Within this document i will be reviewing and including an example for each the different styles of leaders that can be seen in the public services, also i will be comparing two leadership styles and evaluating the effectiveness of each style of leader.
Authoritarian Leadership – These leaders stick to their gut and can almost never be swayed by what there underlings add, They are in command and give instructions to follow to the tee and if these are not followed or done incorrectly severe punishments will be brought upon those who cannot follow simple instructions.They are usually sergeants that train new recruits, they are loud and obnoxious.
They are effective at instilling discipline in raw recruits through their aggressive behaviour and tone and their tiring punishments that they give out individually or to the entire squad. But an authoritarian leader is bad for long term morale so a different approach is recommended when leading a more experienced squad.
An example of an authoritarian leader was Margaret Thatcher who was the Prime minister from 1979 to 1990 she was nicknamed the ‘iron lady’ because of how strong willed she was, what she said happened.
Laissez-faire – French for ‘let it be’ in which the leader gives out their work to the most experienced in their team and let them do it all for them and do not input. This style can only really work when there is a couple experienced people in this team, the leader will take the credit but also will congratulate their people but if the task is not completed or not to a certain standard they will try to push the blame on to a member of the team or the team in general.
They are effective if the team is well experienced and can be left to do their own thing and get the task done. But if this style of leadership is used on less experienced people the result would be catastrophic for the leader in question.
An example of a laissez-faire leader would be Queen Victoria because the era she ruled was also called the ‘age of individualism’ where everyone bettered themselves to do their jobs and grew a great nation without the Queens input unless necessary
Democratic – These leaders will ask for input from their team for the task at hand and incorporate the parts in which most agree with. These leaders team feel empowered when their input is useful and will push themselves to get the job done to impress the team and the leader. The leader cares about what the team says and cares for the team in general forming a close bond between the leader and the team.
They are effective at getting a lot of viewpoints from the team and can create a better plan but at the cost of time, the time it takes to create a plan of action with a democratic leader is increased because they must take in views from most of the team whereas a single man team can get a plan of action faster but it will not be as detailed as a full team contributing.
Transformational – A transformational leader speaks about the future to inspire their team and speaks of the outcome of the task. For example a leader may inspire his troops before a battle to get them motivated and morale high.
They are effective at increasing morale and inspiring people through speeches, But if the task fails morale will crumble and collapse.
An example of this style of leader was Winston Churchill who inspired the whole of britain to rebel against fascist Germany. The speeches truly inspired many people which pushed the nation to be victorious during the second world war.
Bureaucratic – Bureaucratic leaders always follow the book, they will never skip anything in order to keep the team and other people safe. There is also a hierarchy installed into their team, a good example would be a professional bomb disposal squad and the leader would give steps the team must follow insuring their teams safety and any bystanders nearby.
Bureaucratic leadership is effective when the team is experienced in its field and can follow instructions to the tee, But when the team is undisciplined and inexperienced the flow of work can slow or come to a stop.Also there must be a hierarchy inplace and must be followed.
An example of this leadership style was |Winston Churchill, again, he displayed many leadership styles and a bureaucratic leadership style was one of the strongest. As he relied heavily on a structured system he was also a detail oriented leader and wanted to know everything that was happening around him.
Task Oriented – A Task Oriented leader focuses on how to get the job done and thinks of nothing else even if they must sacrifice the lives of others or use all of their materials and funds. The team can lose morale and get sick and tired at the leader, but this won’t stop them they will get the task completed.
Task Oriented leadership doesn’t sound effective but it can be effective at crowd control such as at a riot or a popular event but they must take into account of the rioters and backlash of this if things go too far.The team may also lose morale if they feel like they are not being treated fairly.
People Oriented – -A people oriented leader focuses on the thoughts and feelings of their team making sure they are okay with the task at hand and if they understand and will step in to help if need be. They try to involve everyone in the task and ensure that the member is happy and healthy.
This style of leadership is effective at keeping the morale of the team up and making the members of the team feel useful and secure. But the task progress can be slowed if the leader spends most of their time coercing with the team.
Transactional – A transactional leader drives their team by rewards, if the team is successful the team receives a reward from the leader but if they fail the task they are punished by the leader.But are given feedback on what to do next time. An example of this style would be in boot camp and the officer tells the recruits to run 3km in 13.5 minutes but one member doesn’t pass the whole squad would get punished.
This leadership style is effective at training recruits because it pushes the recruits to receive the reward and boosts motivation and morale but a punishment would fuel their resolve more with them wanting that reward.Not only is it good at training but just in general. But this style could create outcasts in the group who fail most of the task and these people could be disliked by the rest of the squad.
Comparison between two leadership styles.
This part of the assessment will be a comparison between an authoritarian leader and a laissez-faire leader.
An authoritarian leader loves to always be in command and make sure their voice is heard and followed whereas a laissez-faire leader prefers to be away doing something else as his team does most of the work. Using a laissez-faire style can only work if the team in question is experienced and most of the time the team prefers this as they can do what they know, but if an authoritarian style is used on an experienced team they may feel unappreciated and get annoyed at the leader. Also using a laissez-faire style with an inexperienced team is doomed to crumble and fail as the inexperienced team does not know what to do and often mess up the task, But an authoritarian leader thrives when leading an inexperienced team such as recruits in a boot camp because they can drill the required information into the recruits through this style of leadership. An authoritarian leader would almost never give compliments out to his team so that he may keep up the impression of a dictator of sorts, But a laissez-faire will always give out compliments when a task that his team has done is successful to keep his team motivated to work without the leader. In conclusion these two leadership styles are polar opposites in how they run their team.