Introduction
Different leaders have different ways of handling their role as leader of a group, particularly in the workplace. Whatever style a particular manager chooses, however, it is expected that, as leader, that he makes the final decision. Even in a more participatory work environment, it is expected of him or her to cast the deciding vote when there is a tie.
Indeed, the ability to communicate is essential to being an effective leader. For a true leader must be able to communicate effectively and decisively to all members of an organization. No member of an organization wants to feel like he/she is the last to know, and be forced to reorganize his/her life, especially on the job, at the last minute.
…show more content…
Because he got the reputation as a good employer who frequently communicated with his employees and valued their input--the whole group rallied around him and agreed to volunteer during those tough times.
Different Leadership Styles
With that in mind, leadership theory has identified four management styles--authoritarian, democratic, participatory, and laissez-faire. There is inherently nothing wrong with any of them; all have their place at any given time. But it's the communication aspect that is important when implementing any given method of leadership that makes an organization rise or fall, and determines if respect is retained or lost within the group. Stated another way, the problem does not lie in the styles themselves, but rather in the presentation.
Authoritarian
The authoritarian approach involves giving directives. It entails the leader instructing the employee that he needs a specific person to form a certain task. This style leaves no room for bargaining, and any non-compliance or objection of this directive will be viewed by management as insubordination.
As harsh as it indeed sounds, there is a place in management for this leadership style. According to Nwlink.com, it works best when there are deadlines to be met, and time is short. The other instance that the authoritarian, or autocratic, style is appropriate is when an employee, or group of workers, is new, and training must take place.
This
Autocratic leadership, also known as authoritarian leadership is a leadership style characterized by individual control over all decisions and little input from group members. Autocratic leaders typically make choices based on their own ideas and judgments and rarely accept advice from followers. Autocratic leadership involves absolute, authoritarian control over a group. It can also be derived
Authoritarian leadership style is where a leader has complete control and power over their team. They demonstrate their 'power' and 'control' by dictating policies and procedures, deciding what goals need to be achieved, and directs all activities to be done by the team. An authoritarian is usually most successful when things are going well or when in a crisis and decisions need to be made quickly.
There are four main leadership styles, the first being Autocratic style which the manager retains as much control and decision making authority as possible, the manager does not give employees any input or consultation. The next is Bureaucratic which is where the manager manages ‘by the book’ which is where everything must be completed according to procedure and protocol. Mangers using this style will only consult with those above them in the chain of command. They simple enforce the rules of the workplace. The next style of leadership is Laissez-Faire which is also known as the ‘hands off’ approach to management. The manager usually provides little or no direction and give employees as much freedom as possible. All power is given to employees and they are to dictate their own work ethics. The last leadership style is the Democratic style which is also known as the participative style and this is where employees are encouraged to be a part of the decision making process. The democratic manager keeps their employees informed about everything that affects
Autocratic Approach: Autocratic leadership gives a positive belief about the updates about any policies. However this kind of approach is not highly regarded by many of the working environments. This is due to the amendments being brought into use prematurely for the uses to access them. This approach of leadership and management may be viewed as being too authoritative.
A leader I admire, whether real-life or fictional character from the television, the movies or a book, will be identified. Leadership theories will be used to evaluate my selected leader to determine what characteristics and leadership abilities helped this leader become successful. I will also include an evaluation of my own leadership style and identify what my individual leadership characteristics are. The plan will be developed to improve my leadership style based upon the findings of my chosen leader’s leadership style compared to my own.
Authoritarian leadership is a leadership style in which the leader dictates and controls all decisions in the group and task. Often referred to as Autocratic leadership, authoritarian leadership is about control, organization and discipline. Coach Haskins Leadership Style on the Court is authoritarian with his quota “You’re here to learn fundamental, disciplined defensive basketball. Now that means discipline both on and off the court. No girls. No booze. No late nights. Nothing besides fundamental basketball. I speak, you listen. I don’t wanna hear ‘can’t’ or ‘won’t’ or Coach, I’m bleeding. I don’t wanna hear anything except the basketball bounce. You play basketball my way. My way’s hard.” Bobby Joe This authoritarian style of leadership is often encountered in the world of athletics. During the beginning of their season Coach Haskins demands the respect of his players. His values included listening and obeying your coach, or repercussions will take place. If a player dared to disrespect the rules in place, either that person and/or the team would be put through punishment. There was no room for compromise, for whatever coach said was to be done. For example, when coach had said there was no partying some of the team members snuck out the first night. The next day at practice, coach had been informed of their disobedience and had the team running sprints for punishment until they physically could not do anymore. It happened again when coach caught Booby Joe Hill with a
Autocratic leadership, is a style which is characterized by the individual control over all the decisions and little input from group members. These type of leaders rarely accept advice from followers. These type of leaders tend to be bossy and controlling. Failing to consult with other team members in such situations hurts the overall success of the group.
In a democratic leadership style, the decision making process and overall responsibility among team members is shared. Decisions are made by the leader consulting each member of the team; therefore the outcome becomes a group effort. In the democratic leadership style, tasks are delegated to employees effectively, where the implementation is mostly in their hands. As opposed to the authoritarian leadership style, the democratic leader welcomes feedback from every team member. Team members are also encouraged to function as a
Authoritarian leaders give clear orders to what should be done and are straight to the point. They settle on choices with no contribution from others. An Authoritarian leader would be for example an Officer as a part of the armed force, they are for the most part bossy,comanding and intimidating to some they think they are constantly right and they're way is the most ideal way. This could be utilized as a part of a circumstance where a group needs to do things quick and successfully e.g in a drugs raid, if the unit is under attack the leader must yell orders and the group must react quick as their life is at stake. This style is like Task Orientated in the way that the leader is the main individual who puts input, this doesn't make a welcoming
2. Background. The Authoritarian Leadership Theory can be defined simply as the establishment of strict, close control over followers by keeping close regulation of policy’s and procedures given to followers (Howell, 4). Authoritarian leaders set clear expectations as to what should be accomplished and how it will be accomplished. As such, the authoritarian leader fills the void as both the leader and the commander, which makes for a clear divide between the leader and follower. If executed poorly, this kind of leadership tends to lead to negative attributions towards subordinates and makes it ineffective and disruptive to the designated group (Hughes, 158).
To be an effective leader I agree that one must be skillful and understands what the organizational mission is. When working in a complex environment, one will have to navigate, negotiate, and learn how to work in a matrix environment. Communication is key to ensure that all understand what the mission, goals, and values of an organization are. Some may get distracted because of a shift in priorities, but a leader must be able to accomplish tasks and do it effectively and efficiently.
Leadership Evaluation and Philosophy: An Appraisal of Angela Merkel’s Leadership during the Euro Crisis and My Leadership Philosophy
There are two definite strengths of authoritarian leadership: efficiency and productiveness. These both impact the team positively, as team members will feel satisfied - having completed a task/accomplished a goal successfully. Generally, the more efficient and productive a team, the more likely they are to be successful. Authoritarian leaders are proficient at motivating others. This leadership style allows for fast decisions which can be a lengthy process in other leadership styles such as bureaucratic. This essentially allows the team to begin a project and complete it promptly. An example of where this leadership is most effective is in the Armed forces. There is a clear defined structure of ranks and roles within the regiment. There is one leader in charge (the general) who instructs lower ranks and gives orders. The sergeant does this without any input from lower ranks. Northouse (2012) states some “would argue that authoritarian leadership is a much-needed form of leadership– it serves a positive purpose, particularly for people who seek security above responsibility.” This supports the strengths of the authoritarian leadership
Most of the jobs I?ve worked have authoritarian managers. Though it is a necessary style to start a worker off with, eventually, that worker becomes more comfortable in the environment and needs less rigid direction, and would benefit more from a democratic style of leadership. My manager from WVUIT Career
AUTHORITARIAN LEADERSHIP STYLE: What an authoritarian leader would do in this situation: Authoritarian leadership style is characterised by high power distance, “top-down” management, with a focus of power in top managers and executives. Further traits include high control, prescription, and authority. What an authoritarian leader would do depends on the level of power perceived.