The Brisbane Branch Of Dare Advertising

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.

The democratic style which allows the team to develop options and decide actions may be appropriate for a well trained team who perform at a high level. Leadership functions may be shared with the team and individuals have a greater say in decision making and the implementation of actions and procedures. Advantages of this style may include securing team commitment to decisions and their implementation, which can be an aide to the development of the team and individuals, and increased morale. Disadvantages; in situations where team roles are unclear it can lead to communication failures. And there is the possible

and control in the hands of the manager. In an autocratic style of management, the leader makes all of

A democratic leader generally accept any opinion and voices which means that the team would feel free to voice their opinions and ideas without them being dismissed straight away. The positive side to this style is that the team/workforce can be highly motivated, skilled and experienced members can be used in decision making which makes them feel more committed and could less resistant to managerial changes it also help with communication between the workforce and the managers. The negative side to this style is that individuals can dominate participation or make disruptive contributions it can also be very time consuming for the leader because of the two communication it can also result in actions that are the most effective and also people may view this style as incompetent to handle the job responsibilities.

An advantage of the democratic style involves a considerable job satisfaction of subordinates, through augmenting their responsibilities which results in more interesting and diverse work (Ribbins, 1997). Bush (2008) agrees; when responsibility is shared the self-confidence of group members is enhanced, as they have a key role in planning and decision-making. The democratic leadership style provides high quality expert knowledge and skills are identified and implemented towards achieving targets (Dimmock and Walker, 2005). Grace (1995) supports this, and claims that goals are more likely to be reached since; they have been established by group consensus.

An authoritative leader addresses the end but generally gives workers freedom to innovate, experiment and take risks. The authoritative style works best for organizations that are off track, it helps in creating a new course and fresh long-term vision. The affiliative style strives to keep employees happy to create harmony among. The style has a positive effect on communication. People who like one another a lot talk lot. They share ideas, inspirations leading to flexibility, innovation and risk taking. This style should only be employed when trying to build team harmony. The democratic style allows leaders to build consensus through participation. By spending time getting people’s ideas, a leader is able to build trust, respect and commitment. This style works best when a leader is uncertain about best direction however, it does not make sense if employees are not competent. Pacesetting is a leadership style that expects excellence and self-direction. The leader is obsessive about doing things better and faster, and expects the same of everyone around

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 styles have significant effects on organizations. For instance, it influences organizational culture and determines how leaders address conflict. Ultimately, it impacts organizational performance. Consequently, leaders must adapt their approach to achieve the desired outcome. Therefore, it is imperative leaders understand and can implement a variety of leadership styles. This essay will describe how an autocratic and participative leader’s style impacts organizational culture, summarize the strengths and weaknesses of each style, and explain how each leader would successfully resolve conflict.

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

Out of these three Lewin found that the best style of leadership is Democratic, Autocratic leads to an upheaval where the Liaises-Faire approach creates unmotivated individuals who lack effort. (Lewin, LIippit and White, 1939).

When using an authoritarian leadership style, close adherence to regulations and policies are the fundamentals of this leadership style. Workers are held to a specific standard, and the relationship is purely professional. In a democratic leadership style, the decision-making ability is shared. The superintendent relies on feedback from the foremen when making decisions.

“The leader must be able to explain ideas clearly to employees and understand any feedback they receive (Hall, et al 2008 p.g 402). Though rate of production with a democratic style of leadership might be slower than in an autocratic due to low supervision, it could be disputed that workers can work more freely as there is less stress to perform.

Leadership design or style- a management problem that presents itself in the case of the Pfizer’s Palace Coup is poor leadership style (Elkind & Reingold, 2011). A paramount aspect that dominates the case is the idea of the manner in which leadership influences performance and strategies of adopting changes in organizations. In the case of Pfizer Palace Coup, Kindler seemed to use an authoritarian style commonly known as the dictatorial leadership in his management (Elkind & Reingold, 2011). From a management perspective, authoritarian or dictatorial management style happens when leaders use coercion to carry out

Lastly, the new CEO should have a company social event to present his findings and explain the resolutions that have been decided on to fix the issues discussed. By identifying the problem, gathering possible solutions, making a tentative plan, making necessary movements, reconnoitering the situation, completing the plan, issuing the complete order (publishing the resolution found) and supervising the plan of action, the CEO can be successful in fixing the issues and moving forward and starting out on “the right foot” in this new company that he has taken leadership of.

The control of all operation by the Autocratic management style is the use of power over employee and staff and forces them to deal with the customer. This type of leadership makes the decision alone and converts it to the employee which the employee has to work, for example, to deliver the best customer service manger instruct all employee to follow his guidelines for this process. The Democratic leadership style is an important way to give the opportunity for the employee in making decision in the