A thorough and comprehensive analysis on the sport of Cricket is provided with a fascinating range of styles of leadership that can be utilized by leaders and organizations. Adaptation of suitable leadership style is to be based on the organisation/team conveyancers composition, strength and weakness of members, organization and individual goals, nature of assignments to be handled-as to long/medium/short-term, commercial or social, new assignments or repeat/ standard ones and so on. In identifying the many circumstances that could confront leaders in their career path this article brings into attention that the leadership style can never be fixed for a leader . It requires them to wear different types of leadership roles, which can be suited to a variety of situations We've selected the fascinating game of Cricket to determine the different ways to lead groups and leaders. it is distinguished by the following characteristics: 1.)It offers a variety of formats such as Test Matches, One-day, 20-20, knock-out League format, and so on which require different skill sets from the team members as well as different ways of leading them. 2)The long- history of cricket has seen an array of great leaders (Captains) Some legendary, some amazing, some average/passable certain downright failures, and so on. 3)On the personal side Cricket is a team sport and has always had an array of players in relation to the team composition and place of origin the player's culture, his language or dialect or way of speaking the language, socioeconomic strata, age, experience boiler service near me physical appearance, and so on. 4)On the technical side the variety of skill sets that include Match-winners All-rounders, Batsmen (Aggressive players, balanced ones capable of long-hauls, slow-pick-up) , Bowlers (Fast, Off-Spinners, Medium, Leg-spinners) Fielders (Close in, out, out-standing, good, bad and protected, etc.) Wicket-keepers, and so on. 5)Also leadership styles to suit the style, stature and strength of your opponents, type of pitches, situation during a game, qualifying requirements, injuries available to players etc. 6)A great entertainer (on the day) and a money spinning spectator sport. 7)However great you are (like stars in an organisation) however, you must follow the guidelines of captains and umpires the field. You will have limited opportunities to appeal, while calling for the judicious use of such opportunities. 8.)Need for all team players to adapt their approach according to the rules of the game or to meet any specific requirements and, consequently, the requirement from captains to create and shape them to suit the needs of the game. The fascinating range of Leadership styles unearthed as part of the in-depth analysis of cricket Cricket can be described as follows: styles of leadership are listed in the alphabetical order for easy recall and do not signify an order of importance or importance. 1) 1) ACTIVE (OMNIPRESENT) LEADERSHIP 2) AGGRESSIVE (TIGER ON THE PROWL!) LEADERSHIP 3) CHARISMATIC (ROYAL!) LEADERSHIP 4) CONFIDENCE-BUILDING (IDENTIFYING GEMS!) LEADERSHIP 5) COOL (ICEBERG) /PASSIVE LEADERSHIP 6) ENDURING (STABILITY/COMMANDING RESPECT) LEADERSHIP 7) INSPIRATIONAL (TRANSFORMATIONAL) LEADERSHIP 8) PARTICIPATIVE (OUTSTANDING OR STAND-OUT? !) LEADERSHIP 9) PROJECT STYLE (SLAM-BANG!) LEADERSHIP 10) TASK-MASTER (MILITARY) LEADERSHIP 11) UNOBTRUSIVE (CARROT& STICK) LEADERSHIP This is where we analyze the 11 leadership styles: 1.) ACTIVE (OMNIPRESENT) LEADERSHIP - Here the captain/the leader takes on the role of being in constant contact with the world in order to be in the know of everything and anything that happens. Members of the team are likely to sense the leader's breathing under their shoulders. Hence to avoid being over-active, as that may communicate a lack of confidence with the team members This"OMNIPRESENT"style of leadership (somewhat duly modified) , may be relevant in organizations/teams consisting of predominantly freshers, less skilled etc requiring and looking for constant guidance. The team members who are not in the group should be treated differently and that is why the change suggested. 2.) AGGRESSIVE (TIGER on the field!) LEADERSHIP - This is generally the kind of leadership practiced by Australian Captains, who with an aggressive and powerful team backing them, mostly played a mental game (almost bordering on miniature warfare) of conveying to the opposition that Australians are extremely confident of winning and are determined to get rid of unlucky opponents. While it's generally worked for strong teams, when this goes beyond over-confidence or gross underestimating of opponents, this could go wrong quite badly. In an organization/team environment such it can be effective if the team members know and are accustomed to the style of their leader. In the case of a mixed team members, both former and new members, new members need to be put in the same manner as they are accustomed to this "TIGER ON THE PROWL" leadership style , as well as the traditional team members ' style of working in order to be successful. If not, it can go down bad, as the new team members may be alienated. It could also work even with newcomers such as ambitious management graduates, who believe in the power of leadership to accelerate growth. 3) CHARISMATIC (ROYAL!) LEADERSHIP - This style of leadership has happened when captains were towering figures of the game , or have royal lineage , etc. There have been instances of legendary and successful captains , as well as terrible failures in this area. In an organizational or team setup, this could be a viable option (without significant changes) , if the team members believe it is a privilege to be working with a renowned personality. In any case, there is a clear necessity for a leader to be able to communicate in doubt, and he is extremely accessible and his image should not deter the team members 4.) confidence-building (IDENTIFYING gems!) Leadership One of the instances that are often quoted in cricket for this kind in leadership would be Imran khan from Pakistan, who is credited for locating gems such as Wasim Akram, Abdel Quadir and many more. Being aware of their potential, he is believed to have always been there for them, even when they were struggling and out, to instill confidence in the players. Together they played a key part in bringing Pakistan to their pinnacle of glory after winning the world championship. When it comes to team setups, these managers can be valuable in identifying and moulding gems. However they will be disasters should they be perceived as playing the game of favoritism, misusing their position. 5.) COOL (ICE-BERG) Passive Leadership: One of the most famous examples of Cool leadership (as used by media, commentators, and other people) is Mahendra Singh Dhoni of India. This type of leadership carries the possibility of being described as cool when the team is winning , but non-chalant when the team is losing! In an environment of teamwork or organizational, this kind of leadership style can workif there is an organized team, well-established products/ services, a stable and stable organizational/economic environment, and the team/organization is perceived as thriving. If the circumstances change, unless there is a discernible change in the leadership style and the leader is branded "PASSIVE"or inactive. 6) ENDURING (STABILITY&COMMANDING RESPECT) LEADERSHIP: Even though many Australian captains have exhibited such leadership style, slightly lesser credit is being given here for their endurance, as their teams have been virtually "WORLD-CHAMPIONS" for prolonged periods of time. Very rarely a boat is disrupted, especially when the sailing is smooth. Therefore, a bit more emphasis is placed on leaders and captains such as Daniel Vettori of New zealand, Greame Smith of South Africa, Mahela Jayawardane of Srilanka because they are Enduring leaders, inspite of their teams not being the Champs. This type of leadership in teams is possible with leaders who are perceived to be people-oriented and when there is no significant rival leader with a reputation of their own is visible. The stability should not cause too much comfort, familiarity& personal equations among team members that lead to a lack of performance. This type of leadership might not last in the event that a new leader emerges (with generally a preference for change) in addition to when performance of the organization/team goes below certain benchmarks. 7.) INSPIRATIONAL (TRANSFORMATIONAL) Leadership Perhaps the most striking example of cricket for this kind of leadership is Mike Brearly of England, whom the leadership qualities of his team are described as out-standing. There is a legend that says Mike could have been a part of any team around the globe as a captain but not as a player!The classic instance is from the Ashes series. England were beaten 2-nil after 2 games and their top performer Botham was a disaster, as per Australia's aggressive game strategy of controlling Botham ( who is a match-winner on his day) . The addition of Mike as Captain of the team in the 3rd test turned the series on its head. He totally transformed Botham and his team winning all by himself the remaining 3 games and winning the Ashes as a team for England. This kind of inspirational story is extremely relevant for Organizations /Teams involved in creative endeavors, the ability to attract star performers, organizations/teams that are going through a difficult times, and to change people in leadership positions and the like, more than for routine and boring type of activities. They are perfect for new businesses to create the habit of sustaining a culture of performance at the start. 8) PARTICIPATIVE (OUTSTANDING or STAND-OUT?) leadership - A positive example of this kind of leadership is the former Indian Skipper Saurav Ganguly who is guided through his records and team members, reminiscing about his leadership with affection and pride, even after he had ceased to be the skipper. There are many examples in International cricket, in which captains have taken their leadership to the limit and have failed. This kind of leadership have to ensure in an environment for teams or organizations, that it is clear that even though participation of the team is appreciated valued, ultimate decision-making authority, that is based on data, facts and the requirements of the organization will be with the leader. Also such leadership should avoid excessive, endless, free for all participation bordering on LAISSEZ FAIRE style of "NON-LEADERSHIP"Instead of being an"outstanding leader "the leader may have to "stand out" of the leadership position!. 9) PROJECT STYLE (SLAM-BANG!) Leadership: This form of leadership requirement is akin to having different captains for shorter versions of the test match. For instance, Bailey for Australia, Kohli for India and etc. Generally they are perceived to be more aggressive captains, basically taking on more risks to meet deadlines expected by shorter versions the game. In a team or organization leaders are required to finish various types of tasks/ projects with deadlines, uncertainties , etc. because they are extremely vigilant and active, taking risks and capable of making decisions at very short notice even with a limited amount of information. A word of caution be, although dynamic leaders should have an eminent head on their shoulders and capable of moderate restraint, else in the name of dynamism there is a high chance of taking too many decisions that have disastrous outcomes. 10.) TASK-MASTER (MILITARY TYPE) LEADERSHIP We've seen this type leader in the cricket. Some have achieved good results, handling an unexperienced team, while some have been utterly unsuccessful in attempting this method even to an experienced team leading to resentment. This style of leadership is difficult to practice with a sense of humour and respect in contemporary organizations. But it is followed with various degrees of oversight at the shop floor, especially where routine, compliance-oriented and automated processes are the norm and so on. Such leadership style should provide an opportunity for employees to grow, lest they quit. 11) UNOBTRUSIVE (CARROT& STICK ) LEADERSHIP They are leaders with a keen understanding of issues that are aware of the information about the situation and their team, without forcing themselves to be a part of the team constantly. Anil Kumble of India was regarded as one of these captain. In the organization /team situations these leaders can deliver excellent results, provided that the team has experienced or senior professionals, who usually prefer a non-directive style of leadership and if the leader is of sufficient ability to command respect when it is needed. The leader should ensure that his presence is perceived in all making decisions by the team. This kind of leadership makes their presence felt by rewarding right behavior and vice-versa. The leadership style must never allowed to degenerate in to a passive or laissez faire type of leadership to allow more flexibility of the entire team. The leaders of these teams must be more hands-on, when the group composition changes with more of fresh/lesser skilled team members that require direction.