What is Relationship-Oriented Leadership?
Task-oriented leadership theory describes a leader that is motivated by A leadership style that incorporates elements from both theories can help leaders lead. In contrast, relationship-oriented leaders effected greater cohesion between the group's . task behavior and relationship behavior of the group leader on the . a more task-oriented style of leadership developed a more intense relational. Task-oriented and relationship-oriented leadership styles are among the common approaches used by managers. Typically, all leaders have elements of both.
Key Strengths By focusing on the emotional needs of the staff, relationship-oriented leaders ensure they have a positive and motivated workforce. Staff will be enthused and inspired to work and will feel valued and appreciated. In a well supported team of staff, personal conflicts, dissatisfaction and boredom will be minimised resulting in a happy and productive team.
Free from personal issues the staff will be able to work more productively and at a higher standard. Staff may also be more inclined to work creatively and innovatively, taking risks and challenging key operations. Risks can be taken because staff are aware that the leader will provide support if they are unsuccessful. This is essential for development and improvements in organisational performance.
Differences Between Task-Oriented Leaders & Relational-Oriented Leaders | assistancedogseurope.info
Key Criticisms The major criticism to this style of leadership is that with a focus on the relationships between the leader and the staff the actual task at hand can sometimes be overlooked. Another key criticism of relationship-oriented leadership is that some employees may take advantage of a people-focused leader. If staff see the leader accommodating their every need they may start to take liberties to see how far they can push the leader with what they will get away with.
While risk taking was a key strength it can also be considered a criticisms as well.
While risk is essential for progressing an organisation the risk also needs to be calculated. Too much risk taking, at the wrong time and in the wrong place can result in irreversible errors which the leader will find difficult to repair.
Final Thoughts… Leaders have to be relationship focused — after all leadership is all about inspiring and motivating people to take action.
- Relationship-Oriented Leadership
- Differences Between Task-Oriented Leaders & Relational-Oriented Leaders
- Task vs. Relationship Leadership Theories
If a leader does not have a clear understanding of the needs, interests and abilities of their staff, and cannot relate to them on a personal level they will never succeed. Influence Leaders generally need the ability to influence others to succeed. Task-oriented leaders tend to use a more autocratic approach to leadership. They often rely on position power, goal setting, results tracking, clear directives and pushing of employees.
Self-motivated workers tend to make a better fit with a task-oriented leader. A relationship-oriented leader uses empathy and relationships to influence. He believes that if employees see he genuinely cares about them as people, they are more likely to take direction and be inspired by his guidance.
Time A key distinction between these two leadership styles relates to their view of time. Task-oriented leaders tend to be very time-centered. Deadlines are critical, and social interaction should not get in the way of work completion. The relational leader usually puts interaction and group harmony above deadlines or efficiency.
Differences Between Task-Oriented Leaders & Relation-Oriented Leaders
While work must be completed, he is more likely to set aside group activity time or team-building exercises. Risks At the extreme, each style has risks.
An effective leader normally functions somewhere in the middle of a continuum between the extremes. An overly task-oriented leader can come across as bossy, somewhat like a dictator using workers as a means to an end.
This can lead to low morale and, eventually, poor productivity.