Leadership Styles And Its Impact On Society

The theory of leaders can be autocratic, a person who doesn’t consider the person undertaking the task only getting the results. A democratic leader takes opinions of the staff and understands how they believe the best results can be achieved, whereas Laissez-faire style leaves the experienced staff to implement the work processes.

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.

Grojean, Resick & Diskson (2004) suggest that leaders are responsible for facilitating their follower’s to become capable and guide them to improving their capabilities and strengths. Differentiating between different leadership styles can be done in a number of ways. It was determined that the traditional styles of leaders include authoritian (autocratic), democratic, permissive (laissez-faire) and bureaucratic (Viinamäki, 2009).

Leadership goes beyond management, for some, leadership is instinctual and pours over into your personal life. This paper will discuss a leader I admire in my personal life, and analyze their leadership style. I will discuss how that leader has influenced my leadership style, as well as how things like environment and the economy affect my leadership approach.

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.

Often times an authoritarian leader has full control of those around them, and believes to have complete authority to treat them as they want. An authoritarian leader would provide instructions without looking for inputs and superintend his or her nurses in a close manner. However, problems may arise if a nurse must wait for the manager's decision or direction before taking action regarding a patient. Although the authoritarian leadership style can be viewed as undesirable, it has proved to be very efficient in emergent and stressful situations. One of the key benefits of authoritarian leadership is the fact that decision making becomes much more simple and fast, as the leader doesn't have to consult or convince anybody. Basically authoritarian leadership can work wonders for the organization when decision making has to be quick and during some crisis.

Democratic do not have any disadvantages in any situation except for members not having the expertise or knowledge to contribute to the decision making process. This type of leadership is effective and beneficial in any situation it motivates the team members to be involved and committed to completing tasks. When you have a leader who encourages you to do your best and make you feel appreciated, you look forward to completing task you and your team members work in together. A true leader will be able to recognize when to use each style in order to receive the best

The styles today are less authoritative and more on trying to get feedback from co-workers. This change is driven by today’s individuals that want to be treated with respect and empowered to be self-driven. Today’s business environment requires managers to constantly evaluate his or her leadership style to maintain the so called competitive edge. Leadership moves through many power roles and how power vs. soft power that relates to managers as they manage people. The types of leaders are described with characteristics, as it relates to each individual. The characteristics styles that leaders show

Autocratic leadership is a classical leadership style with the following characteristics: manager seeks to make as many decisions as possible, manager seeks to have the most authority and control in decision making, manager seeks to retain responsibility rather than utilise complete delegation , consultation with other colleagues in minimal and decision making becomes a solitary process managers are less concerned with investing their own leadership development, and prefer to simply work on the task at hand. Whereas Democratic Leadership is the leadership style that promotes the sharing of responsibility, the exercise of delegation and continual consultation. The style has the following characteristics: manager seeks consultation on all

Leadership is a concept most people feel informed enough to discuss, but that few are truly educated sufficiently to comment on. Therefore, it is instructive to consider the leadership styles of people with very different approaches both to better understand the diversity underlying leadership, as well as to appreciate the effective and less effective strategies that underlie different leadership outcomes. For that reason, this essay will consider the styles of two leaders who are less visible in this highly contentious presidential election season: Jill Stein (the Green Party nominee) and Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate. The leadership styles of both are very different, yet they are aligned in the sense that both are outsider candidates struggling to gain momentum from a disaffected electorate. This essay begins with a theoretical discussion of leadership more generally and then turns to the two leaders as case studies, comparing and contrasting them and drawing conclusions about how they both work within the same public sphere and for putatively similar ends (i.e., gaining votes).

Autocratic leadership describes the leadership style as the individual having absolute power within the group without input from other work colleagues (Craven 2014). This style of leadership, the autocratic leader makes the decisions and takes responsibility for the achievements of the organisation. Autocratic leaders decide which group members contribute and how much they contribute without consulting (Vugt, Jepson, Hart and Cremer 2004 (cited in Craven 2014). According to Northouse (cited in (Craven 2014) authoritarian leadership has negative outcomes as it fosters dependence, submissiveness and a loss of individuality (cited in Craven 2014). Followers who work under an authoritarian leader feel continually to be under pressure and are not able to take the initiative as the leader does not believe that they are capable of performing the duties required without being encouraged by the leader as they have no passion to work and are not capable of accomplishing tasks alone.

Leadership style has an impact on all aspects of business in organization. Therefore over the last four decades, leadership scholars and practicing

Laissez-faire: This style of leadership is also known as delegate, it is a hands-off approach allowing for both initiative and the latitude to determine process to affect the outcome.

Murphy (2005) maintains that leaders are accountable for helping their follower’s to become efficient and support them to develop their strengths and abilities. Distinguishing and categorising between different leadership styles can be done in several ways, (Gopee and Galloway, 2009). In this essay traditional classification of authoritian (autocratic), democratic, permissive (laissez-faire) and bureaucratic styles of leaders will be discussed.