So how does this apply to our leadership styles. Daniel Goldman, a well known researcher and author about leadership and Emotional Intelligence, identified 6 key leadership style: Commanding, Visionary, Affiliative, Democratic, Pacesetting and Coaching.

Commanding is a “do as I tell you” style that demand immediate compliance. It’s great in a crisis or in a period of change but if overused can have negative impact on people and the climate.

Visionary is a”come with me” style that moblises people towards a vision. Great for engaging people behind a clear vision such as a change in direction. Not so good if overused in a team of experts or experience colleagues where the direction is already clearly defined.

Affiliative is a “people come first” style that create harmony and builds emotional bonds. It’s great for healing rifts or motivating people but if used in isolating can lack direction and purpose.

Democratic is a “what do you think?” style that forges consensus through harmony. It’s great for getting buy-in or consensus but it overused can be a long and frustrating process that can feel leaderless.

Pacesetting is “do as I do, now” style that is good for setting high standards of performance. Great for getting quick results from a highly motivated team but can be overwhelming and oppressive if used over long-periods of time

Coaching is a ‘try this” style for developing people for the future. Great for helping employees to improve performance and developing strengths. It’s not appropriate in time-pressured situations or with people who don’t want to be developed.

As leaders, we naturally have a leaning to one or two of these styles and it is clear that our leadership strengths can become weaknesses if we overuse them or use them on the wrong occasions (I’m assuming that we are unlikely to underuse our strengths). Goldman asserts that leaders who have mastery of four or more of the styles, especially Visionary, Affiliative, Democratic and Coaching, develop the best working climate and achieve the highest levels of business performance.

What are your strongest leadership styles? And are you overusing them?

Continuing on the ‘balance’ theme, I went to a forum on Psychometric testing, recently, and the Speaker there Robert Kaiser from Kaplan Devries Inc was taking about how 5-point scales (“Never” through to “Always” or “Ineffective through “Extremely Effective”) can give the wrong impression in 360 Appraisals.

Take the example question “Pays attention to detail – has a finger on the pulse of day-to-day activity”. If the response to this on a 5 point scale is “Always” then we could assume that this is a good score. However, what would you score someone, on this question, if they were a ‘micro-manager’ of situations; not let their people develop or grow because they controlled how they did things?  On the 5-point scale you would have still score them as ‘Always’, which, i think you’ll agree, is misleading. Kaplan Devries solution is to change the 5-point scale to 9-point scale moving from “Too Little” to “Just Right” and onto “Too Much” (-4,-3,-2,-1,0,+1, +2, +3, +4). In the example question above, you might score the Micro-manager as a “+3″ or “+4″, giving more realistic and actionable feedback to that person.

Should you make changes to your appraisal system, so that development areas are not mistaken for strengths?

The team was made up of 8 people. Even though each member of the team had separate roles, each of these roles was under one brand and this meant that there were grey areas in terms of some of the responsibilities. Unsurprisingly these grey-areas or ‘cross-overs’, as they called them, caused duplications, mis-understandings and all round frustrations (they summed up the situations phrases as ’stepping on toes’). Consequently I was tasked to build the teams understanding of the issue and help them find a solution.

I wasn’t quite sure what i was going to get in this session and I prepared myself for some heated debate and some possible mug-slinging. As it turned out the team were very honest and open. What became clear was that here were a group of talented, ambitious people working in their silos to deliver their own business objectives and further their careers. They were a team in name only.

After discussing the presented ’stepping on toes’ issue and it’s repercussions I tasked the group to think about and come with an objective that they could work towards in solving the issue. What was was really interesting was that they didn’t just come up with a goal that aimed directly at solving the issue but instead opened up the aperture and went for a ‘big picture’ goal of being the ‘No1 Performing Team’ in the company by the middle of next year.

In that moment they were no longer a team,in name only but were a real team united behind a common goal. The energy in the room changed and I knew that the walls of the silos had come down and had been replace with trust.

As for the ’stepping on toes’ issue – working objectives and actions were put in place to solve it. And these objectives and actions joined some others put in place as part of the action plan to reach their common goal.

.

Perhaps it’s a cultural or values thing. I remember my parents teaching me that “you don’t have to boast to people about how good you are, you just have to show them”. As a parent myself these days, I think this saying has great merits – after all who wants a ‘cocky kid’. However, in the modern world of work, how relevant is it?

Recently, I’ve been coaching two clients, who work at different companies with different cultures, and both have been working on this issue of raising their profiles. As it’s a challenge faced by many, I thought I would share a summary of how they went about it, so that you can apply the strategies that you feel might work for you.

• Find role-models in your organisation who you feel are good at raising their profile and study them – model the bits that you like
• Volunteer yourself to work on projects outside of your role – don’t let ‘not having enough time’ stop you. You’ll be amazed how you’ll be supported, when you put your hand up
• Work-out how your stakeholders like to be communicated with – Do they like detail or just top-line (one thing is of sure you must give them the strong impression that you’re in control)?
• Always have something impactful and positive to say to stakeholders for the impromptu ‘watercooler’ moments – this is an opportunity to impress
• Find opportunities to converse with stakeholders – e.g sit next to them in meetings, at lunch etc. These are opportunities that most people avoid
• Get in the habit of making an impact in every meeting, especially when stakeholders are in attendance – preparation is key
• Share your team’s news and successes with rest of the company – it’s not directly about you but you’re delivering the message

So is the saying “you don’t have to boast to people about how good you are, you just have to show them” relevant at work today? Absolutely. What is clear is that it is all about the subtleties of good communication within the context of the your own values and the culture of the organisation you work for. It seems to me that many people struggle with self-promotion because of an inbuilt, or nurtured, values system that makes them feel uncomfortable and unnatural when talking about themselves. Both my clients had this but found their own ways to successfully raise their profiles and at the same time respect, and occasionally challenge, their own values and beliefs.

So what happens if self-promotion is done too overtly? In my opinion, in most organisations in Britain, if it is done too overtly, you are likely to be seen as the ‘cocky kid’ and damage your career rather than advance it. Arguably, in the US and mainland Europe, where communication is more direct and straight-forward, self-promotion is more overt to suit – causing the British to wince