Leadership Styles – Choosing the Right Approach for Recruitment and Growth
In the ever-shifting world of work, leadership is not a one-size-fits-all skill. As organisations strive to recruit, retain and develop talent, understanding which leadership style suits a given context is a crucial piece of the puzzle. According to Business.govt.nz, behavioural scientist, Daniel Goleman identified six fundamental leadership styles in a study of more than 3,000 business leaders and found that those who flexed between styles achieved stronger outcomes than those who relied on only one or two.
For recruitment and human resources professionals, this insight means one thing: when seeking leadership potential or developing executives, it’s essential not just to match “leadership personality,” but also to match the style to the situation.
The Six Leadership Styles
1. Authoritative (Vision-Driven Leadership)
The hallmark of the authoritative style is inspiring people toward a vision. Leaders using this style make time to find new and better ways of doing things, show how individuals are involved in the business vision, encourage goal achievement, and step back to work on the bigger picture.
When it works: Ideal when your organisation needs fresh direction or is entering a new phase – a turnaround, launch or major strategic shift. It works well in many business situations and is especially effective when you need people to buy into an idea, perform at a high level and act with integrity.
When to watch: It is less effective if you’re working with people who are more experienced than you, or in a context where a more collaborative or technical leadership method is better.
2. Pace-setting (High-Performance Leadership)
Pace-setting leaders set a high bar: they expect immediate results, work quickly, to a high standard, and expect others to match. They’re quick to point out weaknesses and demand improvement.
When it works: Useful when staff are highly motivated and competent, when there is a big goal and a short timeframe, or when competition is intense.
When to watch: It can be sustained only for short periods, and overuse may hurt culture, motivation and employee development. People may feel lost if the leader leaves, and it leaves little room for development.
3. Affiliative (Relationship-Centric Leadership)
Affiliative leaders prioritise people: they foster strong emotional relationships and trust, ensure supportive processes are in place, and cultivate teams that work well together and look out for one another.
When it works: Particularly powerful when you’re navigating conflict, recovering morale, or in a time of change and you need to rebuild trust and engagement.
When to watch: If you rely solely on relationships, you may avoid conflict or delay difficult decisions. It can leave employees uncertain about their tasks, and this is particularly undesirable when there’s urgency or a need for clear direction.
4. Democratic (Inclusive Leadership)
This style is all about asking what people think: democratic leaders listen first, act second, encourage teamwork, solve problems by consensus, ensure everyone’s voice is heard, and won’t impose decisions.
When it works: Excellent when you’re shaping or establishing a collective vision, when you want staff buy-in, and when people’s voices need to be heard to embed change.
When to watch: It can take time, especially with multiple stakeholders; it may frustrate those who aren’t used to having a voice; and meetings can drag without clear outcomes.
5. Coaching (Developmental Leadership)
Coaching leaders recognises strengths and weaknesses, supports personal and professional development, delegates tasks and provides constructive feedback, and encourages people to establish long-term goals and plan how to achieve them.
When it works: Strong for developing talent, building long-term capability, and creating a culture of ownership and feedback. It frees up leader time over the long run.
When to watch: Less useful in crises or when tasks must be done quickly. Not suitable if the person is unskilled or resistant to change; feedback must be positive and motivational to avoid micromanagement.
6. Coercive (Directive Leadership)
Coercive leaders demand compliance; they give orders, take charge, dictate exactly how tasks should be done, and make decisions without consulting the team.
When it works: In emergencies or crisis, when tight deadlines loom, or when staff need close supervision and direction.
When to watch: It can alienate employees, stifle creativity and initiative, make people feel they have no independence, and can hurt motivation if used excessively.
Selecting the Right Leadership Style for Recruitment and Development
For recruitment magazines targeting companies hiring for leadership roles or seeking to shape leadership pipelines, they should encourage the following considerations:
Context matters – As the site emphasises: “No leadership style is effective all the time and in all situations. Be ready to change your leadership style depending on the situation.”
A recruiter should therefore probe: what situation does this leader face? A startup innovation project, a turnaround, or a stabilisation role?
People matter – Ask: Who are you working with? What are their motivations, skills, experience and personality?
For example, a coaching style may be effective when your team is in the development phase; a pace-setting style may be more suitable when you already have a high-performing team but need a rapid boost.
Task and Timeframe Matter – What’s Required? What are your business goals? When is it due?
For example, during a product launch with a tight deadline, pace-setting or coercive leadership styles may be required. In contrast, in cultural change, affiliative or democratic leadership styles may be more appropriate.
Flexibility is essential – Encourage leaders to be comfortable shifting styles. The best leaders don’t cling to one preference; instead, they have a leadership toolkit and choose the style that fits the moment.
Implications for Recruitment, Hiring and Leadership Development
For recruitment professionals and organisations building talent pipelines, these leadership style insights carry several implications.
Job descriptions and role profiles can incorporate leadership-style expectations. For instance, a description might note: “The successful candidate will bring an authoritative style to craft the vision, combine it with a democratic approach to engage the team, and adopt pace-setting when hitting key milestones”.
Interview questions should surface a leader’s situational flexibility. Candidates might be asked: “Tell us about a time you shifted your leadership style to match team needs,” or “Which leadership style do you naturally lean toward? Can you switch when required?”
Leadership development programs should not only teach a preferred style but also build capability across the range. Organisations that invest in helping leaders build coaching, democratic and affiliative behaviours, not just directive ones, will create a more resilient leadership base.
Onboarding and transition planning must recognise context. When a leader enters a new role, they should assess the team's maturity, business goals, timeframe, and adapt their style accordingly.
Culture and performance are interconnected with leadership style. For instance, over-reliance on pace-setting or coercive methods may deliver short-term results but can erode motivation. Conversely, affiliative or democratic approaches may boost engagement, but if used exclusively, they may lead to a lack of clarity and delayed execution.
Retention is aided by leadership styles that adapt. Employees want leaders who understand them (affiliative), develop them (coaching), involve them (democratic) and give clear direction when required (authoritative). A rigid leadership style, especially a coercive one, can trigger exit risk.
Final Thoughts
Leadership is not static — it’s about adaptation. The context, people and task all shape which style fits best.
The six styles identified —Authoritative, Pace-setting, Affiliative, Democratic, Coaching, and Coercive—each have their time and place.
The right leader for your role isn’t necessarily the one with the strongest single style, but the one with the greatest versatility and situational awareness.
Recruitment and development practices should embed this principle: look for and cultivate flexibility, not just “one best style”.
An organisation’s ability to deliver, engage and grow depends in part on matching the right leadership style to the right situation.
For hiring managers and recruiters in New Zealand’s evolving employment market, understanding and applying this nuanced approach to leadership can make a decisive difference, both for business performance and for candidates’ fit and long-term success.