People-Oriented or Goal-Oriented? The Wrong Question in Leadership

Task-oriented vs relationship-oriented leadership is an evergreen in management debate. We still often ask leaders: Are you more focused on people, or on results?

But research suggests this is a misleading dichotomy. Task-oriented and relationship-oriented leadership are not opposites. In fact, they tend to be strongly correlated. Good leaders usually do both. Judge and Piccolo (2004) found in a meta-analysis of 87 studies that transactional and transformational leadership are not separate camps but closely linked, with both styles predicting effectiveness across a wide range of outcomes. Later work by Wang et al. (2011) showed that transformational leadership is strongly associated with team performance, satisfaction, and commitment across levels of analysis and also increases the positive effects of transactional leadership.

Studies in Scandinavia of destructive leadership mirror these findings from the opposite side. Skogstad et al. (2007) show how passivity, vagueness, and delayed action not only undermine results but create stress and strain among employees, hence pointing to the destructiveness of passive leadership with neither transactional nor transformational leadership behaviours.

In practice, this means:

• Leaders who give direction and follow up are often the same ones who provide feedback and support development.
• Conversely, weak accountability often coincides with underdeveloped relationships.

So the better question is not whether you are more “people-oriented” or “goal-oriented,” but rather:

👉 Are you an active leader?
👉 And do you have the conditions to be one?

Task-Oriented vs Relationship-oriented leadership: What Does it mean in practice?

Being a great manager, or executive for that sake, is difficult. But sometimes we make it harder than it needs to be — by treating leadership as a matter of personality or charisma – rather than a job.

Many people, even in high positions, do not see themselves as great leaders. Impostor syndrome is a reality, but also somewhat sane. It’s also not a very helpful way of thinking of for example a new job; leading more to paralysis and performance anxiety than actual leadership.

In reality, management is a role. And roles come with tasks.

The core of the job can be divided into two domains: leading operations, and leading people. Making sure people work in roughly the same and correct direction, while safeguarding and encouraging wellbeing along the way. Hence back to transactional and transformational leadership, with some contingent leadership sprinkled on top.

🧭 Leading operations — ensuring goals are met and resources used wisely. That means:

• Build operations structures, from the flow of everyday business to clear project management guidelines and directives
• Tracking progress and outcomes, with focus on crucial KPI:s
• Reacting to problems and anomalies with actions
• Spotting opportunities, even those outside of today’s scope or strategy
• Thinking ahead and planning direction
• Bringing in ideas and knowledge from the outside
• Challenge the ingrown, non-functioning ways of working and thinking in the organisation
• Prioritize, with focus on what’s essential for business performance and customers/members/citizens

👥 Leading people — which I divide into three dimensions:

1. Aligning the team
   • Communicate goals and next steps clearly
   • Decide what to do and overall strategies/directions, while leaving the how to others
   • Connect people and units who need to work together
   • Build alliances within and outside of the organisation
   • Encourage, guide, and correct when necessary
2. Making work easier
   • Provide clear responsibilities and mandates, avoiding delegation of single tasks
   • Structure meetings and decisions so they flow smoothly
   • Pass on vital information quickly to subordinates and superiors
   • Remove obstacles and take swift decisions when needed
3. Supporting well-being
   • Address tensions or organizational problems early — even the uncomfortable ones
   • Create energy and cohesion in meetings
   • Watch for signs of stress or overload
   • Encourage a steady, productive work tempo rather than irregular sporadic sprints
5. The Hidden Prerequisite of Leadership: Protecting Your Own Capacity

This list may not be glamorous. But it is practical. These are not lofty ideals, but concrete behaviors — things we can choose to do or neglect. Leadership is not about perfection; it is about presence, and at times humility. It is about showing up and doing the work. Not about being the next Obama, or having all the answers. And that requires one scarce resource above all: time and space to actually practice the behaviors of leadership.

One responsibility that cannot be delegated away is ownership of your own working conditions. As a manager, you cannot simply blame circumstances. If you lack the time to lead well, you must act — adjust priorities, raise the issue, or reorganize. Otherwise, both employees and managers suffer the consequences.

The reality is sobering. In Sweden, statistics show that managers have gone from being a low-risk group for sick leave to one of the occupations most affected by stress and exhaustion. Leadership, then, is not only about guiding others — it is also about safeguarding your own capacity to lead.