Learn 4 Best Different Types of Leadership Styles

Positive and Negative Leaders or Bosses

There are many methods for motivating people as a leader. If the approach is focused on rewards, it’s called positive leadership. Negative leadership is being used if the approach focuses on penalties. Rather of leaders, negative bosses should be referred to.

There are three types of supervisory methods:

authoritarian,
participative, and
consultative.

Each one is represented by a different sort of management style. Paternalistic management is another term for this category.

Autocratic or Authoritarian leadership

An authoritarian leader concentrates power and decision-making in himself. He gives commands, assigns responsibilities, and issues directives without consulting his staff. The boss is completely autocratic; he or she takes complete control and assumes full responsibility.

Autocratic rule is bad and relies on intimidation and punishment. Subordinates follow his orders because he believes that as a result of his power, he alone has the authority to decide what is best in a given scenario. He thinks that since he has the power, he has the right to make decisions on his own in every circumstance.

Authoritarian leadership is based on close monitoring, clear directives, and strong command. It makes it easier to make quick judgments, take action right away, and have a unified focus. It relies less on delegation than other leadership styles. However, employing too much power might result in strikes and industrial disputes. Frustration and the slowing of employee capacity development are probable outcomes.

Employees are expected to work as hard as is required to avoid being chastised. As a result, they will produce the bare minimum necessary to avoid punishment.

Objectives Of Environmental Studies: Meaning, Scope and Importance

The introduction of a new leadership style is less likely to succeed because:

the generation that followed the baby boomers was more independent and less submissive,
making them more difficult to manage;
people seek ego gratification from their jobs, and
rising expectations disrupted people’s attitudes.

Autocratic Leadership Classes

Autocratic leadership may be divided into three classes:

The tough-boiled autocrat who relies mostly on negative influences uses the power of fear and punishment in order to get his employees to pursue organizational objectives. Employees are likely to become irritated as a consequence of this.

The good autocrat who relies mostly on encouraging influences utilizes reward and incentives to get his people working toward organizational goals. He wins the loyalty of followers by offering them praise and pats on the back.

The boss who makes his employees feel as though they are participating in decision-making when, in fact, the manager himself has made the choice. The Theory X type is referred to by McGregor as this style.

Democratic or Participative leadership

Participative or democratic leaders delegate power. It’s associated with consultation with people under them and their involvement in the creation of plans and policies. He pushes for more participation in decision-making.

McGregor’s methods for leading are more understated than those of Theory Z, which rely on coercion and intimidation. Rather than relying on force or intimidation, he influences and encourages his people through persuasion and example. McGregor refers to this way of thinking as Theory Y.

Taylor’s scientific management was premised on the inability of ordinary workers to make good judgments about their jobs. As a result, managerial authority was concentrated. However, recent research has shown that employees should be involved in decision-making. The modern trend is to delegate responsibility to employees rather than placing it solely in the hands of managers.

This will encourage them to be more enthusiastic. The staff believe that management is concerned with both their progress and their ideas and suggestions. As a result, they will offer recommendations for improvement.

Factors Affecting Elasticity Of Demand: 9 Major Factors Explained

The following are some of the benefits for democratic leadership:

improved motivation and morale;
greater cooperation with management;
enhanced job performance;
reduction in complaints, and
decrease in absenteeism and employee turnover.

The Laissez-faire or Free-rein leadership

Power and responsibility are avoided by free-rein leaders. The non-interfering or laissez-faire type of leader delegates authority over policymaking to his staff and takes a hands-off approach to administration. He offers no guidance and allows the group to establish its own objectives and resolve its own difficulties.

The leader has a modest impact. He believes that when individuals are left to their own devices, they will put out their best efforts and obtain the greatest results possible. The umpire role is taken by the leader. However, because there is no leadership or direction exercised over the employees, the company is more likely to fail.

In 1940, a study was conducted among Boy Scout troops in the United States to determine whether autocratic leadership would cause animosity within the group and dislike for the leader. When the leader was absent in democratic groups, little change took place; however, when he was out of the room, productive work fell to a halt in authoritarian groups.

The group is more likely to follow the leadership of a strong democratic majority. The laissez-faire groups, like their democratic counterparts, also established amiable relationships with the leader. However, suggestions from the groups were rare and they were less productive than the Democratic majority.

Paternalistic leadership

Under this management style, the leader believes that his role is fatherly or parental. Papa knows best is a phrase used to designate paternalism. The link between the leader and his employees is comparable to that between the head of the family and its members. As family members, the leaders guides and protects them.

As the head of the family, he provides his employees with favorable working conditions and fringe benefits. It is believed that staff would work harder as a result of their gratitude. With her distinct sociological past, this leadership approach was wonderfully effective in Japan.

In recent years, the authoritarian leadership style has been increasingly more popular in India’s tiny businesses. However, it is unlikely to function with adult employees who do not want their interests to be looked after by a “godfather.” Instead of gratitude, it might elicit animosity and resentment among subordinates.