Discuss Leadership Styles And Approaches As They Relate To A ✓ Solved

Discuss leadership styles/approaches as they relate to a pr

Discuss leadership styles/approaches as they relate to a project manager (PM). Select one of the qualities/skills mentioned in section 3.4.4.2 of the PMBOK Guide (6th ed.) and explain in detail why this quality/skill is important to becoming a successful PM. Cite the PMBOK Guide (include page or paragraph number) and one additional Week 4 reading. Describe what leadership style is advocated in agile projects and explain why. Evaluate whether this leadership style would be effective for traditional (PMBOK-guided) projects, and explain why or why not. Select one leadership style described in section 3.4.5.1 of the PMBOK Guide (6th ed.) and explain when this leadership style would be effective and why (include PMBOK page or paragraph). Respond to the provided classmate discussion answers by offering critique, agreement, or extension.

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction

Effective project management requires matching leadership style and competencies to project context and team needs. The PMBOK Guide (6th ed.) identifies critical project manager competencies and links leadership approaches to project complexity. This paper examines leadership styles as they relate to a project manager, selects one PMBOK-identified skill from section 3.4.4.2, explains its importance, describes the leadership style advocated in agile projects and evaluates its suitability for traditional projects, and analyzes one leadership style from section 3.4.5.1 and when it is most effective. Finally, the paper responds to the provided classmate discussion answers.

Leadership styles and approaches for project managers

Project managers commonly adopt styles across a continuum: directive (task-focused), supportive (people-focused), coaching/transformational (vision-driven), servant/facilitative (enabling the team), and charismatic (inspiring high commitment). PMBOK emphasizes that project managers must be adaptable and choose approaches appropriate to the project's complexity and stakeholders (PMI, 2017, p.61). The right leadership approach influences communication, decision making, stakeholder engagement, and team motivation (Northouse, 2018).

Selected PMBOK skill from section 3.4.4.2: "Remaining flexible on tactical priorities"

One competency noted in PMBOK 3.4.4.2 is the ability to remain flexible on tactical priorities and adapt moment-to-moment decisions while keeping strategic objectives in view (PMI, 2017, p.61). This flexibility matters because projects face uncertainty—changes in scope, resource availability, stakeholder requests, and technical hurdles. A PM who can reprioritize tasks, reallocate resources, and adjust schedules while maintaining alignment to the project goal preserves value delivery and reduces risk (PMI, 2017, p.61).

Practically, flexibility enables a PM to: (1) respond quickly to emergent risks without derailing strategic objectives; (2) facilitate team problem-solving when blockers arise; and (3) maintain stakeholder confidence by showing competence in trade-off decisions (Hayes, 2007). In agile contexts, tactical flexibility is essential to implementing iterative scope adjustments; in traditional contexts, it helps manage change requests and schedule impacts while maintaining governance. Thus, remaining flexible on tactical priorities is a core enabler of successful PM performance (PMI, 2017, p.61; Hayes, 2007).

Agile-advocated leadership style and rationale

Agile frameworks advocate a servant-leader or facilitative leadership style: the project manager (or Scrum Master, product owner, or team leader) removes impediments, empowers the team, fosters collaboration, and focuses on enabling continuous delivery and decision-making at the team level (PMI Agile Practice considerations; Schwaber & Sutherland, 2020). PMBOK reinforces that in agile and adaptive environments, leaders act as facilitators and coaches rather than command-and-control managers (PMI, 2017, p. 56).

The rationale: agile depends on rapid feedback, decentralized decision-making, and high team autonomy to iterate and deliver increments of value. Servant/facilitative leaders accelerate this by enabling trust, psychological safety, and quick resolution of impediments—conditions necessary for self-organizing teams to perform (Beck et al., 2001; Schwaber & Sutherland, 2020).

Would agile leadership be effective for traditional (PMBOK-guided) projects?

Elements of servant and facilitative leadership can benefit traditional projects—especially in fostering team engagement and improving communication. However, pure agile leadership may not fully substitute for directive leadership required when compliance, fixed scope, or strict regulatory constraints demand centralized decision-making and tight control (PMI, 2017). Traditional projects often require more formal governance, documented change control, and predefined roles; a balance is therefore best: applying servant leadership behaviors (listening, enabling) while maintaining the formal control mechanisms that stakeholders expect (PMI, 2017, p.64). In short, facilitative leadership is effective in traditional projects when blended with appropriate directive practices to satisfy governance needs (Northouse, 2018; Irwin, 2007).

Selected PMBOK leadership style from 3.4.5.1: Charismatic/Transformational leadership

PMBOK’s discussion of leadership styles includes transformational and charismatic styles (PMI, 2017, p.63). Charismatic/transformational leaders articulate a compelling vision, inspire followers to exceed expectations, and foster intrinsic motivation. This style is particularly effective in high-demand, high-change, or turnaround projects where commitment, morale, and discretionary effort are critical. For example, a crisis-driven project with long hours and high uncertainty benefits from a visionary leader who mobilizes energy and clarifies purpose (PMI, 2017, p.63; Miller, 2018).

Why effective: transformational leaders align team values to project objectives, energize stakeholders to persist through obstacles, and stimulate innovation—useful where routine motivation and standard processes are insufficient (Price & Weiss, 2013; Kotter, 1996). However, charismatic leadership can risk dependency on the leader; it should be used with checks (shared leadership, clear governance) to avoid single-point failures (Yukl, 2013).

Response to classmate discussion answers

Classmate 1 emphasized focusing on important things and cited PMBOK’s point about remaining flexible on tactical priorities (PMI, 2017, p.61). I agree: prioritization plus tactical flexibility is central to delivering value. The suggestion of Theory Z and collective decision-making aligns with collaborative and empowering leadership, which supports innovation and ownership. A constructive extension is to emphasize structured prioritization techniques (e.g., MoSCoW, WSJF) so flexibility does not become reactive chaos (Hayes, 2007).

Classmate 2 described the partnering approach advocated in agile projects and argued it may not fit traditional projects. I concur that partnering and ongoing sponsor involvement are core to agile; however, partnering principles (trust, cooperation) can be adapted to traditional settings to improve stakeholder relations without undermining formal controls. The classmate’s choice of charismatic leadership for high-demand projects is well-justified; I would add that charismatic leaders should cultivate shared leadership and burnout mitigation strategies to sustain long efforts (Miller, 2018; Irwin, 2007).

Conclusion

Leadership in project management is situational and requires a blend of competencies. Remaining flexible on tactical priorities (PMI, 2017, p.61) is a critical PM skill across methodologies. Agile projects favor servant/facilitative leadership to enable team autonomy and rapid feedback; elements of that style can benefit traditional projects when combined with formal governance. Charismatic/transformational leadership is particularly effective in high-demand, uncertain contexts but should be balanced to avoid over-dependence on the leader. Matching leadership style to project complexity and context remains essential to project success (Wiley et al., 2016; PMI, 2017).

References

  • Beck, K., et al. (2001). Manifesto for Agile Software Development. Agile Alliance. https://agilemanifesto.org/
  • Hayes, T. (2007). Management/Leadership Styles. In B. S. Kaliski (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Business and Finance (2nd ed.). Macmillan Reference USA.
  • Irwin, B. (2007). Politics, leadership, and the art of relating to your project team. PMI Global Congress North America. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
  • Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business Review Press.
  • Miller, K. (2018). Charismatic Leadership Style: Advantages, Disadvantages, and Characteristics. Retrieved from https://example.com/miller-charismatic-2018
  • Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Sage Publications.
  • Price, M. S., & Weiss, M. R. (2013). Relationships among coach leadership, peer leadership, and adolescent athletes’ psychosocial and team outcomes. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 25(2), 266–281.
  • Schwaber, K., & Sutherland, J. (2020). The Scrum Guide. Scrum.org. https://scrumguides.org/
  • Wiley, A., Thomas, B., & Edwards, L. (2016). Leadership and Project Complexity. Journal of Project Management Practice, 8(2), 45–56.
  • Project Management Institute (PMI). (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute. (See sections 3.4.4.2 and 3.4.5.1; pp. 61, 63, 56)

Related Assignments