Eight Archetypes of Leadership


This week in Leadership we discussed the adaptive and psychodynamic approaches to leadership. Adaptive leadership describes how a leader helps his followers adapt to change and solve problems. Psychodynamic leadership points out the importance of seeing beyond actions alone and understanding that humans are complex beings with many motivations and conflicts at play in any one instance.

Individuals and organizations respond differently to different types of leaders. Likewise, some situations call for different kinds of leaders. Within our text for this chapter, an assessment involving the eight archetypes of leadership was presented. Manfred F. R. Kets de Vries presents these archetypes in a discussion of them in a 2013 Harvard Business Review article “The Eight Archetypes of Leadership”. You can find the article here: https://hbr.org/2013/12/the-eight-archetypes-of-leadership .

According to this article, the eight archetypes of leadership are as follows:

1.       The Strategist
2.       The Change-Catalyst
3.       The Transactor
4.       The Builder
5.       The Innovator
6.       The Processor
7.       The Coach
8.       The Communicator

Kets de Vries explains that the fit between a leader’s archetype, “organizational dysfunctionality”, and “executive failure” (Kets de Vries, 2013). There is a clear incentive to understanding the kind of leader we are and the kind of leader a position/organization needs. So, let’s explore these archetypes a little more thoroughly.

1.       The Strategist:
o   “Leadership as a game of chess” (Northouse, 2016, p.319).
o   “These people are good at dealing with developments in the organization’s environment. They provide vision, strategic direction, and outside-the-box thinking to create new organizational forms and generate future growth” (Kets de Vries, 2013).
Strategists are clearly gifted in problem-solving. However, they may lack in communication skills, and they may also fail to notice small issues plaguing the workplace (Northouse, 2016, p.319). Relationships may not be The Strategist’s strong suit. However, they are excellent at vision and solving the abstract problems other archetypes may struggle with (Northouse, 2016, p.319).

2.       The Change-Catalyst
o   “Leadership as turnaround activity” (Northouse, 2016, p.319).
o   “These executive love messy situations. They are masters at re-engineering and creating new organizational blueprints” (Kets de Vries, 2013).
Change-catalysts thrive in new or changing environments. They are trailblazers, and “have the ability to align vision, strategy, and behavior” (Northouse, 2016, p.319). They have some people skills that The Strategist may lack in this regard. They are not merely schemers or planners. They are active in implementing plans.  

3.       The Transactor
o   “Leadership as deal making” (Northouse, 2016, p.319).
o   “These executives are great dealmakers. Skilled at identifying and tackling new opportunities, they thrive on negotiations” (Kets de Vries, 2013).
This type of leader thrives in hard discussions when compromise is necessary. “They are outcome oriented but not as effective at processes” (Northouse, 2016, p.320). They thrive on making the deal but not necessarily on implementing the resulting plan.

4.       The Builder
o   “Leadership as entrepreneurial activity” (Northouse, 2016, p.319).
o   “These executives dream of creating something and have the talent and determination to make their dream come true” (Kets de Vries, 2013).
Builders are worker bees with a need for independence. They have the determination and drive. Additionally, builders make great entrepreneurs because of their energy and need for control.  One leader this made me think of was Martin Luther King Jr. because of his ability to build a major movement out of essentially nothing.

5.       The Innovator
o   “Leadership as creative idea generation” (Northouse, 2016, p.319).
o   “These people are focused on the new. They possess a great capacity to solve extremely difficult problems” (Kets de Vries, 2013).
Innovators are passionate about learning new things (Northouse, 2016, p.321). Innovators may not respond well to authority or set processes, and they tend to also be introverted—more focused on ideas than people (Northouse, 2016, p.321). However, these people are important for the workplace and society if we want to have progress.

6.       The Processor
o   “Leadership as an exercise in efficiency” (Northouse, 2016, p.319).
o   “These executives like organizations to be smoothly running, well-oiled machines. They are very effective at setting up the structures and systems needed to support an organization’s objectives” (Kets de Vries, 2013).
Processors are vital in organizational settings. They like thrive in creating order and systems. They like routine and constancy when possible. Additionally, they are able to “keep a cool head in stressful situations” (Northouse, 2016, p.321). However, these leaders sometimes do not explore new opportunities like they should.

7.       The Coach
o   “Leadership as people development” (Northouse, 2016, p.319).
o   “These executives know how to get the best out of people, thus creating high-performance cultures.” (Kets de Vries, 2013).
One leader this brings to mind is Steve Jobs. Jobs loved pushing people to do better and challenging them to do even better than they thought possible. This leader can be vital to a thriving, non-complacent business.

8.       The Communicator
o   “Leadership as stage management” (Northouse, 2016, p.319).
o   “These executives are great influencers and have a considerable impact on their surroundings” (Kets de Vries, 2013).
Communicators are not necessarily the planners, but they are great communicators. This archetype brings to mind great orators like Patrick Henry or even Joseph Goebbels of the Nazi cause. They were not the visionaries, but they played a vital role in raising public support for their causes.

Different situations call for different types of leaders. Additionally, sometimes a combination of leaders may be necessary. For example, when a company is forced to explore other ways of doing things, The Processor may look to The Innovator for assistance. In order for an organization to be well-run, leaders should know their own and strengths and weaknesses. But, perhaps, more importantly, leaders need to know their followers so that when certain situations arise the right leader can be called upon to solve the problem.

I hope you enjoyed reading this week’s post. Be sure to stop by again next week or anytime at http://exploringleadershipinpublicadmin.blogspot.com/

References
Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (2013, Dec  18). The eight archetypes of leadership. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2013/12/the-eight-archetypes-of-leadership
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Hofstede’s Dimensions of Culture

Image
This week in Leadership we discussed two very interesting areas—gender and culture—and how they relate to leadership. For this week’s blog post I will focus on culture and how it is related to leadership. Culture Culture describes “learned beliefs, values, rules, norms, symbols, and traditions that are common to a group of people” (Northouse, 2016, p.428). every person has their own culture. We get culture from our religions, nations, regions, states, hometowns, genders, races, and even our individual families have their own culture. Culture permeates every decision we make and almost everything we do—from how we speak, what we eat, and even how we perceive individuals. It all comes back to culture. So, it is important for leaders (and followers too) to understand differences in culture and how this will affect the workplace or any environment. “Of all the research on [the] dimensions of culture,” Hofstede’s is likely the most cited (Northouse, 2016, p. 431). Geert H. Hofstede...
Read more

The Behavioral and Situational Approaches to Leadership

Image
This week’s discussion covered two other approaches in leadership theory—the behavioral and situational approach. Each of these approaches considers the leader’s behavior across two main dimensions—task and relationship behaviors. Consider this diagram from our text that depicts the behavioral approach: Picture source: Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7 th edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers. P. 76 The Behavioral Approach Figure 4.1 depicts the behavioral approach to leadership. As you can tell the two dimensions considered are the concern for people or relationship behaviors and concern for results or task behaviors. This diagram does a great job of portraying the approach. I especially like the names given to each type of leader. Beginning in the top left we have “country club management”. These types of managers are almost wholly concerned with relationship behaviors. They are interested in being the follower’s friend and likely making...
Read more