Leadership Styles

Kurt Lewin and colleagues did leadership decision experiments in 1939 and identified three different styles of leadership, in particular around decision-making.

This experiment was done with small groups of children, but the principle still holds water.

Autocratic

In the autocratic style, the leader makes decisions without consulting with others. The decision is made without any form of consultation. In Lewin's experiments, he found that this caused the most level of discontent.

An autocratic style works when there is no need for input on the decision, where the decision would not change as a result of input, and where the motivation of people to carry out subsequent actions would not be affected whether they were or were not involved in the decision-making.

Democratic

In the democratic style, the leader involves the people in the decision-making, although the process for the final decision may vary from the leader having the final say to them facilitating consensus in the group.

Democratic decision-making is usually appreciated by the people, especially if they have been used to autocratic decisions with which they disagreed. It can be problematic when there are a wide range of opinions and there is no clear way of reaching an equitable final decision.

Laissez-Faire

The laissez-faire style is to minimize the leader's involvement in decision-making, and hence allowing people to make their own decisions, although they may still be responsible for the outcome.

Laissez-faire works best when people are capable and motivated in making their own decisions, and where there is no requirement for a central coordination, for example in sharing resources across a range of different people and groups.

What Lewin found out was that the democratic style was the best style of leadership. The quality of work was somewhat higher than the laissez-faire. Work motivation and interest were stronger in this style. Also, originality was greater. Duh. I think it is because it treats people on an individual level. It doesn’t dehumanize them like you would in the autocratic style.

Now, the laissez-faire the work was poorer and there was less work. Now, some on the Left would say “see, this means the laissez-faire free-market doesn’t work. Adam Smith was wrong.” Not really. In a country that has millions of people, there will be quite a few that are capable and motivated in making their own decisions. Actually, the definition of the laissez-faire style fits perfectly with what the free-market is.

Authoritarian leadership is best applied to situations where there is little time for group decision-making or where the leader is the most knowledgeable member of the group. The cost was the children were angry, frustrated and even destroyed their own property. They were also very dependent on the leader. Most political elites think they are the most knowledgeable members of society whether they are or not. That’s where you get socialism,  communism and other dictatorships from.