Democratic vs. Authoritarian Leadership



Democratic vs. Authoritarian Leadership

Summary of Literature Sources

The beginning point of experimental research is focused on the dichotomy between authoritarian leadership and democratic leadership which was conducted by Lewin and Lippitt in the year1938. According to the first studies from Misumi in 1985, leaders can apply both authoritarian and democratic leadership style while completing their task and get the work done (Eden 1983). In the previous research, Misumi collects all research criteria for both styles in two leadership roles: first is performance that is execution or implementation and the second one is maintenance stability-oriented and social integration of the group.

In Authoritarian leadership style, the supervisor passes on instructions, tasks and arrangements without involving his subordinates in the decision. The leader expects unquestioning obedience and entertains no opposition or criticism from subordinates. Authoritarian (directive) leadership style- the style of management, based on the formal authority of the head. The leader authoritarian control makes all the decisions and demands of his subordinates do their job exactly as he wishes. Subordinates are not involved in decision making. Moreover, this style appeals to fear and membership is acquired under threat of destruction or deprivation. The advantage of this style is high speed of decision, good control and clarity of powers. In short term, this style of leadership has large impact on the improved performance of employees in the organization. But such performance is not applicable in long term. The drawbacks include; low motivation, rigidness over personal freedom and the risk involved in decision making (Preston 2001).

Democratic leadership style comprises a leader where he or she obtains input from followers. It allows discussion and requires factual support. Errors are usually not punished, but helped. The democratic leader is characterized by listening to members of their group, be friendly, accessible, help workers with personal problems, showing consideration and concern for others, promoting the participation of all and be permissive. Advantages include high motivation among employees, high creativity, improvement in performance and highly self-motivated followers. Friendly work environment encourage subordinates to have open discussion and communication with leaders. Its disadvantages include: slow decision making process or may be delayed because of high involvement of employees to share creative ideas (Northouse 2009).

Reasech such as Joreskog and Sips proposed a latent structure is based on inter-correlations found after adjusting for measurement error between questionnaires of preferences, which suggests a continuum ranging from authoritarian to the ...