3 What Are Types of Leadership?

Katrina knew right away that she had stumbled out of the gate in her new executive leadership position. And Katrina knew the mistake that she had made. Katrina had tons of leadership experience. But her leadership experience was all in government, not in education, where she had accepted her new executive position. And her leadership experience was all at department and team levels, not as the chief executive officer of the whole organization. With her first executive error, Katrina realized things were different at the top level and different in the education sector in which she now led. She knew she had some adjustments to make. She just hoped that she could make them in time.

Types

Leadership across sectors and fields, and up and down the chain of command, has common challenges and attributes. You can benefit from following leadership strategies and principles, no matter the sector in which you lead an organization or the level of the organization at which you lead. Yet leadership can also differ in its execution in different sectors and at different levels of responsibility. Leadership in education isn’t exactly the same as leadership in business, nonprofits, government, or the military. Leadership’s challenges and strategies differ across sectors. Nor is leadership at the board level the same as leadership at the executive, department, or team levels. Leadership’s challenges and strategies differ up and down the organizational hierarchy. While this guide addresses leadership strategies and principles useful to varying degrees and in different ways across sectors and up and down the organizational hierarchy, this chapter addresses some of the distinctions in leadership between sectors and levels. 

Board

Many types of organizations, in both the public and private sectors, and business and nonprofit sectors, have boards governing them. Private corporations, both in business and the nonprofit sector, have boards of directors. Public bodies have councils and commissions, also effectively corporate boards. School districts have elected boards, and public and private colleges and universities have elected or appointed boards of trustees or regents. Even in the military, one finds joint chiefs of staff, military councils, or councils of war bringing military leaders together to govern operations. Boards govern their organizations through an executive leader whom they appoint. Board leadership can differ from executive leadership. The board chair or president does not make governance decisions in the way that an executive leader calls the operational shots. A board leader instead gains consensus of the board. A board leader’s responsibility is to guide the board through its agenda to unanimous, consensus, or majority decisions on governance matters. A board leader may be visionary, may heavily influence the board, and may direct significant governance tasks like an executive leader would direct operational tasks. Yet a board leader defers to the will of the board. A board leader must also ensure that the board does not interfere with the executive leader’s operational responsibility. Board leadership is thus a sensitive and complex role.

Executive

Organizations generally need an executive leader. An executive leader represents the organization externally while having ultimate internal responsibility for the organization’s activities. The executive leader may serve at the will and pleasure of the organization’s board, but the executive should have substantial authority to carry out the board’s will as the executive best determines. A board must not interfere with its chief executive’s operational decisions. Conversely, a chief executive officer, often referred to as the organization’s president but in other sectors designated as a general, admiral, executive director, general manager, superintendent, or dean, must defer on governance issues to the board, even if the executive may have substantial influence over the board on all issues. The quality of the relationship between the board and executive can go a long way toward determining an organization’s success or failure. Executive leadership, like board leadership, is a sensitive and complex role, typically for individuals who already have significant leadership experience at lower levels. 

Department

Organizations of any significant size generally need to divide their functions, systems, and operations into departments or units, simply to manage their coordination and complexity. Departments or units need leaders to answer for their operations. Department or unit leaders are responsible to the organization’s chief executive, not directly to the organization’s board. The department leader who goes around the chief executive to negotiate and navigate organizational matters directly with the board will generally have a serious problem with the chief executive. Department leaders must answer to the chief executive to recognize and maintain the chief executive’s authority and responsibility. The organization that has multiple bosses instead of one, with the one designated chief executive undercut by back-channel directives, generally has a serious problem. Department or unit leadership thus involves adhering to the chief executive’s directives while advocating with the chief executive for department or unit needs and interests. Like board and executive leadership, department or unit leadership can involve a sensitive and complex role. 

Team

Organizations of significant size can also require smaller teams of individuals with similar skills performing similar tasks, below the department level. An organization’s finance department, for instance, may have a planning and analysis team, tax team, treasury team working with receivables, payables, and payroll, and internal audit and compliance team. An organization’s personnel department, for another example, may have recruitment, compensation and benefit, learning and development, performance management, labor relations, health and safety, organizational structure, and analytics teams. Teams also need leaders to carry out the department leader’s directives and to advocate with the department leader for the needs and interests of the team. A team leader reports to the department’s leader who reports to the chief executive, forming an internal chain of command. Team leadership is a good first step on the way to gaining greater leadership experience. Many individuals never rise to team leadership. Those who do lead a team can learn, test, and hone leadership skills. 

Business

Leadership in business can differ in significant and subtle respects from leadership in the nonprofit, government, education, or military sectors. Businesses by definition organize with the goal of producing revenue, earning owners a fair return on investment. Business leadership can thus have clear and objective performance measures. A leader’s posturing doesn’t count. The bottom line counts. Business leadership thus tends to be more pragmatic, directive, and decisive, and can be less collaborative, collegial, and reflective. Business leaders generally expect subordinates to carry out their directives and will generally not hesitate to hold accountable subordinates who do not. Although business leaders come in all types, business leadership can require individuals with stronger will and personalities, and less sensitivity for individual interests when organizational interests demand swift and decisive action. Don’t go into business leadership with a thin skin, indecisive character, and weak constitution.

Nonprofit

Leadership in the nonprofit sector can have a significantly more relational feel than business leadership. Charitable nonprofits do not seek profit but instead fulfillment of their charitable mission. Charitable nonprofit organizations generally depend on public contributions and grants from private foundations to fund their operations, more so than sales revenue. Donor relations can thus be critical to a nonprofit organization’s success. Relations with volunteers and underpaid staff members, and to the underprivileged patrons whom the organization serves, can also be critical to a nonprofit organization’s success. Nonprofit leaders may thus need substantially more interpersonal skill and charm, and team-building and collaboration skills, than business leaders. Nonprofit leaders may also need to be excellent communicators of the organization’s vision, insofar as they must motivate donors and volunteers by that vision rather than by directive and command. You can’t order donors or volunteers to do much of anything. Pursue nonprofit leadership only if you enjoy working through consensus around community issues that move the hearts of generous people. 

Government

Leadership in the government sector can have a different cast and character from leadership in the business and nonprofit sectors. Leading a government agency does not generally require the cutthroat competitive fire one can see among business leaders. Nor does leading a government agency require the charm and passion of a nonprofit leader. Leading a government agency instead generally requires the ability to convince the legislative body allocating the agency’s budget out of tax revenues that the agency is providing the public service that the legislators expect. Leading a government agency thus involves the ability to articulate public needs, show how the agency is meeting them, and prove that the means is an efficient use of limited tax revenues. Leading a government agency can be more technical, even wonky, than business or nonprofit leadership, facing the challenge of quantifying and meeting often-ambiguous public needs. While agency leaders can generally expect subordinates to do as the leader directs, leading a government agency can also involve dealing with public employee unions and their work rules. An agency leader may thus be able to tell subordinates what to do but may not see any particular urgency in their response. Agency leaders can expect clear hierarchies but encounter a significant level of bureaucracy, making management more challenging and less responsive.

Education

Leadership in education can also differ markedly from leadership in other sectors, while still involving some of the same principles and strategies. Schools must be financially responsible. They thus rely to some extent on business principles, more so in private education than public education. Yet whether in public or private education, schools are more like communities than business organizations. That is, their staff members bear something like a parent relationship, referred to in the law as in loco parentis, to their student populations. The key relationship in a school is thus between the teacher and student, not, as in other organizations, between the organization and a customer, client, or patient. A school leader thus doesn’t direct staff members quite so much as serve and support them in their primary duty to promote student development. Education leaders must thus generally act with significantly greater deference and collegiality toward instructors, often reflected in labor-union, statutory, or negotiated tenure protections. Education leadership can be especially sensitive and complex, while requiring greater patience and perseverance answering to multiple constituencies. 

Military

Leadership in the military and, to a lesser but similar degree, in law enforcement is especially distinct from leadership in other sectors. Command and control are vital to the coordination necessary for effective military and law enforcement functions. Military and law enforcement leaders reasonably expect and rightly insist on prompt and strict obedience to orders, especially on matters relating in any way to their security duties. Military and law enforcement leadership may thus not be nearly so nuanced as, and clearly not collaborative and collegial like, leadership in the nonprofit and education sectors. Military and law enforcement leadership is also generally not competitive and bottom-line driven in the same way as business leadership, nor budget and public-service focused in the same way as government agency leadership. Military and law enforcement leadership may involve some of the principles and strategies that this guide discusses, but this guide’s focus is not on military and law enforcement leadership, which is instead a world much unto its own.

Reflection

In which of the above sectors, from business to nonprofit, government, education, or military, do you see your personality, character, conditions, and preferences guiding you to lead? At which of the above levels, from the board level down through the executive, department, and team levels, do you see your personality, character, conditions, and preferences guiding you to lead? On a scale from one to ten, how would you rate your character, personality, or preference on each of these measures, relative to the several sectors and levels this chapter addresses: (a) bottom-line competitiveness; (b) decisiveness; (c) pragmatism and practicality; (d) interpersonal and relational abilities; (e) ability to communicate passionately; (f) ability to foster generosity; (g) technical measurement skills; (h) budget advocacy skills; (i) bureaucracy navigation skills; (j) collegiality; (k) collaboration skills; (l) command and control; (m) consensus building skills. 

Key Points

• Leading can differ across sectors and up and down organization levels.

• Board leaders govern organizations by board agenda and consensus.

• Executives lead organization operations by directive, at board will.

• Department leaders answer to executives, advocating for their units.

• Team leaders answer to department leaders, at the lowest level.

• Business leaders are generally bottom-line directive and decisive. 

• Nonprofit leaders must motivate generous donors and volunteers. 

• Government agency leaders must justify their share of tax revenue.

• Leaders in education collegially serve and support instructors.

• Military and law enforcement leaders command and control.

Read Chapter 4.