Autocratic Leadership Definition Pdf

Autocratic Leadership Style. • The classical approach • Manager retains as much power and decision- making authority as possible • Does not consult staff, nor allowed to give any input • Staff expected to obey orders without receiving any explanations • Structured set of rewards and punishments.

Definition: The Leadership Styles are the behavioral patterns that a leader adopt to influence the behavior of his followers, i.e. the way he gives directions to his subordinates and motivates them to accomplish the given objectives.

The leadership styles can either be classified on the basis of behavioral approach or situational approach. These approaches are comprised of several theories and models which are explained below:

Based on Behavioral Approach

1. Power Orientation: The power orientation refers to the “degree of authority” that a leader adopts to influence the behavior of his subordinates. Based on this, the leadership styles can be further classified as:
2. Leadership as a continuum: This model is given by Tannenbaum and Schmidt, who believed that there are several leadership styles that range between two extremes of autocratic and free-rein, which are shown below:
3. Employee-Production Orientation: Several types of research were conducted to study the leadership behavior that gets affected by the several characteristics that are related to each other. It was found that employee orientation and production orientation play an important role in determining the leadership style.The employee orientation is based on the premise that an employee is an important part of the group and is in parallel to the democratic leadership style. Whereas the production Orientation focuses on the production and technical aspects of the job and the employees are considered as the tools for accomplishing the jobs. Thus, the production orientation is parallel to the autocratic leadership style.
4. Likert’s Management System: Rensis Likert along with his associates studied the patterns and behavior of managers to identify the leadership styles and defined four systems of management. These four systems are: Exploitative Authoritative, Benevolent Authoritative, consultative system and participative system. For a detailed description of these systems click on the link below:
   Likert’s Four systems of Management
5. Managerial Grid: The managerial grid is the tool designed by Blake and Mouton to determine the leadership style. According to them, the leadership style gets influenced by both the task-oriented and relation-oriented behavior in varying degrees. For a detailed description click on the link below:
   Blake and Mouton’s Managerial Grid
6. Three Dimensional Grid: The three-dimensional grid is also called as a 3-D leadership model given by W.J. Reddin. Reddin included the effectiveness dimension along with the task-oriented and relationship-oriented dimensions to study how a leader behaves in a given situation and a specific environment. To know more about this grid, click on the link below:
   Reddin 3-D Leadership Model

Based on Situational Approach

1. Fiedler’s Contingency Model: This theory is given by Fred Fiedler, who, along with his associates identified the situational variables and their relationship to determine the leadership styles. Thus, this model is comprised of three elements, leadership styles, situational variables and the interrelationship between these two. For a detailed description of this model, click the link below:
   Fred Fidler’s Contingency Model
2. Hursey and Blanchard’s Situational Model: According to this model, the leader has to adopt the leadership style that matches up with the subordinate’s maturity i.e. his willingness to direct his behavior towards the goal. To know more about this model, click on the link below:
   Hursey & Blanchard’s Situational Model
3. Path-Goal Model: The Path-Goal Model is given by Robert House, who, along with his associates tried to predict the effectiveness of leadership styles in varied situations. He believed that the foremost function of any leader is to define the goals to the subordinates clearly and assist them in finding the best path to accomplish that goal. The detailed description of this model is given in the link below:
   Robert House’s Path-Goal Model

Thus, a manager behavior and the situational demands give rise to several leadership styles as discussed above.

An authoritarian leadership style is exemplified when a leader dictates policies and procedures, decides what goals are to be achieved, and directs and controls all activities without any meaningful participation by the subordinates.^[1] Such a leader has full control of the team, leaving low autonomy within the group.

The leader has a vision in mind and must be able to effectively motivate their group to finish the task.^{[citation needed]} The group is expected to complete the tasks under very close supervision, while unlimited authority is self-bestowed by the leader. Subordinates' responses to the orders given are either punished or rewarded.

• 2Views of authoritarian leaders

Background[edit]

Authoritarian leaders are commonly referred to as 'autocratic' leaders. They sometimes, but not always, provide clear expectations for what needs to be done, when it should be done, and how it should be done. There is also a clear divide between the leader and the followers.^[2]Bob Altemeyer conducted research on what he labeled right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), and presented an analysis of the personality types of both the authoritarian leaders and the authoritarian followers.^[3]

Authoritarian leaders make decisions independently with little or no input from the rest of the group. They uphold stringent control over their followers by directly regulating rules, methodologies, and actions. Authoritarian leaders construct gaps and build distance between themselves and their followers with the intention of stressing role distinctions.^[4] This type of leadership dates back to the earliest tribes and empires. It is often used in present day when there is little room for error, such as construction jobs or manufacturing jobs.^[5]

Authoritarian leadership typically fosters little creativity in decision-making. Lewin also found that it is more difficult to move from an authoritarian style to a democratic style than vice versa. Abuse of this style is usually viewed as controlling, bossy and dictatorial. Authoritarian leadership is best applied to situations where there is little time for group discussion.^[2]

Views of authoritarian leaders[edit]

A common belief of many authoritarian leaders is that followers require direct supervision at all times, or else they would not operate effectively.^[4] This belief is in accordance with one of Douglas McGregor's philosophical views of humankind, Theory X. This concept proposes that it is a leader's role to coerce and control followers because people have an inherent aversion for work and will abstain from it whenever possible. Theory X also postulates that people must be compelled through force, intimidation, or authority, and controlled, directed, or threatened with punishment in order to get them to accomplish the organizational needs.^[6]

In the minds of authoritarian leaders, people who are left to work autonomously will ultimately be unproductive. “Examples of authoritarian communicative behavior include a police officer directing traffic, a teacher ordering a student to do his or her assignment, and a supervisor instructing a subordinate to clean a workstation.” ^[4]

Communication Patterns of Authoritarian Leadership^[4][edit]

• Downward, one-way communication (i.e. leaders to followers, or supervisors to subordinates)
• Controls discussion with followers
• Dominates interaction
• Independently/unilaterally sets policy and procedures
• Individually directs the completion of tasks
• Does not offer constant feedback
• Rewards acquiescent obedient behavior and punishes erroneous actions
• Poor listener
• Uses conflict for individual gain

Ways to Properly Incorporate Authoritarian Leadership[edit]

• Always explain rules: it allows your subordinates to complete the task you want done efficiently.
• Be consistent: if you are to enforce rules and regulations, make sure to do so regularly so your subordinates take you seriously. This will form a stronger level of trust.
• Respect your subordinates: always recognize your subordinates' efforts and achievements.
• Educate your subordinates before enforcing rules: do not present them with any surprises. This can lead to problems in the future due to false communication.
• Listen to suggestions from your subordinates, even if you do not incorporate them.

Effects of Authoritarian Leadership Communication Styles^[4][edit]

• Increase in productivity when leader is present ^[7]
• Produces more accurate solutions when leader is knowledgeable ^[8]
• Is more positively accepted in larger groups ^[9]
• Enhances performance on simple tasks and decreases performance on complex tasks ^[10]
• Increases aggression levels among followers ^[11]
• Increases turnover rates ^[12]
• Successful when there is a time urgency for completion of projects
• Improves the future work of those subordinates whose skills are not very applicable or helpful without the demands of another ^[13]

Downfalls of Authoritarian Leadership[edit]

• Long term use can cause resentment from subordinates. Use this form of leadership sparingly and when absolutely necessary
• It has been found by researchers that these type of leaders lack creative problem solving skills
• Without proper instruction and understanding from subordinates, confusion may arise

Autocratic Leadership Definition Pdf Download

Examples of Authoritarian Leaders[edit]

Engelbert Dollfuss, chancellor of Austria from 1932 to 1934, destroyed the Austrian Republic and established an authoritarian regime based on conservative Roman Catholic and Italian Fascist principles. In May 1932 when he became chancellor, Dollfuss headed a conservative coalition led by the Christian Social Party. When faced with a severe economic crisis caused by the Great Depression, Dollfuss decided against joining Germany in a customs union, a course advocated by many Austrians. Severely criticized by Social Democrats, Pan-German nationalists, and Austrian Nazis, he countered by drifting toward an increasingly authoritarian regime.^[15]

The Italian leader Benito Mussolini became Dollfuss' principal foreign ally. Italy guaranteed Austrian independence at Riccione (August 1933), but in return Austria had to abolish all political parties and reform its constitution on the Fascist model. In March 1933, Dollfuss’ attacks on Parliament culminated that September in the permanent abolition of the legislature and the formation of a corporate state based on his Vaterländische Front (“Fatherland Front”); with which he expected to replace Austria’s political parties. In foreign affairs he steered a course that converted Austria virtually into an Italian satellite state. Hoping therewith to prevent Austria’s incorporation into Nazi Germany, he fought his domestic political opponents along fascist-authoritarian lines.^[15]

In February 1934 paramilitary formations loyal to the chancellor crushed Austria’s Social Democrats. With a new constitution of May 1934, his regime became completely dictatorial. In June, however, Germany incited the Austrian Nazis to civil war. Dollfuss was assassinated by the Nazis in a raid on the chancellery.^[15]

One must be careful drawing similarities between political dictators and the authoritarian styles of non-politicians. For example, one might argue - controversially - that Martha Stewart had an authoritarian style. She constructed her empire through her own special attention to every detail. She was meticulous, demanding, thorough and scrupulous. She flourished in her ventures and in using her authoritarian leadership style.^[16]

Autocratic leadership style works well if the leader is competent and knowledgeable enough to decide about each and every item under their control. Authoritative leadership is considered one of the most effective leadership styles in the event of an emergency where quick decisions need to be taken. Bill Gates adopted this style and has steered Microsoft toward great success. According to Bill Gates, he had a vision when he took reins of the company and then used all the resources available to make that vision a reality. In the personal computer workplace, many operating conditions call for urgent action, making this style of leadership effective. While Gates does not exhibit this style consistently, his success can be judged by his decision making process and the growth of the computer industry in the world.^[17]

References[edit]

1. ^Business Dictionary. (n.d). authoritarian leadership. Retrieved 2017-04-01, from http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/authoritarian-leadership.html - 'A leadership style in which the leader dictates policies and procedures, decides what goals are to be achieved, and directs and controls all activities without any meaningful participation by the subordinates.'
2. ^ ^abCherry, Kendra. 'Lewin's Leadership Styles.' About.com Psychology. Web. 14 Mar. 2012. <http://psychology.about.com/od/leadership/a/leadstyles.htm>.
3. ^The Other “Authoritarian Personality” by Bob Altemeyer Advances in Experimental Social PsychologyVolume 30, 1998, Pages 47-92
4. ^ ^abcdeHackman, M. Z., & Johnson, C. E. (2009). Leadership: A Communication Perspective (5th ed.). Long Grove, IL, Waveland Press.
5. ^Leadership-Toolbox. (2008). Leadership Styles: Authoritarian Leadership. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from http://www.leadership-toolbox.com/autocratic-leadership.html
6. ^Clark, D. (2010). Theory x and theory y. Big Dog & Little Dog’s Performance Juxtapostion. Retrieved March 26, 2012, from http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/history/xy.html
7. ^Shaw, M. E. (1955). A comparison of two types of leadership in various communication nets. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 50, 127-134.
8. ^Cammalleri, J. A., Hendrick, H. W., Pittmen, W. C., Jr., Blout, H. D., & Prather, D. C. (1973). Effects of different leadership styles on group accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57, 32-37.
9. ^Vroom, V. H., & Mann, F. C. (1960). Leader authorization and employee attitudes. Personal Psychology, 13, 125-140.
10. ^Rudin, S. A. (1964). Leadership as psychophysiological activation of group members: A case experimental study. Psychological Reports, 15, 577-578.
11. ^Day, R. C., & Hamblin, R. L. (1964). Some effects of close and punitive styles of supervision. American Journal of Sociology, 69, 499-510.
12. ^Ley, R. (1966), Labor turnover a function of worker differences, work environment, and authoritarianism of foremen. Journal of Applied Psychology, 50, 497-500.
13. ^Authoritarian Leadership: Use Sparingly! (n.d.). Retrieved November 15, 2013, from http://www.educational-business-articles.com/authoritarian-leadership.html
14. ^About.com: Psychology. What is Authoritarian Leadership?. (2013). Retrieved November 15, 2013, from http://psychology.about.com/od/leadership/f/autocratic-leadership.htm
15. ^ ^abcBritannica. (n.d). Engelbert Dollfuss. Retrieved March 21, 2012 from, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/168274/Engelbert-Dollfuss
16. ^Autocratic Leadership. (2010). Money-Zine.com. Retrieved March 23, 2012, from http://www.money-zine.com.
17. ^Dogra, Aastha. 'Leadership Styles and Examples'. Buzzle.com. Retrieved 25 March 2012.

Laissez-faire Leadership Definition