It can be a difficult question to reflect on, but as new social and professional norms emerge among an intergenerational workforce, the “old school” approach to management might not have the same impact as it used to. We’re not suggesting abandoning all structures in favor of sweatpants and ping-pong tables. Still, it may be time to reevaluate the role of management in the modern workplace and whether managers are helping or hindering their subordinates.
One of the many roles of management is to ensure high employee engagement, which can have a powerful impact on business outcomes. According to a 2022 Gallup poll, highly engaged business units (i.e. those with high employee engagement and low turnover) can experience up to a 23% difference in profitability compared to low engagement business units.
So, how do you keep employees engaged and what does it have to do with management? In this article, we’ll discuss different management styles and how to deploy them can positively impact employee engagement.
There’s Just One Way to Manage… Right?
Often, the mental image of a middle manager follows a “command and control” structure, where a single individual oversees several employees, ensuring tasks are completed, projects are seen through to completion, and high performers are promoted into the next generation of managers.
However, as technology and enhanced efficiency continue accelerating the pace at which organizations operate, the effectiveness of a top-down approach dwindles. Managers and their teams are doing more, yet many companies still operate using pre-Internet and pre-AI management styles. Instead of letting “the boss decide,” managers should reframe their role from that of a captain to that of a coach
What It Means to Adopt a Coaching Mindset
Unlike a “command-and-control” approach, a coach-as-a-manager’s priority is not just hitting targets or overshooting revenue goals. Instead, according to Sir John Whitmore, a pioneer in the executive coaching industry, it’s about “unlocking people’s potential to maximize their own performance.”
As a leader, this requires a fundamental shift in perspective. A coach adjusts their approach to each individual to find the best way to engage employees’ strengths and develop weak areas. This transition can be uncomfortable for many managers, as it requires shifting away from “telling and selling” to active listening.
Fortunately, there’s a simple way for managers to align their coaching style according to current needs. Harvard Business Review developed a 2×2 coaching matrix that illustrates four key coaching styles:
- Directive Coaching
- Laissez-Faire Coaching
- Nondirective Coaching
- Situational Coaching
Each style differs based on how much direction a manager gives (input) and how much problem-solving is left to the employee (output). Let’s break them down:
1. Directive Coaching
Also known as mentoring, directive coaching follows a “telling” approach. It provides employees with a lot of information on how to accomplish tasks while requiring little input or individual problem solving.
Pros:
- Familiar and comfortable for both managers and employees.
- Well-suited for employees who respond well to direct guidance.
Cons:
- Can be demotivating if employees feel they have no autonomy.
- Limits employee development by not allowing them to solve problems independently.
2. Laissez-Faire Coaching
Laissez-faire coaching requires neither a “telling” approach nor active involvement in employee problem-solving. Instead, it allows autonomous teams and employees to work independently with minimal oversight.
Pros:
- Ideal for experienced specialists who require little direction.
- The opposite of micromanaging, promoting trust and self-sufficiency.
Cons:
- Should not be mistaken for complete disengagement—employees still need support.
- Best used situationally rather than as a default management style.
3. Nondirective Coaching
Nondirective coaching is the opposite of directive coaching. According to HBR, it is “built on listening, questioning, and withholding judgment.” If directive coaching is about mentoring, nondirective coaching is more like therapy—guiding employees to solve their own challenges.
Pros:
- Encourages employees to develop their own insights and career trajectory.
- Helps employees build independent problem-solving skills.
Cons:
- Does not come naturally to most managers.
- Requires patience and can be mentally taxing for leaders.
4. Situational Coaching
Situational coaching blends the directive approach (giving guidance) with the non-directive approach (encouraging employee engagement). It requires managers to balance listening with instructing to provide a productive and compassionate management style.
Pros:
- Considered the “sweet spot” of coaching, allowing for both guidance and autonomy.
- Helps managers and employees engage in meaningful development.
Cons:
- Can be challenging to maintain the right balance.
- Managers should first become comfortable with non-directive coaching before attempting this hybrid approach.
Getting Started with Coaching-First Management
Making the shift to coaching-first management requires adjustments from both managers and employees. For example, Google’s Project Oxygen found that the most effective managers were those who acted as coaches rather than traditional authoritative figures. By focusing on active listening, empowering employees, and providing consistent feedback, Google was able to improve employee satisfaction and performance significantly. This demonstrates how a coaching-first approach can yield tangible benefits when properly implemented.
With Baby Boomers, Gen Xers, Millennials, and Gen Z all occupying the modern workforce, there is potential for miscommunication and differing social norms.
To ensure success, managers and employees should first align on “rules of play” to develop a shared vocabulary and understanding of how each employee receives and responds to input from management. This may include setting expectations and definitions for:
- Positive and negative feedback.
- Shared goals and desired outcomes.
- Feedback loops and communication styles.
Employees, like managers, should have opportunities to provide constructive feedback to ensure a two-way relationship that empowers both parties to maximize their full potential and achieve higher performance.
Want to learn more ways to improve performance and culture in your organization? Contact us at cs-strategies.com/contact/.
