When we gained the privilege of leadership and the ability to control others, we must determine as leaders as leaders and what leadership we will use. Back in 1939, a psychologist, Kurt Lewin, attended an investigation to identify the main ways of leadership and determine which one was most effective. After the end of the study, Lewin confirmed that there were three major leadership styles, authoritative (autocratic), delegative ( laissez-faire ) and participant (democratic). We will compare and contrast these styles and consider the advantages and disadvantages of each and every one.
You can usually spot public leaders in a mile away. They know what they want, when they want it, who's going to do it and how. They have clear expectations about team performance and they convey expectations to uncertain terms. Allowed leaders are either professionals or highly trained in the field where they manage – they know their content inside and out and they expect their team members to keep their heads and follow their directives to the letter. These leaders usually do not have time to assemble team training, and no time to waste looking for solidarity or input from others. They have work to do, and that's the only thing that matters to them. The buck stops with them and they take full responsibility for getting the job right – which means that it will happen along the way and on their terms.
Autonomy works better in some settings than it does in others. For example, when there is little time for decision-making or solidarity of buildings, a public leader is necessary to keep the team towards its goal. Such as, in the case of an emergency incident located in or near Sendai Japan, about 230 kilometers from Tokyo, March 11, 2011, when an earthquake 9.0 was hit. Do you want someone to ask yourself if you need to escape? Or do you want to get someone in touch and give you direct commands to lead you and your family to safety? Similarly, when using this feature, it should be because you have clearly more experience and information than the people you are leading. In addition, there is little time for solidarity and you do not have time to think about other options.
Be sure to share as much relevant information as possible when using an independent leadership form. As a human, we always want to know why we are asked to respond or perform a certain path.
However, there is a drawback in using intellectual leadership style. You stop becoming a dictator that creates unnecessary division between you and the team you lead.
If you intend to adopt a public leadership style, make sure that the environment you are leading to promoting that approach. Be sure that you have accumulated enough knowledge to be able to exercise your trust with confidence. Develop clear vision, tasks and goals, and know how to communicate effectively. It is absolutely important and necessary that you keep the communication open to team members so that the people or team you are looking feel free to ask questions. As a human, we always want to know why we are asked to respond or perform a certain path. In all cases, the appropriate gratitude for consistency and / or good practice is always shown.
And finally, never say, always abuse your power by humiliating or disregarding your team members. To do it is the quickest way to fail – for you and for your team.
Secrets of the Summit at a glance
Works best when:
* There are clear expectations about what to do
* There are clear expectations about how to do it [19659004
* The leader knows more than members
* There is little or no time to make decisions in the group
Challenges to this style:
* Creates strong division between leaders and followers
* Difficult to Switch to Other Leadership Leadership
* Leadership Leaders are often regarded as bosses, rulers
In the next discussion we will discuss the Leissez-Faire Ombudsman's Guide leadership until then, I have heard Your thoughts about official (autocratic) leadership. Do you find it easy to work under these circumstances or do you want to join? Why do you feel like this? Feel free to ask questions about public leadership or other leadership roles. I answer as many of them and space allows.