Most leadership styles have negative or mixed effects on employee mental health. (Photo: Jehyun Sung for Unsplash)
FUCKING WORK! is a section where Olivier Schmouker answers your toughest questions [et les plus pertinentes] about the modern business world… and of course its weaknesses. An appointment to read tuesdays and the thursdays. Would you like to participate? Send us your question to [email protected]
Q. – “My boss certainly meant well, but by prioritizing everyone’s ‘harmony’ and ‘wellbeing’, she forgets to recognize the achievement and dedication of those who, like me, do their best 110% every day . It makes me drop everything. It horrifies me so much that I get irritable in the office and lose sleep…” – Dany
A. – Dear Dany, You would like to be recognized for your fair value at work, but your boss seems to prefer welcoming the collective to the individual. And you suffer in silence, show – I don’t want to worry you, just inform you – the symptoms when people talk about burnout.
Incidentally, you’ve just put your finger on a problem that’s attracting more and more researchers: the impact of executives on the mental health of the members of the team they are responsible for. A problem that is all the more serious as recent discoveries on the subject show that these effects are mostly… negative. Even dramatic. explanation.
Diego Montano is a medical researcher at the University of Tübingen, Germany. With his team, he conducted the meta-analysis of 53 current studies on the influence of managers on the mental health of employees. The first point that emerges is that we can identify seven leadership styles used by most leaders today:
– The transformer. Charismatically he influences, inspires and stimulates. It takes everyone’s needs into account.
– The transactional. He knows how to reward the work done, correct the situation when there is still time, and learn from the mistakes made.
– The absent. A proponent of laissez-faire, he is conspicuous by his absence, avoiding decisions and reluctant to take action.
– The individualist. In his eyes, people always come first. Everyone is therefore responsible for the results they display. Everyone must report directly to him without going through anyone else.
– The destroyer. Aggressive, he has potentially dangerous behavior towards his subordinates. His orders can go so far as to harm the organization’s interests if he chooses to do so.
– The relational. He respects others and acts as an unwavering support. He knows how to resolve conflicts.
– The pragmatic. He knows how to distribute the tasks accurately, evaluate each other’s performance and achieve the desired goal.
Dany, I’m sure you’ll find your boss’s leadership style on this list. Perhaps, if necessary, by combining two of them. A priori I would go there with a style from the genre “absent/relational”, what do you think?
Let us continue. Diego Montano and his team then assessed the impact of these different leadership styles on employees’ mental health.
Results? All styles have either a “negative” or “mixed” impact, except for two:
– Unsurprisingly, the “destructive” style has a “hypernegative” impact on the mental health of those who endure it on a daily basis.
– The “transformative” style is “really positive”. This is because such leaders inspire others with their vision of the future, encourage team members to show initiative, and know how to tailor their approach to each employee’s specific needs.
Simply put, all of today’s leaders have a negative or at least mixed impact on employee mental health. Yes, all of them, with the notable exception of those who act as Transformers.
Should we despair in the face of such a finding? To get the point across, by emphasizing that this is hardly surprising when we know that the top reason given by employees for leaving is almost always “It’s because of my boss…”?
No, because the study by Diego Montano and his team gives hope.
For example, she suggests that organizations should make it a priority to reorient their manager’s style to the “transformative” style. There are a number of training programs and other specialized coaches for this.
Another example: Organizations could work to eliminate toxic behaviors from their managers. That is, the behaviors that correspond to certain leadership styles, especially the so-called “destructive” one: aggressiveness, selfishness, etc.
Note that the study also found that correcting the style of incumbent leaders is generally “more effective” than offering employees various wellness programs and other mindfulness classes. Because it makes it possible to get to the root of the problem.
Good. Back to your boss, Dany. What to do when the leader is “absent/relational” when one of their team members is, say, “individualistic” (feel free to correct me if I’m wrong)? The idea, it seems to me, is to find common ground between the two. This means that you take a step towards the “absent/relational” style, for example by thinking more collectively than you normally do. And as for her, that she needs to gravitate toward the “transformative” style that allows her to better understand your unmet need for approval.
In short, take a step towards them, invite them to do the same, for example by learning about this study by Diego Montano that you heard about. And things might get better in the future, both for you and for them.
Incidentally, former cycling team boss Cyrille Guimard likes to say: “Turning habits upside down is still the best way to change things”.