Leadership style is a key factor in determining the level of job satisfaction and emotional well-being among employees. Employee motivation, productivity, and job happiness can all be significantly impacted by a leader’s attitude to and interactions with their team. This essay will examine the effects of three leadership styles on employee job satisfaction and emotional well-being.
Autocratic leadership is a leadership style in which the leader holds all the decision-making power and authority, without seeking input or opinions from the employees (Briker, Walter & Cole, 2021). Due to the climate it can foster, this leadership style can have a substantial negative influence on the emotional and job happiness of employees.
Lack of employee empowerment is one way that autocratic leadership can have an adverse effect on job satisfaction (Briker, Walter & Cole, 2021). Employees may feel helpless when leaders make all decisions without taking into account feedback from others. Their motivation and job happiness may suffer if they believe that their thoughts and opinions are not valued. Employee work satisfaction might also be impacted by the possibility that they feel as though they are not making a significant contribution to the business’ success.
The use of intimidation and fear by autocratic leaders can have an adverse effect on job satisfaction (Houghton, Oxarart, et al, 2021). Autocratic leaders frequently use fear as a technique to manipulate their followers and force them to do as they are told. This may result in a hostile and stressful work atmosphere, which may have an adverse effect on employee job satisfaction. Employees may feel as though they are always treading water and may be reluctant to speak up or share their ideas out of concern for retaliation. This may cause them to experience stress and worry, which may negatively affect their emotional health and overall job satisfaction.
Having an autocratic leader can have a variety of negative effects on one’s emotional health (Nyberg, Westerlund, et al, 2008). For instance, it might lead to feelings of resentment and rage when employees feel powerless and unappreciated. These unfavourable feelings might take many different forms, like increasing absenteeism or a high worker turnover rate. Additionally, the use of fear and intimidation by authoritarian leaders can result in a toxic workplace that is unfavourable to emotional wellbeing. High levels of stress and worry among workers may eventually have an adverse effect on their mental health and wellbeing.
Lack of communication is another way that autocratic leadership may have an adverse effect on one’s emotional health (Schoel, Bluemke, et al, 2011). When managers do not ask for feedback or comments from staff members, a culture of silence and secrecy may develop. Employees may believe that they are not being informed about significant choices or organisational changes. Confusion and doubt may result from this, which may have an adverse effect on one’s emotional health. Furthermore, a lack of communication might foster a feeling of alienation between workers and leaders, which can worsen emotional results.
In conclusion, autocratic leadership might negatively affect the mental health and job happiness of employees. When managers make all the decisions without consulting their teams, it can foster a culture of fear and disempowerment. Motivation, job happiness, and emotional health may all suffer as a result. Additionally, a toxic work atmosphere that is unfavourable to success can be produced through a lack of communication and the use of intimidation and fear. Leaders should think about embracing a more participative and collaborative leadership style that values the thoughts and opinions of every team member in order to secure favourable outcomes for employees.
Democratic leadership style is a leadership approach where the leader shares decision-making power with employees and encourages their participation in organisational decision-making (Jurek & Scime, 2014). The emotional health and job satisfaction of employees may benefit from this leadership approach.
Democratic leadership has the potential to improve job satisfaction by boosting employee involvement (Barthold & Smecci, 2022). Employees are more likely to feel invested in their work when they believe that their ideas and opinions are respected and that they have a voice in how decisions are made. A boost in motivation and job satisfaction might result from this feeling of investment. Additionally, democratic leadership can foster a sense of ownership among workers, which can increase feelings of fulfilment and success when objectives are attained.
Democratic leadership can also have an impact on job satisfaction by fostering more cooperation and teamwork (Smolović Jones, Smolović Jones, et al, 2016). Encouragement of employee involvement in decision-making can foster a feeling of cohesion and shared purpose inside the company. This might result in more cooperation and teamwork, which is good for job satisfaction. Employees are also more likely to feel encouraged and respected when they believe they are a member of a team, which can boost job satisfaction.
Democratic leadership has a variety of effects on emotional health (Barthold & Smecci, 2022). For instance, when workers feel that their thoughts and opinions are acknowledged, it can foster a sense of worth and confidence in oneself. Employees may experience an improvement in their emotional health as a result of feeling as though they are contributing significantly to the business. Additionally, encouraging employee involvement in decision-making helps foster confidence between staff members and managers. This trust may result in a more favourable work atmosphere, which may benefit emotional health.
Through improved communication, democratic leadership can also have an effect on emotional wellbeing (Hilton, Arkorful & Martins, 2021). Employee involvement in decision-making helps foster an environment of openness and transparency. This might result in better communication between staff members and managers, which would be beneficial for everyone’s emotional health. Employees may feel more secure and stable if they believe they are being kept informed about significant choices and changes inside the company.
In conclusion, democratic leadership can enhance the psychological and professional well-being of staff members. Employees may feel a sense of ownership and investment when leaders delegate decision-making authority to them and encourage their involvement in organisational decision-making. Increased motivation, job satisfaction, and emotional wellbeing may result from this. Furthermore, democratic leadership can foster a feeling of cohesion and shared purpose inside the organisation, which promotes greater cooperation and teamwork. Employees may experience greater emotional well-being when they believe that their opinions and ideas are valued and that they are a valuable member of the team. Last but not least, democratic leadership may foster an atmosphere of openness and transparency that will improve communication and the working environment.
Transformational leadership is a leadership approach that involves inspiring and motivating employees to achieve their potential and reach their goals (Atonakis & House, 2014). The emotional health and job satisfaction of employees may benefit from this leadership approach.
Increased job engagement is one way that transformational leadership can have an impact on job satisfaction (Labrague & Obeidat, 2022). Employees are more likely to be motivated and engaged in their job when their leaders encourage them to reach their potential. When goals are attained, this may result in more job satisfaction and a better sense of accomplishment. Additionally, transformational leaders frequently promote creativity and innovation among their staff, which can increase job happiness and fulfilment.
The improvement of communication and feedback is another way that transformational leadership can have an impact on job satisfaction (Jensen, Moynihan & Salomonsen, 2018). Employees of transformational leaders are frequently given feedback and communication, which can assist them recognise their strengths and limitations and how to enhance their performance. Employees who feel supported and motivated to advance in their positions will likely be more satisfied with their jobs.
Emotional well-being can be impacted by transformational leadership in a variety of ways. For instance, when staff members are inspired and motivated by their managers, it can give their work a feeling of direction and purpose (Atonakis & House, 2014). Employees who believe that their work is significant and has a beneficial impact on the organisation may experience a rise in their emotional well-being as a result. Additionally, transformational leaders frequently foster a friendly and upbeat work atmosphere, which can improve employees’ emotional wellbeing.
Increased trust and respect are two more ways that transformative leadership can have an impact on emotional wellbeing (Khattak, Zolin & Muhammad, 2020). It can foster a sense of trust and respect between leaders and employees when leaders show a dedication to the growth and success of their staff. Employees may feel more valued and respected at work if they perceive their leaders to be showing this value and respect.
In conclusion, transformational leadership can enhance the emotional health and job satisfaction of employees. Increased job engagement and a greater sense of fulfilment can result from leaders inspiring and motivating staff to realise their potential and accomplish their objectives. Additionally, transformational leaders frequently communicate with their staff members, giving them frequent feedback that can help them recognise their strengths and flaws and find ways to perform better. This may result in a higher sense of support and encouragement, as well as an improvement in job satisfaction. Last but not least, transformational leaders frequently foster a welcoming and encouraging work atmosphere, which can improve employees’ emotional wellbeing.
My preferred leadership style is situational, and I applied this in my work as Vice President and later Treasurer of the Australian Democrats political party, both National Executive positions. Situational leadership is a leadership approach that involves adapting leadership style to suit the needs of individual followers in different situations (Crosby, 2021).
This approach is founded on the idea that there is no single leadership style that is effective in all situations, and that leaders must be able to adjust their style to suit the situation at hand. The Situational Leadership II model (Zigarmi & Roberts, 2017) identifies four leadership styles that situational leaders typically employ: directing, coaching, supporting, and delegating. However, I found that a wider variety of leadership roles were also useful in different situations.
Situational leadership has been found to have a positive influence on job satisfaction in various ways (Bosse, Duell, et al, 2017). The flexibility, increased autonomy, improved communication, personalised approach, and reduced turnover associated with situational leadership can all contribute to higher levels of job satisfaction. Using a situational leadership approach created a more productive and satisfied work team, which benefitted the party in numerous ways.
One of the key benefits of situational leadership is that it allows leaders to be flexible in their approach to leadership without following a set formula (Aslam, Saleem, et al, 2022). By adapting my leadership style to suit the needs of individual followers, I could build better relationships with the members of the various work and policy teams I lead. As example, on the Education Policy Team, I found that a directing style was more successful when dealing with school principals, who are typically managers. However, a coaching style proved more successful with teachers, who needed both direction and support.
Another positive influence of situational leadership on job satisfaction is that it can increase followers’ autonomy (Princes & Said, 2022). By adapting my leadership style to suit the needs of the followers, I could empower them and give them more control over their work. For this I used participative leadership in decision making. This led to higher levels of job satisfaction as the members of the teams felt that they had more control over their work and were trusted to make decisions.
Situational leadership can also improve communication between leaders and followers (Xuecheng, Iqbal & Saina, 2022). By adapting a transformational leadership style in communication, I found that I could communicate more effectively. This involved ensuring that team members felt their input was valued, and that they were a part of the team. They felt they were heard and understood, and I could communicate more effectively with them. This led to higher levels of job satisfaction.
Situational leadership is a personalised approach to leadership, and this can have a positive influence on job satisfaction (Pasaribu, Goestjahjanti, et al, 2022). By adapting my leadership style to suit the needs of individual team members, I found I could create a more personalised approach to leadership. Sometimes this meant being directing, as with the school principals, sometimes coaching, as with the teachers, sometimes supporting, as when a team member needed little direction but a lot of support, and sometimes delegating, as when the team member needed little direction and little support. This made the team members feel valued and respected, and led to higher levels of job satisfaction as all team members felt that they were important to the team and the party as a whole.
Situational leadership can also lead to reduced turnover among the team membership, when considered in conjunction with the Social Exchange Theory (SET) (Xuecheng, Iqbal & Saina, 2022). The SET proposes that individuals engage in a process of weighing the potential benefits and drawbacks of different social interactions and make decisions accordingly. The benefits of a social exchange can include rewards such as affection, approval, information, or tangible resources. By using transformational leadership, I managed to have a positive impact on the commitment of the team members, who felt that their individual needs were being met. This meant a lower turnover in the teams I led.
While situational leadership had numerous positive influences on work team satisfaction, there were also negative impacts to that arose on occasion using this leadership style with the work teams I led. This was partly due to my failure to use the correct leadership style at the correct time. Among the negative impacts were lack of consistency, lack of clarity, overreliance on me as the leader, and a lack of trust.
One of the potential negative influences of situational leadership on job satisfaction is a lack of consistency in leadership style (Zigarmi & Roberts, 2017). By frequently changing my leadership style to suit the situation at hand, I sometimes created confusion and uncertainty among team members. On occasion, team members felt anxious and disengaged, which led to lower levels of job satisfaction.
Situational leadership can also lead to a lack of clarity in communication (Pasaribu, Goestjahjanti, et al, 2022). By not communicating my expectations clearly, team members sometimes did not know what was expected of them. This led to frustration and a lack of job satisfaction as team members felt that they were not being set up for success.
Another potential negative influence of situational leadership on job satisfaction is an overreliance on the leader (Thompson & Glasø, 2015). When team members became too dependent on me to tell them what to do, they felt disempowered and unfulfilled in their work. This sometimes led to lower levels of job satisfaction as team members felt that they did not have control over their work.
Situational leadership can also lead to a lack of trust between leaders and followers (Zigarmi & Roberts, 2017). By frequently changing my leadership style or failing to communicate my expectations clearly, team members sometimes lost trust in me. This led to a lack of job satisfaction as some team members felt that I was not acting in their best interest.
Overall, though, I felt that situational leadership, as used in the Australian Democrats, had more positive impacts than it had negative consequences. It led to a happier and more effective work team, which was advantageous to the party in many ways.
Antonakis, J., & House, R. J. (2014). Instrumental leadership: Measurement and extension of transformational–transactional leadership theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(4), 746–771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.04.005
Aslam, S., Saleem, A., Kumar, T., & Parveen, K. (2022). New Normal: Emergence of Situational Leadership During COVID-19 and Its Impact on Work Motivation and Job Satisfaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 919941–919941. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.919941
Barthold, C., Checchi, M., Imas, M., & Smolović Jones, O. (2022). Dissensual Leadership: Rethinking democratic leadership with Jacques Rancière. Organization (London, England), 29(4), 673–691. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508420961529
Bosse, T., Duell, R., Memon, Z. ., Treur, J., & van der Wal, C. . (2017). Computational Model-Based Design of Leadership Support Based on Situational Leadership Theory. Simulation (San Diego, Calif.), 93(7), 605–617. https://doi.org/10.1177/0037549717693324
Briker, R., Walter, F., & Cole, M. S. (2021). Hurry up! The role of supervisors’ time urgency and self‐perceived status for autocratic leadership and subordinates’ well‐being. Personnel Psychology, 74(1), 55–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12400
Hilton, S. K., Arkorful, H., & Martins, A. (2021). Democratic leadership and organizational performance: the moderating effect of contingent reward. Management Research Review, 44(7), 1042–1058. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-04-2020-0237
Houghton, J. D., Oxarart, R. A., Heames, J. T., Buckley, M. R., & Carbo, J. A. (2021). Leader Power and Agency-Communion Orientations as Moderators of the Effects of Organizational Characteristics on Workplace Bullying. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 33(3), 235–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10672-021-09379-x
Jensen, U. T., Moynihan, D. P., & Salomonsen, H. H. (2018). Communicating the Vision: How Face‐to‐Face Dialogue Facilitates Transformational Leadership. Public Administration Review, 78(3), 350–361. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12922
Jurek, S. J., & Scime, A. (2014). Achieving Democratic Leadership: A Data-Mined Prescription. Social Science Quarterly, 95(1), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12035
Khattak, M. N., Zolin, R., & Muhammad, N. (2020). Linking transformational leadership and continuous improvement: The mediating role of trust. Management Research Review, 43(8), 931–950. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-06-2019-0268
Labrague, L. J., & Obeidat, A. A. (2022). Transformational leadership as a mediator between work–family conflict, nurse‐reported patient safety outcomes, and job engagement. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 54(4), 493–500. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12756
Nyberg, A., Westerlund, H., Hanson, L. L. M., & Theorell, T. (2008). Managerial leadership is associated with self-reported sickness absence and sickness presenteeism among Swedish men and women. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 36(8), 803–811. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494808093329
Pasaribu, S. B., Goestjahjanti, F. S., Srinita, S., Novitasari, D., & Haryanto, B. (2022). The Role of Situational Leadership on Job Satisfaction, Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), and Employee Performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 896539–896539. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.896539
Princes, E., & Said, A. (2022). The impacts of project complexity, trust in leader, performance readiness and situational leadership on financial sustainability. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 15(4), 619–644. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-03-2021-0082
Schoel, C., Bluemke, M., Mueller, P., & Stahlberg, D. (2011). When Autocratic Leaders Become an Option-Uncertainty and Self-Esteem Predict Implicit Leadership Preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(3), 521–540. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023393
Smolović Jones, S., Smolović Jones, O., Winchester, N., & Grint, K. (2016). Putting the discourse to work: On outlining a praxis of democratic leadership development. Management Learning, 47(4), 424–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507616631926
Thompson, G., & Glasø, L. (2015). Situational leadership theory: a test from three perspectives. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(5), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-10-2013-0130
Xuecheng, W., Iqbal, Q., & Saina, B. (2022). Factors Affecting Employee’s Retention: Integration of Situational Leadership With Social Exchange Theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 872105–872105. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.872105
Zigarmi, D., & Roberts, T. P. (2017). A test of three basic assumptions of Situational Leadership® II Model and their implications for HRD practitioners. European Journal of Training and Development, 41(3), 241–260. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-05-2016-0035
Comments are closed.