this style could be linked, as stated before, to Buckinghams opinion on what
great managers and leaders should do: a coaching leader helps employees to identify their
strengths and weaknesses. Furthermore, he or she has excellent delegation skills and is
able to identify challenging tasks for every employer in order to maximize a company
profitability on the long term.

Currently Neslte has a Democratic Leadership style. That means that Instead of one defined leader, the
group leads itself. Democratic leaders are frustrated by the enormous effort required to build consensus
for even the most mundane decisions as well as the glacial pace required to lead a group by fiat. The
potential for poor decision-making and weak execution is significant here. The biggest problem with
democratic leadership is its underlying assumptions that everyone has an equal stake in an outcome as
well as shared levels of expertise with regard to decisions. Thats rarely the case. While democratic
leadership sounds good in theory, it often is bogged down in its own slow process, and workable results
usually require an enormous amount of effort.

Process performance is measured by effectiveness -- how effectively the workforce uses the processes
as they were designed. To impact process performance by reducing variation in how people use
processes, leaders need to consider these questions:

1. Are people using the processes the way they were designed?
2. Is everyone proficient in how to use the processes as designed?
3. Are there clearly defined expectations to which they are held accountable?
The more variation in how processes are followed, the less effective performance will be. Leaderships
role is to get the right people with the right attitudes on the tasks, and provide training so they have the
knowledge and ability to do them.

Situational leadership requires identifying each individuals competence level and commitment to the task
at hand and adapting leadership style to meet his or her needs, helping them achieve their goals and the
goals of the organization. If a leader takes a directive style with someone who is fully capable and
committed, the effect is frustration and de-motivation from being micro-managed. If a leader delegates to
someone who needs direction and guidance, the result can be just as frustrating and de-motivating. In
either case, we end up with poor performance. A good leader analyzes the needs of the situation they are
dealing with, and then adopts the most appropriate leadership style. We know employees are competent
when the results of their work meet the desired expectations. In this case, the appropriate leadership style
is delegating or supporting. On the other hand, if the results are not meeting expectations the
leadership style should be directing or coaching.

When there is variation in process performance, the leader should first identify if the reason is due to lack
of ability, lack of desire, unclear expectations and accountability or any combination of the three. After the
diagnosis, comes the prescription. The leader adapts his or her style to meet the unmet needs of ability,
desire, and clear expectations, and monitors results. Remember, monitor results, diagnose and adapt
your leadership accordingly, and be patient change takes time! Process performance is the payoff;
leadership is the lever.

I personally think that different situations need diverse styles of leadership, it can be said that different
style are effective only if a leader possess emotional intelligence that is the ability to and work with other
people by effectively leading changes using self- awareness, determination empathy and social skills.
(Goleman 2004).

Furthermore, as stated by Yukl (2013), leaders should use five diverse style of power sources in order to
influence others: Legitimate, Reward, Coercive, Referent and Expert Power.