Among all the types of leadership currently being practised, there is one that is gaining particular strength due to the advantages it offers. So-called participative leadership is that which takes into account the views and impressions of the entire team involved. This allows the whole team to achieve greater commitment to the project, although it also has some limitations as opposed to more authoritarian or traditional leadership.
As its name suggests, participatory leadership is the type of leadership that allows all team members involved in a project to participate. This is manifested in the proposal of ideas and opinions, which are deliberate as a whole, despite the existence of a specific authority that is the referent of leadership within the team.
The main characteristic of participative leadership is the way in which decisions are made. In the authoritarian or traditional leadership, There is a person who holds the position of team leader and who is the one who makes decisions unilaterally thanks to holding this position. This position is acquired on merit. In other words, at least in theory, they are the most capable person in the team to lead it, which presupposes their suitability when it comes to making decisions and imposing them on the rest of the team.
In contrast, in the case of the participative leadership, Here, the leader's role is closer to that of a manager than a boss. In this type of leadership, decisions are made based on the opinion of the majority, which is expressed openly and freely and which, after being compared and presented against other ideas and opinions, must be ratified by most of the team. Once this deliberation has taken place, the leader's role will be to develop the necessary conditions to carry out the chosen decision, but their opinion will carry the same or similar weight as the rest of the team.
Understandably, participatory leadership presents a number of challenges. important advantages over authoritarian or traditional leadership. However, it also presents some weaknesses that should be borne in mind when choosing between the two.
As can be seen, participative leadership offers significant advantages that are worth considering when developing a project. However, if one wishes to avoid the main disadvantages it can present, the best option is opt for a middle ground. When referring to a midpoint in participative leadership, it means choosing a decision-making path that is participative but, at the same time, allows the leader has a higher quality when choosing said decisions, but at the same time valuing the Members of the team's opinions and contributions. This way, the advantages of both models are combined, which usually provides the best results in most cases.
Practising participative leadership fosters employee commitment to the project and the company. In the same vein, it is important to remember that, to achieve the best results, one of the aspects that cannot be overlooked is employee satisfaction. The Satisfied employees are more productive and acquire greater commitment. with the company. There are many ways to foster this worker satisfaction. In addition to participative leadership, elements such as adequate salary remuneration, as well as granting workers certain benefits, are also fundamental social benefits that will allow them to improve their purchasing power or the Work-life balance, among other proposals.
