Sie sind auf Seite 1von 3

Directive Leadership Directive Leadership is a common form of leadership we see in the world today.

This leader tells the subordinate what to do, and how to do it. He initiates the action about the things to do and and tells subdorinates exactly what is expected of them, specifying standards and deadlines. They exercise firm rule and ensure that subordinates do follow. This kind of leaders are usually found in more traditional and long standing companies where the prevalent culture in the country is a more authoritarian type of rule, and especially so in Asian countries. Employees in these organizations will find it hard or sometimes even frustrating to work there. This is because when a leader behaves in such a way, it restricts the potential of individuals in the organization by not valuing their creativity and initiative. As a leader, you must strive not to become like that because this is how you manage people. But people dont want to be managed, they want to be lead. However, of course there are some cases where this form of leadership is important, like in the military where strictness and accuracy in performing tasks is often a virtue. However, for most other cases, I believe that this form of leadership in this day and age is counter-productive. Permissive Style: a)Individually self directed. b)Can be delegatory in approach but not laissez-faire, which is having no-control and abdication of any leadership responsibility. c)Individuals self select aims and tasks. d)Unfortunately, an anarchical structure can arise from this style of leadership where the group members do not have a clear united vision or similar levels of motivation to achieve the group goal. e)Requires self-initiative and self-expression. f)requires a relaxed framework within which the group can operate. Benefits to group: The activity is self-motivated, can be allow for an opportunist to come to the fore. Tasks can be spontaneous in nature. Participants can learn by their mistakes or from discovery and progress. Failure is possible but also accepted.

Diffident members may feel more comfortable with this style of leadership. Time consuming but not necessarily time wasting. Content and tasks are self selected. Concern is for personal effectiveness. Allows for the main purpose of the groups function to be based on personal and individual interests which of course, can also be a downside.

Downside to this style: The work can become untidy, chaotic and mistakes can often occur. Time consuming i.e. little success with goals required to be achieved in very short time periods. May become competitive in approach. Failure of group to reach objective or goal. Mistakes can demoralise the group demeaning the fun and positive experiences. End product can be individually variable. A specific task may not be achieved if no one wants to do it.

Assumptions
Involvement in decision-making improves the understanding of the issues involved by those who must carry out the decisions. People are more committed to actions where they have involved in the relevant decisionmaking. People are less competitive and more collaborative when they are working on joint goals. When people make decisions together, the social commitment to one another is greater and thus increases their commitment to the decision. Several people deciding together make better decisions than one person alone.

Style
A Participative Leader, rather than taking autocratic decisions, seeks to involve other people in the process, possibly including subordinates, peers, superiors and other stakeholders. Often, however, as it is within the managers' whim to give or deny control to his or her subordinates, most participative activity is within the immediate team. The question of how much influence others are given thus may vary on the manager's preferences and beliefs, and a whole spectrum of participation is possible, as in the table below.

< Not participative

Highly participative >

Autocratic decision by leader

Leader Team proposes Full proposes Joint decision decision, delegation of decision, with team as listens to decision to leader has equals feedback, team final decision then decides

There are many varieties on this spectrum, including stages where the leader sells the idea to the team. Another variant is for the leader to describe the 'what' of objectives or goals and let the team or individuals decide the 'how' of the process by which the 'how' will be achieved (this is often called 'Management by Objectives'). The level of participation may also depend on the type of decision being made. Decisions on how to implement goals may be highly participative, whilst decisions during subordinate performance evaluations are more likely to be taken by the manager.

Discussion
There are many potential benefits of participative leadership, as indicated in the assumptions, above. This approach is also known as consultation, empowerment, joint decision-making, democratic leadership, Management By Objective (MBO) and power-sharing. Participative Leadership can be a sham when managers ask for opinions and then ignore them. This is likely to lead to cynicism and feelings of betrayal.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen