Monday, 18 April 2016

Apparently I have at least two leadership styles

I did a leadership quiz on the LeadershipIQ page (which is one of Mark Murphy's creations).
The quiz is called "What's Your Leadership Style?", which walks you through ten binary question pairs, where you choose one option that best suits you.

Interestingly, I got two quite different answers to what my leadership style was. The first:
Result: Steward
Stewards are the rocks of organizations. They’re dependable, loyal and helpful, and they provide a stabilizing and calming force for their employees. They value rules, process and cooperation. They believe that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and they move only as fast as the whole chain will allow. And they take care to help those who struggle.
Working for Stewards offers the chance to be part of a well-oiled machine. It offers security, consistency and cohesion. It may not offer great opportunities for individual glory or an adrenaline rush, but it does provide great opportunities for team success. Stewards can often be found in mission-critical areas of the organization and they are often relied-upon by leaders in other divisions. For the appropriate people, it’s a great situation.

And the second:
Result: Diplomat
Diplomats prize interpersonal harmony. They are the social glue and affiliative force that keeps groups together. They’re typically kind, social, and giving, and often have deep personal bonds with their employees. And they’re often known for being able to resolve conflicts peacefully (and avoid them in the first place). Working for Diplomats is often more fun and social than working for other leaders (especially the Pragmatists). Diplomats put less emphasis on challenging their employees than they do putting their people in positions to succeed and leverage their strengths. Diplomats work to avoid having people feel uncomfortable or anxious. Traditional measures of employee satisfaction are often very high for Diplomats. For the appropriate people, it’s a great situation.

Puzzling. I think I answered each the same, despite having no one answer that really summed up how I like to relate to others on two questions. It is possible that I may have answered one question differently... but the results that I received are two quite different leadership styles.

In addition, I don't think that either of these really sums me up: so I am not sure that I would trust the results of this test.

Instead of having binary answers, the test might have been better to have used Likert scales to show how much the respondent agreed with each option. It would have meant more complexity, but it is possible that the reader - me, in this case - might have felt more affinity for their results.



No comments :

Post a Comment