Bureaucratic Leadership: A Comparison Of Autocratic Style Of Leadership

756 Words2 Pages

Autocratic style of leadership is the sole decision making of one person. The person in charge decides what is right solely on their beliefs. They disregard any rules, regulations and others thoughts. This is a type of dictatorship and has many disadvantages. The only advantage or way that this style works is by no one taking responsibility or initiative. The leader would not allow for this type of participation from any members other than themselves. This causes a form of resentment from all parties involved and sets the leader up for failure. Not only do those he is leading not like the leader but also he is at a disadvantage if he is not an expert in a wide range of areas.

Bureaucratic style of leadership is known as the just and fair style of leading. This is due to everything being decided according to the policies and procedures that are set forth. All decisions are solely made on what should be done based on rules and consulting a superior when there is no rule in place the decision. This type of leadership has limitations because it cannot adapt to different situations. Since everything is decided directly by the book it doesn’t allow for flexibility …show more content…

The style of referring to policies and procedures is a great way to lead because it takes the opinion out of decision-making. This allows for decisions to be made as justly as possible. However, bureaucratic has the limitations of not allowing for flexibility. That’s where the mix of participative leadership would come in. This allows for decisions to be made on a need by need basis. The members consult each other when the rules don’t quite apply. This allows for members to feel as though they are individuals and concerns are relevant. This mix gives the best balance for leadership. The leader is in charge and making decisions on a fair bases but allowing for contribution from all parties

Open Document