INVESTIGATE THE STYLE PORTFOLIO OF YOUR LEADERS

The LDT leadership style model includes 18 possible leadership styles, each of these are strictly defined and related to a number of competences (see also Leadership Style Concepts under 'Leadership  & Development').
Why so many styles?
Besides the fact that LDpe wished to develop a subtle 'language’, there are two main reasons why the LDpe leadership model defines a larger number of styles:

1. LDpe wants leaders to be able to address their style portfolio more precise.
    Every person has a unique combination of styles and has unique abilities to develop his style
    portfolio, depending on his personality and preferences. The leadership style portfolio can include
    a number of styles and leaders can grow the number of styles in their portfolio by changing
    behavioural preferences.
    A large style portfolio enables a person potentially to cope with a number of situations.*

2. LDpe wants to avoid the simplicity of typification.
    Type theories classify an individual as one of several types of person, showing particular
    combinations of characteristics. The MBTI for instance classifies people into 16 categories. 
    Even if MBTI may help others (coaches, managers) to understand how a person works,
    communicates and learns, to identify a person as a certain type is far too simple.
    LDpe beliefs that every person is unique and has also a very personal way of developing.
    A wider vocabulary of personality traits, competences and styles will offer more subtle
    possibilities for defining a tailor made development scenario. 

The fact that people can be flexible and cope with different situations with different behavioural styles is
    one of the key assumptions of the LDT. But in order to apply the style effectively a leader needs to learn
    to be sensitive and sense the situation right (situational sensitivity). More about this under the  pages
    Indiv LD-process.

On the next pages we show a case of the Style Portfolio Analysis of a representative group of 38 participants.
For three of the participants we show the Quick Wins scenario and the potential effects.

We will classify the participants in 3 categories:
-    Probably fit for role
     (scores above 30)
-    Not yet fit for role
     (between 20 and 30)
-    Not fit for role
     (scores under 20)