It’s been quite month for the Men’s England Football team. Despite not playing to their full potential, they got to European Championship Final, last Sunday, and were beaten by best team in the tournament, Spain.

Since then, Gareth Southgate has resigned as the Manager of England Team. I think it’s fair to say that feedback about Gareth’s performance has been mixed. He, himself, declared that his goal was to win the tournament. Many believed that with the talent England had, they should have won it. It wasn’t to be.

So why did Gareth Southgate fail? Let’s look at it via an Emotional Intelligence Leadership Style lens.

Daniel Goleman, Richard Boyatzis, and Annie McKee first identified the six "emotional leadership styles." They are: 

1. The Visionary Leader – their approach to leadership is summed up by the phrase, "Come with me."

2. The Coaching Leader – here the approach is, "Try this."

3. The Affiliative Leader – "People come first, " with this kind of leader, who promotes harmony.

4. The Democratic Leader – they ask, "What do you think?"

5. The Pacesetting Leader – this leader says, "Do as I do, now."

6. The Commanding Leader – they demand, "Do what I tell you."

Each of these six styles have their strengths and weaknesses. There are situations and times when each style is appropriate and conversely, when they can be overdone. 

My observation of Gareth Southgate is that he is dominate Affiliative leadership style. He cares deeply about his players. He has received a lot of praise from pundits, and the players themselves, about the culture he created. I would suspect that that there is some Visionary Leadership in there too, having lead the team since 2016 through a number of International championships.

The problem with a dominate Affiliative Style is that “they rarely offer constructive advice on how to improve, so players (employees) must figure out how to do so on their own. When people need clear direction, this style is unhelpful.”

Gareth received much criticism about the strategic side of the team. At times they played like a ‘bunch of individuals’ rather than a team. And then there were the substitution decisions which were also heavily scrutinized.

Strategic nous, lives under the Commanding leadership style – “great for changing direction quickly”. The combination of a Commanding and Affiliative leadership style can provide a potent combination. Of course, the Commanding style does not come naturally to everyone and it doesn't appear to be one of Gareth’s strengths.

There is a solution. If a leader is unable to dial up the Commanding leadership style easily have someone in the team with this strength. I’m not sure if Gareth had such a person in his backroom staff. But if he did, perhaps the pressure of situation prevented him from listening.

Would you like to know more about yours and your team’s Leadership styles? I’d be happy to talk you through the assessment.