Blog 3 - Are All Leadership Styles Truly Balanced in the Centre?

In the Assertiveness-Duality Continuum, we explored the delicate balance between extremes of being "too nice" and "too aggressive." At the centre lies the assertive leader, integrating empathy and assertiveness to foster trust and accountability. But can all leadership styles naturally align at this balanced point, or do some inherently lean toward one side of the spectrum?

Leadership is situational by nature, and emotional intelligence (EQ) plays a vital role in determining how a leader adapts their style. Some styles, like visionary, coaching, and democratic leadership, lend themselves more easily to balance. Others, like pacesetting and commanding leadership, tend to lean toward one end of the continuum and require significant self-awareness to recalibrate.

Balancing Leadership Styles on the Continuum

1. Visionary Leadership: Naturally Near the Centre
• Visionary leaders thrive on empathy, inspiring teams by articulating a compelling vision while encouraging innovation. Their natural alignment with the continuum’s centre depends on maintaining clarity and accountability, as they can drift toward passivity if the vision lacks follow-through.
• Balance Tip: Reinforce assertiveness by setting clear boundaries on how innovation aligns with goals, ensuring consistent accountability.
2. Coaching Leadership: A Strong Fit for Balance
• Coaches exemplify the principle of empathy + assertiveness = accountability. They develop others’ strengths while holding them accountable for progress. However, over-coaching can lead to inefficiencies if boundaries aren’t enforced.
• Balance Tip: Focus on measurable outcomes alongside personal development, ensuring that empathy doesn’t overshadow productivity.
3. Affiliative Leadership: At Risk of Drifting Right
• Affiliative leaders prioritise harmony and inclusivity, but they may avoid conflict or tough decisions to maintain relationships, drifting toward the +5 “Nice, But” side. While great for fostering team cohesion, it can hinder productivity.
• Balance Tip: Pair affiliative tendencies with assertive goal-setting, ensuring harmony doesn’t come at the cost of accountability.
4. Democratic Leadership: Collaborative but Situational
• Democratic leaders often thrive in balanced settings, leveraging EQ competencies like teamwork, conflict management, and influence. However, over-reliance on collaboration can delay decisions, nudging them toward passivity.
• Balance Tip: Assertively establish decision-making timelines and hold the team accountable for collective outcomes.
5. Pacesetting Leadership: Risk of Leaning Left
• Pacesetters, driven by high standards, often land near the -2.5 Aggressive zone. Their focus on performance can undermine relationships and emotional safety, particularly if empathy is lacking.
• Balance Tip: Introduce emotional awareness to better understand team dynamics and create space for collaboration without compromising standards.
6. Commanding Leadership: Far from Balance
• Commanding leaders lean toward -5 Manipulation, demanding compliance through authority. While effective in crises, this style often sacrifices trust and collaboration. Achieving balance requires significant EQ development, particularly self-awareness and emotional control.
• Balance Tip: Use the commanding style sparingly and only when urgency demands it. Rely on empathy and influence to bring teams back to a collaborative and sustainable pace.

The Role of EQ in Maintaining Balance

The emotional intelligence competencies underlying these leadership styles play a pivotal role in determining where leaders reside on the continuum. Leaders with high EQ—particularly self-awareness, empathy, and emotional control—are better equipped to recognise when they’re leaning too far toward either extreme and make conscious adjustments.

Without EQ, leaders risk the following:

• Loss of Emotional Self-Control (EQ): Leaning too far left or right on the continuum often results in reactive behaviours, such as aggression, avoidance, or manipulation.
• Diminished Motivational Intelligence (MQ): Leaders struggle to inspire and align their teams when their leadership style fails to balance relationships with accountability.

Situational Leadership and Self-Awareness

Leadership is never static. Situational demands often push leaders toward one end of the spectrum, whether to address immediate challenges or adapt to cultural dynamics. For example:

• In crises, a leader may adopt a commanding or pacesetting approach, temporarily leaning left for quick decision-making.
• During times of uncertainty, a coaching or affiliative style may emerge to rebuild morale and trust.

The key to success lies in self-awareness. Leaders must recognise when their current approach is no longer serving the team or organisation and adjust accordingly. This involves asking reflective questions:

• “Am I prioritising relationships at the expense of results?”
• “Have I become too directive, stifling collaboration?”
• “How can I integrate empathy and assertiveness to regain balance?”

Closing Thoughts: Striving for Balance

While some leadership styles are naturally closer to balance, others require deliberate effort to integrate empathy, assertiveness, and accountability. Recognising that leadership is situational, the continuum invites leaders to adapt consciously, moving back to the centre when extremes threaten to derail progress.

Ultimately, the most effective leaders are those who understand that the continuum is not a rigid framework but a dynamic tool for growth. By developing emotional intelligence and practising self-awareness, they can remain adaptable, inspire trust, and deliver sustainable results—no matter the circumstances. 

Review Blog 1: Unlocking Trust and Accountability with Assertiveness

Review Blog 2: The Assertiveness-Duality Continuum

Go-to Blog 4: The Playbook: Leadership Through Situational EQ