CASE STUDY ANALYSIS AN AUTHORITARIAN APPROACH TO MANAGEMENT
This essay makes available an analysis of a case study pertaining to tribulations in human resources management and management technique at the ____ County Social Welfare Department. Patton, the new Director, manifest an exceedingly authoritarian management style. The analysis includes problem diagnosis, analysis and evaluation of alternative solutions, and recommendations for actions.
Like Patton, administrators who adopt an authoritarian approach lay down clear rules for subordinates and expect them to obey not only the rules but the also the administrator with authority. An authoritarian style of leading uses outside incentives such as: rewards for obeying the rules and consequences for breaking them. An administrator who adopts this approach tends to lack affection and openness and values their own opinions over those of their lessors.
The foremost objective of an authoritarian administrator is to increase overall conformity and they seek to accomplish this end through the use of outside enticements which often suggest obedience out of apprehension. Patton adapted to this way of managing because he was raised to respect and value work ethic. His parents were industrious and committed who believed in corporal reprimand. It was not difficult to understand why Patton adapted to the authoritarian approach to management.
Authoritarian style is implemented when the person in charge tells his/her employees what is expected and how it should be done, without getting the advice of cohorts. A quantity of the suitable conditions to employ it is when you have all the information to get to the bottom of the dilemma, you are limited on time, and your workforce is well motiva...
... middle of paper ...
...refore, a qualitative analysis might be used with a cross-sectional study or multimethod approach that included direct observation of managers within the public welfare agency, questionnaires of employes, and semistructured participant observation of the organization. The goals of the qualitative component of the study might be to recognize and demonstrate the barriers to and the opportunities for successful and well-organized management approaches.
Finally, the extent to which leaders are able to manage change, develop consensus, and maintain loyalty will establish the success/failure of any organizational management idea or reorganization endeavor. One of the most noteworthy factors that impede success in organizations is lack of leadership. Continuous, attentiveness, self-evident leadership is very important for flourishing achievement of organizational change.
If Beverly knew about this management styles before heading into the job at Gridlock Meadows she might have been more prepared for what was about to come. This paper might have come off a little bias but remember that each management style has its positive aspects as well as negative ones. The key is recognizing the management style and how to work with each one you may encounter.
This style has been defined as ( Abdicates responsibilities avoid making decisions)(Robbins 2001). That would mean leaders are not involved in taking decisions at all and they are available only to provide their employees with materials and answering questions, the subordinates have complete freedom to take decisions and set objectives (Chaudhry and Husnain 2012). In other words, this theory lacks any kind on powerful leadership. Hence, there would be lack of motivation, low levels of performance, and poor work practices(Packard 2009). However, if the employees are already motivated and have full understanding and high level of knowledge regarding the mission at hand, Lassies- Faire model might works fine (Gustainis and Roosevelt 2004) .
The extreme leadership style of the Authoritarian can have a negative effect on team members. A characteristic of this leader is one who makes all the decisions and passes the directives to subordinates who are expected to carry these out under very close supervision. Because open communication is vital to any project, these perceptions can hurt team performance.
According to the report “Six leadership styles: selecting the right leader” (2016) coercive style is a one- way communication, where the leader give directions that needs to follow. This style is mainly used in a critical situation or when protocol needs to monitor. Alongside there is authoritative, where the leader makes a clear vision for the followers. Also, the leader with this type of style has the ability to win over the interest of his follower’s to walk in the same path (Six leadership styles: selecting the right leader, 2016). Hence, this is effective especially when a new employees started work and need guidance.
Autocratic I (A1). The leader takes a decision completely at his discretion without the knowledge or consent of the team members in this style of leadership. This style of decision making is possible only in cases where there is not a lot at stake with the out come of this decision, when the employees’ decision is not exactly crucial for the outcome of the project, or when a leader thinks decision can be arrived at based on the information at hand and thinks any additional information isn’t needed from the team members to take a good and calculated decision.
Autocratic leadership theory is a part of the behavioural approach. In this leadership theory, leader makes all decisions and uses power to command and control the followers to achieve goal. According to Lewin(1939), “autocratic leaders are associated with high-performing groups, but that close supervision is necessary and feeling of hostility are often present” (p.173). It is incredibly efficient and tasks are completed quickly. Autocratic leadership can be beneficial when decisions need to be making quickly. For example, in emergency situation surgeon uses this theory because the patient’s situation is between life and death and there is no time to discuss with other members. Bass (2008) mentioned in the Leadership styles and theories article, “Autocratic leaders can be effective because they create good structure, and determine what needs to be done. They provide rewards for compliance, but punish disobedience” (Giltinane, 2013, p. 35-37).
Usually leaders display many different traits. I personally think that autocratic and free rein can be pretty much equally harmful for a good team work. It mainly depends on the business setting and the team needs whether a certain type would meet the organization’s needs. In the case of autocratic style, all decisions are made singlehandedly thus opening the door for many mistakes. Matters are viewed one-sided and many issues can be overlooked and misinterpreted. Such style seems to suppress the natural desire of many people for creativity and contribution to their work; it can feel very suffocating and making people believe that they cannot make a difference. The advantage of this style is displayed in crisis when the decisions must be made fast and enacted immediately (Amanchukwu, Stanley, Ololube, 2015). In the case of free rein too much liberty is given to the employees and sometimes the work place might look like anarchy. There are many situations when the person that manages the business must step in and offer guidance while enforcing the rules and regulations, and when that doesn’t happen, the people might feel lost. If too much liberty is given many due dates might be missed; the organization might start looking very “disorganized” and even unprofessional. Such leadership style might be beneficial in businesses that require their team members to possess flexibility, creativity, or innovative
Authoritarian leaders, provide clear expectations about what, when, and how something is to be done. However, these leaders lead with an iron fist, marking a clear delineation between the leaders and the followers (Bass, 2008). This sort of leadership style inherently alienates group members since they feel they have no input on changes being made. Research has shown that employees are less creative and less innovative under this style of leadership (Bass, 2008). A successful leader achieves his goals by granting power to his followers through influence (Nye,
The authoritarian style of parenting is control focused and militaristic in approach. This parent has high expectations and demands strict obedience. They often rule by fear and punishment. Dr. Gwen Dewar states, “… Little nurturing, lots of psychological control” (Dewar). On Consistant-parenting-advice.com the author communicates this type of parenting can result in abusive discipline that can be emotional and physical; however this writer is also including verbal abuse to the list.
Authoritarian-parents who are punitive and focus on gaining a child's obedience to parental demands rather than responding to the demands of the child.Authoritarian parenting styles give little to no options to a child. What the parent says goes. It is a rigid approach to raising children that may have been most effective in times of great famine or toil. It was used most commonly in large, traditional families in which the father was the patriarch, and everyone else was called to follow his command. Times have changed greatly since. Doctors see a problem with this approach in modern times,it creates a distance between parent and child in which the child doubts the parent's love for him. It is based on punishment, which can easily create anger.
According to Manion (2014), a leader is a person who is able to positively influence a group of people and develop their ability to accomplish a goal (Manion, 2014). According to this definition of leadership, it suggests that every individual has a likely chance to become a leader. Every time one voices an opinion or an idea, they influence others in some form of way, therefore, they function as a role of a leader. Lewin, Lippitt and White (1939) suggest that there are three types of leaders: authoritarian, democratic and laissez-faire (Lewin, Lippitt, & White, 1939). Authoritarian, or autocratic leadership, is a leader that dictates all the decisions within a group of individuals (Lewin et al., 1939). On the other hand, the Laissez-faire leader allows the group members complete freedom without the leader’s participation in any of the decisions (Lewin et al., 1939). The type of leader I aspire to be is the
In one’s opinion, when one combines these two leadership styles, in common and uncommon situations, one may see higher productivity and overall accountability within employers and employees – giving the workers a sense of self-respect within the company and experience to handle issues on their own as well as, the ability to be noticed in leadership aspects. However, one also must realize there are just as much cons to autocratic and empowerment leadership styles. Autocratic leadership’s cons involve incompetent feedback; plus, many feel these types of leaders shouldn’t be followed but used as an extreme measure to keep a business that is falling, in place (autocratic leadership). Perhaps seeing the cons of ...
Pace-setting leaders expect brilliance and self-bearing, and can be summed up as 'Do as I do, now '. The Pace-setter all that much shows others how it’s done, however this sort of authority just works with a profoundly able and all around spurred group. It must be managed for some time without colleagues hailing. Like the Coercive pioneer, Pace-setters additionally show drive to succeed and activity, yet rather than restraint, these are combined with scruples.
Leadership, without doubt, is a significantly important function of management. It helps to aggrandize efficiency and to fulfil an organization’s goals. Leadership is the ability of a manager to induce the subordinates to work with confidence, determination, courage and zeal. It is also defined as ability to influence a group towards the realization of a goal. Leaders should have the capability of developing future visions, and to drive the organizational members to want to attain the visions. This paper states my points in which I duly believe, justifies the importance of an outstanding leader in any organization.
Autocratic leaders also known as authoritarian leaders are leaders that have absolute authority over subordinates, are in control of the situation they are in, dictate and enforce orders, rarely consult with or ask opinions of others, are highly task driven, and the emotional needs of people are a low priority. The advantage of an Autocratic leader is they typically achieve results quickly; they would make a great leader during the time of crisis or when a project