CLASSIC LEADERSHIP STYLES

Autocratic, Democratic, and Laissez-faire

In the study of coaching behavior, three leadership styles are traditionally identified as defining the team atmosphere. The Laissez-faire style is characterized by a passive and permissive stance.

The leader acts more as an observer than a guide, avoiding difficult decision making and allowing athletes to operate almost unsupervised.

While this may appear to be a relaxed environment, it often results in a lack of direction and low standards, as there is no one to push the group toward excellence. At the opposite extreme is the Autocratic style.

This is the classic "command and control" model, where the coach makes all decisions without consulting the players and expects immediate obedience. Motivation is usually generated through fear of consequences or punishment.

An example would be a gymnastics instructor who dictates every movement and severely reprimands any deviation, creating a tense environment where the athlete performs to avoid the coach's wrath rather than out of a desire to excel.

Transactional leadership (rewards and punishments)

Transactional leadership operates on the premise of an exchange: "if you do this, you get that".

It is an evolution of the autocratic model that incorporates a clear incentive structure.

The coach sets the rules and objectives, and uses a system of rewards (praise, tenure, privileges) and punishments (extra physical exercises, substitution) to manage behavior.

It works well for maintaining order and accomplishing short-term tasks, but rarely inspires deep commitment or long-term loyalty.

Imagine a handball manager setting a rule: "If we win Saturday's game with a five-goal difference, you have the day off on Monday.

If we lose, we run ten kilometers on Monday." This approach turns performance into a tradable commodity.

Players may strive to win the day off, but not necessarily because they feel passion for the project or connection