Autocratic Leadership Style of Lewin - Essay Example

Table of contents Introduction 2 Lewin’s autocratic leadership style 2 Laissez faire style 3 Democratic/participative style 4 Transformational leadership style 5 Transactional style 6 Conclusion 7 References 8 Introduction It is undoubtedly true that the leadership style used by the manager in the organization can determine its success or failure (Robbins, 1993). Employees in a particular organization often come from different cultural backgrounds and it is the role of the leader to choose an effective leadership style in order to successfully lead them. Patterson et al (1998, p. 7) states that, “the effectiveness with which organizations manage, develop, motivate, involve and engage the willing contribution of people who work in them is a key determinant of how well those organizations perform.” As such, this paper seeks to outline and discuss a range of leadership styles. There are numerous leadership styles but this paper will specifically focus on Lewin’s leadership styles namely: democratic/participative, laissez faire, autocratic as well as transactional and transformational leadership styles which are more recent. Lewin’s autocratic leadership style Kurt Lewin, a psychologist developed a framework of three leadership styles in 1930s and these styles were later to become a benchmark for developing styles of leadership. Lewin’s styles of leadership include the following, autocratic, laissez faire and autocratic (Amos et al., 2008). Autocratic leadership style is usually carried by leaders who make all the decisions in the organization alone (Amos et al, 2008). These leaders use authoritarian rule and they do not bother consult other members of the team when they are making decisions in the organization. The leader who uses this style has the final authority to make any decision in the organization and it can also be noted that the communication channel used is top to bottom where the subordinates are mere takers of instructions from the top. In other words, they just respond to what has been said from the top without any contribution. The subordinates can hardly interact with their leaders. This leadership style is oriented towards goal attainment of the organization and improving productivity at the expense of the employees who also have their personal goals to achieve outside work. This style leads to demotivation of the employees and can subsequently lead to absenteeism or staff turnover since the workers are not motivated to put optimum performance in their operations. Laissez faire style Laisez fair is another leadership style developed by Lewin which emphasises on giving the employees freedom to manage their own affairs (Kleyhnhans, 2007). In other words, the employees work with very little or no supervision at all and they are responsible for setting their own goals as well as deadlines to achieve those goals. One main advantage of this leadership style is that the employees are satisfied with their job. Satisfied people in the organization are productive and they are likely to put optimum effort in their operations in order to achieve the goals they have set for themselves. However, the likely disadvantage of this particular leadership style is where the employees lack the required knowledge to perform certain tasks. There should be at least a knowledgeable leader who should lead other people and this person should also exercise some form of control and authority over others. This leadership style may also pose some challenges related to decision making. There may be no unanimity in the decision making process where each individual is concerned about following his desired path. In an organization, the efforts of all the employees should be directed towards the attainment of the same goal not individual goals. It is important to have some form of authority in the organization of which this leadership style is often criticised for not having formalised authority. Democratic/participative style The democratic also known as participative leadership style is probably the best in as far as leading in the organization is concerned. Wener (2007) posits to the effect that a democratic leader uses an open door policy in his leadership style. A democratic leader consults and he also engages the other team members in the decision making process in the organisation. A democratic leader also uses open channels of communication where he can give or get feedback from the employees. Information exchange is vital in the operations of the organization and it can be seen that this leadership style is very effective in creation of knowledge among the members of the organization. This leadership style is very effective since it motivates the employees to pull their efforts towards the attainment of the desired goals. The employees do not feel alienated from their leaders and they can positively contribute to the operations of the organization. There is also likely to be high employee satisfaction as a result of the fact that they are treated like valuable assets to the company by their leaders. Employees are motivated by the way they are treated in the organization. If they are given the autonomy to contribute towards the decision making process in the organization, they are likely to identify with it. It is also easier for the leader who uses this leadership style to control the activities of the other employees in the organization since they share the same vision. In an organisation, optimum performance can be achieved if all the members pull their efforts towards the same direction. This leadership style is ideal for both small and large organizations since it can create mutual understanding among all members of the team which leads to synergy of their efforts. Patterson et al (1998) posit to the effect that the organization is likely to achieve its goals if all the employees work as a team. Cohesion among the team can only be achieved if the leader is able to influence the other members to focus on goal attainment for their betterment and the organization. Transformational leadership style The other leadership style is transformational. Transformational leaders often inspire their members to produce the best for the sake of the organization. These leaders are humble and they are accommodative to different members of the team which make them accountable for their actions. Thus, “Focus of leadership research has shifted towards the examination of the behaviours exhibited by the leader that makes the followers more aware of the values and task outcomes, activate their higher order needs and induce them to transcend self interests for the sake of the organization,” (Bass, 1985, Yukl, 1989 as cited in Podsakoff et al, 1990, p.2). The followers often display more respect and trust to a leader who uses a transformational leadership style and they often perform more than what they are expected. Transformational leaders always display a positive attitude and they are also in a position to motivate their followers to put more effort in their operations. Charismatic leaders are capable of inspiring and persuading their members to have positive behaviour towards their work. Research has indicated that transformational leadership is a perspective that suggests that leaders change or transform basic values, beliefs and attitude of followers such that they are inspired to perform beyond the minimum level stated by the firm (Podsakoff et al 1990). Organizations operate in a dynamic environment that is characterised by changes and this style is very effective since it helps the leader to be in a position to persuade the followers so that they can positively change their behaviour and adopt new changes in the organization. This leadership style is very effective as a result of the fact that the leader is put in a position such that he can inspire, influence, motivate as well as to persuade the employees to put optimum performance in their work. This helps the company to attain its goals. Transactional leadership style Transactional leadership style is goal centered since it suggests that the employees are expected to follow the instruction from their boss (Wener, 2007). Upon assuming duty in the organization, the employees commit themselves that they will abide by the rules of their leaders. Since this leadership style is performance based, it can be noted that good performance is rewarded while poor performance can attract punishment. In terms of productivity in the organization, the style is good but overall, its shortcomings are widespread than benefits. Morale in the organization is lowered and this can lead to absenteeism. Ultimately, this can lead to staff turnover since the employees are not motivated enough to perform various tasks in their workplace. This impacts negatively on the overall performance of the organization. Conclusion Essentially, leading is a process that requires the leaders to influence, persuade as well as to motivate the employees so that they can pull their efforts towards the achievement of the desired goals in the organization. This can only be achieved if the leader uses the correct leadership style. Leadership style denotes the approach taken by the leader to influence the followers to pull their efforts towards the attainment of the desired goals. There are various approaches that can be taken as discussed above and these have their own advantages and disadvantages. However, it should be borne in mind that the structure and size of the organization have a bearing on the type of leadership style that can be used. Off all the leadership styles discussed above, democratic/participative and transformational styles are more effective than the others. These are employee centered and they are designed to inspire them so that they can pull their efforts towards the same direction. For instance, full commitment to the organization among the employees can be achieved if the leader uses the democratic style. This is because of the fact that all members are involved in the decision making process. On the other hand, the transformational style is likely to yield positive results in businesses that operate in dynamic environments. This style helps the employees to quickly adapt to the changes that may take place in the organization. References Amos, TL et al 2008, Human Resources Management. 3rd Edition, JUTA: CT. Kleynhans, R 2007, Human Resource Management: fresh perspectives, Prentice Hall: CT. Podsakoff, P.M. et al 1990. ‘Transformational leader behaviours and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviours.’ Leadership quarterly, Vol 1, No. 2. Patterson, MG et al 1998.‘Impact of People Management Practices on Business Performance,’ Institute of Personnel and Development, London. Robbins, SP 1993, Organisational behaviour: Concepts, controversies and Werner, A et al 2007. Organisational behaviour: A contemporary SA perspective.2nd Edition. CT. Van Schaik Publishers. dition. Prentice Hall: NJ. Read More