What’s your leadership persuasion style?
In “The Art of Woo” by G. Richard Shell and Mario Moussa, the authors outline five leadership approaches to persuasion:
Driver
Commander
Promoter
Chess Player
Advocate
One style is not particularly better than the other; each style has its strengths and weaknesses. And some leaders use more than one style to achieve their goals.
The assessments in the book reveal I am a Chess Player, which was not a total surprise to me. I am a quiet, introspective thinker who tends to think through ideas before bringing them to the table.
My profile for the five persuasion styles resulted in the highest correlation with vision and interests/needs, followed by a mid-range correlation with authority and personal relationships. The lower correlation was with reason/data, and at the very bottom was politics, correlating with less than 10% of those surveyed.
This assessment identifies what I would be more comfortable doing if I didn’t think I had to follow organizational protocols. As a marketer who focuses strongly on core values and works in a nonprofit, I am unsurprised that vision and interests/needs rank high on my persuasion style. In fact, I often persuade myself to continue in nonprofit, despite the lack of resources and lower pay, because the mission and vision are critically important.
I often present my ideas with the framework of how they support the mission of the organization. It’s clear I would like to use authority more (as that ranked at 60%), yet authority clashes with my style as a Chess Player. This is a conflict I continue to explore.