36 comments (+ Add)
Different Styles of Leaders
As I’ve studied our different campuses and teams, I’ve noticed that many leaders exhibit one of four different styles of leadership. (I’m sure there are many more, but these are the common ones I’ve observed.)
The four styles I most often observe include:
- Relational leaders: These leaders motivate others through personal connections.
- Visionary leaders: These leaders move people by painting a picture of what “could be.”
- Administrative leaders: These leaders move the ball forward by organizing groups of people with clear boundaries, expectations, and accountability.
- Innovative leaders: These leaders find new ways to accomplish old objectives.
Although no leader should be boxed into one style, recognizing and capitalizing on strengths and style can be extremely helpful. This week we’ll spend some time discussing each style.
What is your dominant and secondary style of those listed?
Visit 
I’m # 2 with a little #4
I am a lot #1 and some #4.
From the feedback I have gotten in the past, along with my experiences, I would say that I am primarily Visionary in a very Relational way.
I am def #1. That’s for sure. I’m not so sure about my secondary though. I think #3 or #2 - I see both of those in me - lots of dreams I’d like to see us move towards, but I have “the mommy gene” and can easily organize groups too.
it is interesting to note how different church cultures and ministry contexts can draw out and develop different styles of leadership in a single person.
as far as my natural bent goes, I am relationsal and visionary, but after 5 years at a church that majors on administration towards excellence, I am painfully developing this area. I have also seen God pull out of me creative ideas and strategies I did not know existed, especially as I have been developed graphics and series themes, etc…
is it possible to be competent at all of these and not odminant at any? is that a good thing or a bac thing? how would you use a leader like that in YOUR organization?
Wow! I read this earlier and had to come back to it! It hurt my brain to think that deep before my morning cup of “Joe”. Why is coffee called “joe”? (hmm…random)
So here is what I think #2 first, #4..then #1…Cant wait for the rest…
By the way this weekend messaged Rocked the Hizzle! Speaking of houses. If Amy ever “needs” to clean again…my house is always open!
What a great wife you have!
wow! definitely not as a typist! I think that is the most typos per line ever! sorry! NEED …MORE …CAFFEINE… “odminant” - “incapable of typing “dominant” properly”
Ah! I’m wanting all of them! Specifically, I think my heart leans towards 1 & 2…also 4 (by 4 I mean I want to do things in new creative ways…not necessarily technologically speaking).
So should I focus on building each one separately?
Any other advice for me fellow Swervers?
I love the fun talk this morning!
seeing that i don’t go to lifechurch.tv and haven’t had much connection with you craig, i’m interested in knowing which two do you follow under? i’m personally going to say for myself #1 & #2 and wish i had a bunch of #4.
I’m either #2 or #4 but am looking forward to seeing how you break those down more distinctly so I can see myself more clearly.
I agree about this weekend–so good! But honestly, I can hardly wait for the Steven Furtick message to drop.
I’m #1 with some #2. I love it when people follow because they trust the leader, but it’s the vision they really believe in. Because people will let people down, people fail. So I like to build relationships and lead people through that while casting a vision that is the true desired outcome.
Jared, You’ll probably want to work some on all of them but focus the most on your top two.
Heady, I am probably 2 and 3.
Some of you might be interested in Hybel’s article on this…
http://www.buildingchurchleaders.com/articles/1998/le-8l1-8l1084.html
[...] via Different Styles of Leaders - LifeChurch.tv : swerve. [...]
Definitely a #2 with a splash of #4. What I’ve been finding is that the more that I lead out of my strength and bring others around me who are strong #1s and #3s, the better our church gets. We made our first full-time hire (a strong #3) this past spring and it has catapulted us forward. We’re now able to organize our teams who were already fired up about the vision….man is there ever power in motivating your volunteers around a significant vision!
Great post!
I am most definitely a RELATIONAL leader. My secondary one would be administrative. Over this past year I have been learning to be more innovative and visionary.
Craig, do you believe that these styles of leadership go along with our God-given SHAPE and/or can they be learned?
Kevin, Yes, I think a person can unquestionably improve at each of these, but I think he/she is most likely naturally gifted at one or two. Rather than always focusing on building our weaker ones, it is probably more advantageous to run with the strongest ones.
I think I would probably be 2 and 4. These are the areas I probably excel in more then the others. 2 is probably the first and 4 is the second. Good stuff! Thanks guys for writing.
Love the post Craig. I got so inspired I posted some stuff on my blog too. Would love to get everybody’s feedback. Go to: http://pastors.com/blogs/bowman/default.aspx
Great stuff Craig, thanks.
Now that I think about it, right now I only have one - and that is #1…I definitely need to work on the other 3 too…
Why do I feel like I must perfect all of them? It must be a sign of immaturity…I know I must work on each of them, but I feel I must perfect each one.
I’m excited to hear more about these! I hope I can learn to focus too if that’s what I really need to do.
Thanks for the wisdom Craig! And thanks everyone else for the comments.
#2
#1 (this one has to be more intentional though)
@ Craig Thanks for your response! A couple more questions: (1) Would the key then be to build your staff (or in my case my leadership volunteers) around your weak leadership areas? and (2) Can a pastor be THE leader without being the main visionary for the church?
Kevin, Those are great questions. Maybe someone else can jump in on the conversation.
The pastor will probably be the chief communicator of the vision but doesn’t necessarily need to be a visionary leader. Some of our best campus pastors do a great job casting vision, but they are better relational or administrative leaders.
You will probably want to build your team “around” your weaknesses but “on” your strengths. Make sense?
I am a very strong #3 and #1 follows close behind. I have just recently been put into position so that I can use my gifts. In having conversation with my pastor and asking him where he could use the most support/help I found it is where I am strongest. God is so faithful to use us when we just let Him have His way.
I more than lean on #1 and #2, but would prayerfully like to have a little more edge on #4. As a new church planter, my heart tends to be all over the place on a daily basis. But God generally reals me in at the end of the day…….then I begin to make sense, most of the time. Looking forward to more from you, Craig on this post!
@ Craig - I am assuming that you are saying that you should build your team to complement your strengths. Is that correct?
I agree with you that the lead pastor should be the main communicator of the vision and not necessarily the visionary leader. I am curious to hear other peoples thoughts on this.
Craig,
Great conversation here. At the ministry, I have leaders who are all the above. Our founder is actually is all of the above, which I find very rare. Myself, I’m a lot of #4.
Which type do you respond and follow best?
Their are also inherent problems with each style….
The relational leader can struggle to lead beyond the relationships he/she can maintain.
The visionary leader has the least trouble as long as he/she can communicate the vision clearly. I have seen visionaries struggle here as they are often a Van Gogh or Picasso in a Rembrandt world.
The administrative leader may get so entrenched in systems and processes that they lose the larger question of “What do we do next and how many resources do we apply to it?”
I don’t know if I would separate out innovative leaders as a true style. Mintzberg (in Drucker’s Leading for Innovation) deems “innovation” by its very definition does not mean doing an old thing a new way. That is merely “adaption.” (Example: a wenkal engine is still a gas powered engine, not innovative, just adaptive.)
Most people we would deem great adaptive leaders are also managerial/systems types with merely a different methodology. Most innovators are really visionaries. In that sense, I don’t see it innovative as a separate “style.” (Also, our egos love to think of ourselves as innovative when most are truly just adapters).
craig, edit first word “there” instead of “their”..my bad.
#1 for sure!
I am #1 (I love people) and #2…probably depends on the hormones :O) Sybil
[...] Styles of Leadership [...]
[...] Posted in Uncategorized Different Styles of Leaders [...]
I always see myself as a relational leader yet God is developing in me as a newly church planting pastor a visionary leader.
[...] An addition to last week’s series on Leadership [...]
I think I’m a mix between 1 and 4, but I guess you should ask the people that attend my church. We tend to have a distorted view of ourselves!