Leaders adapt their style depending on various internal and external factors that shape their approach to managing teams and driving business success.
Internal and External Influences on Leadership Style
Leadership style is not fixed or one-size-fits-all. Rather, it is shaped by a variety of internal factors (originating within the organisation) and external factors (influences from the business environment). These forces can impact how leaders make decisions, interact with staff, and approach challenges. Effective leadership often involves adjusting one’s style to suit the situation at hand.
Understanding these influences is crucial in helping businesses identify when a particular style may be most suitable and how leadership can evolve in response to change.
Nature of the Task
The specific type of task being carried out can heavily influence the choice of leadership style. Some tasks are straightforward and require minimal creativity, while others are complex and demand input from multiple stakeholders.
Routine vs. Complex Tasks
Routine tasks (e.g., data entry, assembly line work, stocktaking) benefit from a clear and direct leadership approach, often autocratic. These tasks are repetitive, predictable, and require little creative thinking. An autocratic leader gives precise instructions, closely supervises the work, and ensures consistency and efficiency.
Complex tasks (e.g., product development, strategic planning, software engineering) often demand more flexible, innovative thinking. In these cases, democratic or laissez-faire styles may be more effective. These tasks benefit from brainstorming, team input, and independent problem-solving.
Example:
A supermarket manager overseeing shelf-stocking may use an autocratic approach to maintain order and consistency. In contrast, a project manager working with a team of engineers on a new app may use a democratic style to incorporate diverse ideas and perspectives.
Organisational Structure
Organisational structure defines the formal hierarchy and system of authority in a business. The number of levels between top management and frontline employees, and how communication flows, can influence leadership style significantly.
Tall vs. Flat Structures
Tall organisational structures have multiple layers of authority. Information and decisions pass through many managerial levels. This structure tends to suit autocratic or paternalistic leadership styles, as decisions are centralised and instructions are passed down the hierarchy with limited employee input.
Flat organisational structures have fewer levels of management and promote decentralisation. In such environments, democratic and laissez-faire styles are often preferred because employees are empowered to take responsibility and make decisions collaboratively.
Example:
A global corporation like Nestlé, which has a highly structured and formal hierarchy, may favour more autocratic leadership at senior levels. On the other hand, a tech start-up like a new digital marketing agency might use a flat structure and democratic leadership, encouraging fast-paced collaboration and idea-sharing.
Company Culture
Company culture refers to the shared values, beliefs, attitudes, and practices that shape how people behave within an organisation. The cultural norms of a company can strongly influence what style of leadership is accepted or expected.
Traditional vs. Modern Cultures
In traditional, conservative cultures, where formality and authority are highly valued, autocratic or paternalistic leadership styles are often the norm. Leaders are expected to provide clear direction and closely oversee employee performance.
In modern, innovative cultures, where openness, creativity, and flexibility are encouraged, democratic or laissez-faire leadership styles are more common. These organisations value trust, autonomy, and team collaboration.
Example:
A corporate law firm with a long-standing history might be characterised by a formal and hierarchical culture, favouring autocratic leadership. In contrast, a video game development company might promote a more casual and open culture, supporting democratic leadership that allows creative freedom.
Employee Skill Levels
The experience, confidence, and skill level of employees significantly influence the effectiveness of different leadership styles. A leader must assess the capability of their team and tailor their approach accordingly.
Skilled vs. Inexperienced Teams
Highly skilled employees often prefer a high degree of autonomy and can handle tasks independently. These individuals thrive under laissez-faire or democratic leadership styles, where they are trusted to manage their own work and contribute to decisions.
Inexperienced or new employees generally require more direction, supervision, and support. A paternalistic or autocratic approach is often more appropriate in these cases, as it ensures that tasks are clearly explained and performance is monitored.
Example:
In an advertising agency, a team of senior copywriters may prefer to work with minimal supervision, benefiting from a laissez-faire leadership style. In contrast, in a customer service call centre, new recruits might need a manager who adopts a more structured, autocratic approach during their training period.
Time Pressure and Situational Context
Time-sensitive situations and unexpected crises can limit a leader’s ability to involve others in decision-making. In such cases, a quick and decisive leadership style becomes essential.
Emergency vs. Stable Situations
In a crisis or emergency, such as a product recall, a cyberattack, or a major operational failure, an autocratic style is usually necessary. The leader must make swift decisions and take control to mitigate damage and ensure safety.
In stable, long-term planning contexts, where there is time for consultation and analysis, democratic leadership may yield better outcomes. It encourages collaboration, creativity, and joint ownership of decisions.
Example:
During the COVID-19 pandemic, many business leaders had to adopt an autocratic style to quickly implement remote working policies and health measures. However, once stability returned, many shifted back to democratic leadership to consult employees on hybrid working models.
Manager’s Personality and Experience
The personal qualities of a leader—such as confidence, empathy, decisiveness, and communication style—as well as their professional background, play a key role in shaping their leadership style.
Personality Traits
Assertive and dominant leaders may naturally adopt an autocratic or paternalistic style. They are confident in giving instructions, enjoy being in control, and prefer to make key decisions independently.
Empathetic and inclusive leaders often prefer democratic leadership, where they value the opinions and feelings of team members.
Reserved or highly trusting individuals may be drawn to laissez-faire leadership, giving their team the freedom to take charge.
Experience and Maturity
Experienced managers are often better equipped to adapt their style to different situations. They understand the pros and cons of each style and use a contingency approach, selecting the right style based on the context.
New or less experienced managers may lack the confidence or knowledge to adapt and may fall back on one style—often autocratic—especially when under pressure.
Example:
A veteran headteacher managing a large secondary school may use a mix of democratic and autocratic approaches, depending on whether they are planning curriculum changes or handling a student discipline crisis. A newly promoted sales team leader, however, might rely heavily on an autocratic style as they gain confidence.
Adapting Leadership Style to Situational Needs
Skilled leaders understand that no single leadership style fits every situation. They must constantly evaluate the context and adjust their approach. This adaptability is at the heart of situational leadership and the contingency approach.
Here are some practical examples that illustrate how leadership styles may shift depending on specific factors:
Example 1: Crisis Requires Command
Scenario: A fire alarm is triggered during working hours in a large retail store.
Influencing factors: Immediate danger, time pressure, inexperienced staff.
Appropriate style: Autocratic – The manager quickly instructs staff to evacuate customers and call emergency services. There is no time for discussion.
Example 2: Creative Environment Promotes Collaboration
Scenario: A marketing firm is designing a new brand campaign.
Influencing factors: High creativity needed, skilled staff, open company culture.
Appropriate style: Democratic – The leader facilitates team meetings, encourages sharing of ideas, and makes decisions jointly with the group.
Example 3: Training New Recruits
Scenario: A fast-growing startup hires ten new employees in customer service.
Influencing factors: Low experience level, need for structure, fast onboarding.
Appropriate style: Paternalistic – The leader explains tasks clearly, supports team members’ development, and regularly checks in with guidance and encouragement.
Example 4: High Autonomy for Experts
Scenario: A consultancy firm assigns a project to a team of senior analysts.
Influencing factors: High skill level, mutual trust, non-urgent task.
Appropriate style: Laissez-faire – The leader sets expectations but allows the team to plan, execute, and make decisions independently.
Leadership Style as a Response to Context
To be effective, leaders must ask themselves the following questions regularly:
What kind of task am I managing?
What is the skill level and experience of my team?
What is the business environment or situation like?
How much time do I have to make decisions?
What values and structure define the organisation I lead?
How do my own personality traits and experience influence my instincts?
Leadership is about making informed and adaptive choices. The most successful leaders are those who remain flexible, aware of the dynamic forces around them, and willing to adjust their style to maximise team performance and organisational success.
FAQ
Yes, many effective leaders adopt a flexible or hybrid approach known as the contingency style. Instead of relying on a single leadership model, they evaluate situational factors—like task urgency, team dynamics, or organisational change—and shift between styles as needed. For instance, a leader might use autocratic decision-making during a crisis but switch to democratic methods when launching a creative project. This adaptability allows leaders to respond precisely to complex internal and external demands, increasing their overall effectiveness and team morale.
As the external environment evolves—due to technological advances, market competition, or economic pressures—leadership styles often need to adapt. For example, during periods of rapid growth or uncertainty, a business may shift from a democratic to an autocratic style to maintain control and fast decision-making. Alternatively, a company embracing innovation or global expansion may adopt a more decentralised, laissez-faire approach to empower local teams. Failing to adapt style in line with external shifts can result in poor morale, strategic failure, or reduced competitiveness.
Even within the same organisation, managers may differ in personality, confidence, experience, and interpretation of their teams’ needs. One might favour autocratic leadership due to a personal preference for control or a lack of trust in inexperienced staff. Another may be more democratic, valuing team participation and innovation. Differences in department objectives, team capabilities, or even recent past experiences—like having managed a crisis—can shape individual approaches. This variation reflects that leadership style is not only situational but also deeply personal.
In international or multicultural teams, leadership style must account for differing cultural expectations around hierarchy, authority, and communication. For example, employees from cultures that value high power distance may expect directive leadership and find democratic styles confusing or inappropriate. In contrast, employees from low power distance cultures may prefer open dialogue and shared decision-making. Effective global leaders must be culturally aware, adjusting their style to bridge expectations and maintain clarity, trust, and cohesion across culturally diverse teams or offices.
Technology can influence leadership style by changing how leaders interact with teams and how work is managed. In remote or hybrid environments, traditional autocratic control becomes harder, often pushing leaders towards more trust-based, democratic or laissez-faire approaches. Digital tools such as project management platforms and real-time communication apps support greater transparency and collaboration, enabling leaders to delegate more effectively and involve team members in decisions. However, in tech-driven crisis situations like cyberattacks, leaders may still revert to an autocratic style to respond swiftly.
Practice Questions
Analyse how the nature of the task and employee skill levels may influence a manager’s leadership style. (10 marks)
The nature of the task and employee skill levels are key internal factors influencing leadership style. For routine tasks requiring efficiency and consistency, an autocratic style may be suitable, ensuring instructions are followed precisely. Conversely, complex tasks benefit from democratic or laissez-faire leadership, promoting innovation. If employees are inexperienced, a paternalistic or autocratic style provides essential guidance and oversight. However, skilled workers may prefer autonomy, favouring democratic or laissez-faire approaches. A successful manager will assess both the task and team capability to adapt their style accordingly, maximising productivity while maintaining employee satisfaction and appropriate decision-making involvement.
Assess the likely impact of a business’s organisational structure and culture on its leadership style. (12 marks)
Organisational structure and culture significantly shape leadership style. A tall structure, with many layers of authority, often supports autocratic or paternalistic leadership, as decisions are centralised and communication formal. In contrast, a flat structure may encourage democratic or laissez-faire leadership due to closer collaboration and shared responsibility. Similarly, a formal culture might demand authoritative leadership to maintain discipline, whereas an innovative culture supports participative styles that inspire creativity. However, leadership must remain flexible. If structure or culture changes—such as during growth or crisis—leaders must adapt their style to maintain effectiveness, ensuring alignment with employee expectations and business needs.
