They identified authoritarian, democratic and laissez-faire styles of leadership, and demonstrated that leadership style had a profound effect on group productivity and interactions with other group members and the leader.
Others have elaborated the concept of leadership styles, for example Slevin and Pinto and Singh and Jampel, who developed a model incorporating five distinct leadership styles based on the balance between decision-making and consultative propensity.
Confirmatory analysis of positive scenarios Transcripts were examined for data extracts demonstrating use of Goleman's leadership styles, and number of extracts for each style scored for each individual.
Several respondents made associations between preferred style(s) and choice of clinical specialty: Surgeons, they do have, I'm convinced of it, more pace-setting and authoritative style   not the same for physician types who spend more time pondering anyway, and are much more reliant on multiprofessional groups to solve problems.
As found in previous studies, individual leaders tended naturally to favour a small number of styles overall the authoritative; democratic and affiliative styles were used most frequently; and the coaching, commanding and pace-setting styles less frequently.
A more recent study of 232 medical leaders found that the predominant styles were "Dominant" and "Conscientiousness", where the former focused on control over tasks and the environment, directing others and achieving goals, while the latter related to independent working and a preference for working on tasks rather than dealing with people.
There are some parallels across these two models, for example, the democratic and affiliative styles in Goleman's model equate to some extent to the consensus manager style in the Singh and Jampel model, while the commanding and complete autocrat styles are also comparable.