Behavioral Styles Can Make or Break Your Team

Cathie Leimbach • August 2, 2021

Do you ever experience this? Teams that aren’t effective, even though the members are talented. Conversations that go off track, no matter how hard you try to communicate. There’s one employee you can’t get through to no matter how hard you try. You are left with one question – why isn’t this working?

 

Here’s the thing. All of us have our own behavioral style. How do we communicate with others? Are we productive on our own, or need to be motivated? Do we question things or follow directions? 

 

Behavioral style is a pattern of habits and behaviors that can be observed. It is how you handle tasks and interact with other people. And behavioral styles impact productivity and how each of your employees interacts with their colleagues.

 

So why does it matter? Understanding how we approach the goals and tasks in front of us versus our employees’ approach helps us be better leaders. When we build teams based upon the team members’ behavioral styles, they are stronger and more productive. Creating a culture that is sensitive to how each colleague is wired decreases misunderstandings and increases productivity.

 

There are four styles outlined below. Most of us have a primary and secondary style, with bits and pieces from other styles appearing from time to time.  We rely mainly on our primary style to achieve our workplace tasks and goals. It explains 50% of how we behave at work. We exercise our secondary style when the primary style is not achieving our desired results. Our primary and secondary styles together explain 80% of our behavior. When we understand our own style and the style of each of our employees and colleagues, we can lead and work together more effectively. 

 

The Decisive Style blends a low level of emotional responsiveness with a high degree of assertiveness. People with this work style tend to be task-oriented, know where they are going and what they want. They get to the point quickly, are pragmatic and results-oriented. Limitations include impatience, being demanding, poor listening skills, and being quickly bored by routines and details.

 

The Expressive Style blends a high level of emotional responsiveness and assertiveness. People with this work style look at the big picture, often taking fresh and creative approaches to problems. They are willing to take risks to seize opportunities. They thrive in interactive situations, and their ability to charm, persuade, excite, and inspire people can be a strong motivating factor. Limitations include being unrealistic, not detail oriented, reactive, excitable, and having a tendency to listen to feelings more than logic.

 

The Steady Style combines higher than average responsiveness with comparatively low levels of assertiveness. Individuals with this style tend to be sympathetic to the needs of others and are sensitive to what lies beneath someone’s outward behavior. They are most likely to use empathy and understanding in interpersonal problem-solving situations. Limitations include being over accommodating, avoiding conflict, and resistance to change.

 

The Analytical Style tends to take a precise, deliberate, and systematic approach to work. They usually gather and evaluate a lot of data before acting. They are self-controlled, cautious, and prefer analysis over emotion. Limitations include being too hard on themselves, critical of others, overly cautious, and indecisive without “all” of the facts. 

 

Each behavioral style contributes to your organization. Understanding yours and adapting it to meet team members where they are helps you communicate and lead more effectively. Helping your employees understand their style increases productivity, improves communication, and builds more effective teams.

By Cathie Leimbach June 23, 2026
Most leaders say they want employees to speak up. They want people who spot risks, question assumptions, and help the organization make better decisions. Yet many employees hesitate to do exactly that. Why? Because leaders often respond to speaking up as if the speaker is complaining, criticizing or resisting. When people fear being viewed as difficult, they stop sharing what they see. The organization loses valuable information, ideas, and perspectives. A recent McKinsey article found that teams with high psychological safety are two to three times more likely to generate breakthrough ideas. When people feel safe speaking up, better thinking follows. The best leaders understand a simple truth: Speaking up is not defiance. It's duty. When employees question assumptions, raise concerns, or offer a different perspective, they are helping the team avoid blind spots and make stronger decisions. That's why effective leaders don't merely tolerate speaking up—they invite it. They ask: What are we not seeing? What assumptions are we making? Who might see this differently? What information are we missing? Just as importantly, they respond with curiosity instead of defensiveness. They thank people for expressing their perspective. They explain how input influenced decisions. They make speaking up safe. Because organizations don't improve when everyone agrees. They improve when people feel responsible for helping the team see what others may have missed. In healthy organizations, speaking up isn't rebellion. It's responsibility. It's duty. Leadership Reflection Think about your last leadership team meeting. Did people simply agree? Or did someone help the team see something it otherwise would have missed? Download 5 Questions That Surface Better Thinking and make speaking up a productive part of how your team thinks, decides, and performs.
By Cathie Leimbach June 16, 2026
Artificial Intelligence is becoming a powerful workplace tool. It can summarize information, analyze data, draft content, and generate ideas in seconds. But there is a growing risk leaders need to recognize: AI can sound convincing even when it is wrong. In an article by Erica Dhawan, she describes a legal case where attorneys used ChatGPT to help prepare a court filing. The brief looked professional, the reasoning seemed logical, and the citations appeared legitimate. There was only one problem: several of the cited cases did not exist. The AI had fabricated them. The danger wasn't carelessness. It was trust. Because the information was presented clearly, confidently, and professionally, nobody stopped to question it. Psychologists call this the "fluency heuristic"—our tendency to assume information is accurate when it is easy to process and sounds credible. As leaders, we cannot allow polished answers to replace critical thinking. When you find yourself thinking, "This is too good to be true," put your brain in gear. Dig deeper. Investigate. Verify the facts. Ask what assumptions were made, what information might be missing, and what evidence supports the conclusion. AI can be an incredible assistant. It should never become a substitute for judgment. The smooth answer is not always the wrong one—but it is often the one that deserves the most scrutiny. Before You Act, Verify. The biggest risk with AI isn't bad information. It's believable information that's wrong. That's why we created the AI Verification Checklist for Leaders —a simple 5-minute tool designed to help leaders challenge assumptions, identify missing information, verify conclusions, and make better decisions before acting on AI-generated recommendations. Download the free AI Verification Checklist for Leaders and start asking better questions before making important decisions.