Authoritarian leadership style - what is it, advantages and disadvantages

for managers personal development

19.07.2021

Author: Academy-of-capital.ru

Add a comment

Rating:

From this material you will learn:

• Types and characteristics of authoritarian leadership style
• 6 Rules for an Authoritarian Leader
• Pros and cons of an authoritarian leadership style
• Situations when an authoritarian management style is justified

When choosing ways to manage a team, you need to understand the pros and cons of an authoritarian leadership style. Despite the century of openness and democracy, this method has not lost its relevance and is still used in some large companies.

At the same time, you need to understand that using one leadership style for a long period can lead to a drop in productivity, so an authoritarian approach can be used as a temporary measure to shake things up. In our article we will tell you what advantages and disadvantages this management style has, what rules it must meet, and give examples of world-famous companies that use strict methods of managing subordinates.

What is an authoritarian leadership style

It is believed that the method of sole leadership with the establishment of strict discipline is an authoritarian leadership style. Its main principle is absolute authority, the primacy of the leader. Authoritarianism is based on the ability to make quick decisions, on clear and clear orders, without allowing objections, as well as on the denial of any manifestations of initiative on the part of subordinates. This leadership style is considered effective in cases where the organization has reached a crisis in labor discipline. However, this particular management style is considered dangerous due to the occurrence of staff turnover.

In pedagogy

The preference for authoritarian leadership among teachers increases the external performance of their work. Such statistics can be traced to the achievement of a high level of discipline and student achievement.

However, this pedagogical approach has disadvantages - the socio-psychological atmosphere of such a class is unfavorable, since the student simply does not have the right to express his own opinion. Any initiative coming from a student is perceived by an authoritarian teacher as an act of self-will, which is unacceptable for the latter. Suppression of a student's will has a detrimental effect on his further socio-psychological development.

In personnel management

Management and personnel management is the area in which the authoritarian management method is most often used. In order to increase the efficiency of the work process and streamline the provoking behavior of employees, a decision is made to apply a directive style. Thus, the boss himself is responsible for the progress of work, excluding delegation of his powers in any form. An authoritarian leader gives clear instructions that staff members are obliged to follow unquestioningly.

Note! There are known cases when a manager abused power, which led the organization into decline - employees left their positions, as a result of which the activities of the organization as a whole suffered.

Sometimes managers abuse their power

Democratic style, or “Let's think together”

Alexey K., a young manager, left Gennady Pavlovich’s company and founded his own business. He decided to learn from the mistakes of others and realized that he would not allow such a dictatorship as reigned at his previous place of work. Alexey recruited young employees who were more like-minded than his subordinates. From the first days, he began to adhere to a democratic leadership style: he discussed the company’s development strategy with employees, listened to their ideas and opinions, and trusted them to work on projects independently. For the workers, he was not a strict boss, but his friend Lekha. One day this almost ruined the company: the employees relaxed and stopped taking Alexey seriously. Some people began to be late, miss the deadlines for completing tasks, and to the bewilderment of the boss they said: “Whatever, I’ll do it, don’t worry!” When deals with profitable clients began to fall through and the company lost profits, the young businessman realized that it was time to change something.

Democratic management style is a deceptive thing. To the young and modern, it seems to be the only acceptable one and in keeping with the spirit of the times (well, don’t work the old fashioned way!), but if you loosen the reins a little, it will turn out like in the example above. To prevent democracy from turning into anarchy and permissiveness, the leader must have management experience.

In general, the democratic style is truly a priority in young modern companies. The manager does not make decisions alone - he consults with the team, organizes brainstorming sessions, and tries to ensure that each employee reveals his or her potential. He himself works as an equal or assigns himself the role of a consultant or mentor. If a democratic boss makes a mistake, he does not blame the staff for everything, but draws conclusions. At the same time, he remains the leader - he does not remove himself from the main role, does not emphasize that “we are all equal here, guys.” That is, a team is a team, but the hierarchy must be clearly built.

Disadvantages of the democratic style

1. The possibility of anarchy, belittling the role of the leader, and the emergence of opposition in the team. In general, everything that was described using the example of Alexey K.
2. Decisions can take a long time to make. The more people involved in the discussion, the longer the process may take. Time management and clear deadlines for setting tasks will save the day. For example, 3 days are given for discussion and introduction of improvement proposals - and not a second longer. This disciplines employees and speeds up business processes.

Pros of a democratic style

If mistakes are avoided, a democratic style can become the basis for creating a cohesive team.

1. Strengthens team spirit, makes employees true like-minded people, united by one goal. It’s good if the company has a well-developed corporate culture - mission and values, main tasks for the coming years, a common Big Idea.
2. Reduces the number of errors in work. The more people involved in solving a problem, the greater the chance that the optimal option will be found. Just remember that the discussion should not drag on.
3. Minimal staff turnover. Why leave the team if you share its values ​​and objectives, and feel involved in one common goal? That's right, there's no need. Employees rarely leave companies with a democratic management style (if, of course, they join the team and share common values).

Advantages and disadvantages of such management

Styles of pedagogical communication and their brief characteristics

One of the main advantages of this management style is the effective behavior of the leader. The advantage of an authoritarian leader is that he is aware of the level of his responsibility and in problematic, even crisis cases, he is able to quickly navigate and make certain decisions in the shortest possible time. It happens that companies in decline decide to accept help by hiring an authoritarian leader as head. Undoubtedly, any existing democracy ceases to function, since the new leader assumes the only goal - to raise the company and achieves it, first of all, through strict control over the implementation of work according to instructions.

Naturally, it is not without its drawbacks. First of all, the psychology of modern man in the era of freedom of speech and action is not capable of working in conditions of an authoritarian attitude, which a manager can achieve through insults and belittlement of an employee’s professional qualities. In this case, staff turnover may occur, resulting in the constant departure of employees. At the same time, newcomers do not have time to get used to it, gain experience, and either they are fired or they leave on their own. Sooner or later, given this state of affairs, the company will cease to exist.

Personality-oriented style, or “Don’t be afraid, I’m with you”

Olga B. worked with both Gennady Pavlovich and Alexey. The woman realized that both authoritarian and democratic styles have their pros and cons, and decided to act differently. Actually, she didn’t come up with anything new - she used a completely individual approach. Olga realized that you need to work with each employee in your own way, and what is suitable for one is categorically unacceptable for another. For example, a quiet person may be shy at general planning meetings and brainstorming sessions, but during a personal conversation he will begin to burst out with creative ideas. It is difficult for an owl man to arrive at the office at 9 am - his head is not clear, things are not getting done, but in the evening the most fruitful time comes. Olga organized a free schedule for several of her comrades and allowed introverts not to speak at the planning meeting in front of everyone. The employees appreciated the good attitude and began calling the boss “our mommy.” But there’s nowhere without a fly in the ointment: a group of people quickly emerged who considered a good attitude a weakness and began to openly neglect work. Olga was worried, had soul-saving conversations, and only when the team submitted a collective request for the dismissal of those at fault, she decided to take a bold step.

Practicing an individual approach is the right thing to do. Typically, bosses of this type (usually women) like to conduct psychological testing, organize corporate parties and get-togethers in order to get to know their employees better. However, you shouldn’t overprotect your employees: you are not a mother hen, and they are not helpless chickens. Trust, but verify, be not a mommy, but a boss - this is the moral of this fable.

Disadvantages of a person-centered approach

1. As a rule, bosses of this type are soft, sensitive people. Good relationships are more important to them than the company’s profit and its development. Therefore, sad as it may be, a soft-spoken boss can quickly be “eaten up” by his more resourceful colleagues or one of his subordinates.
2. No delegation of authority. Instead of clearly issuing instructions and monitoring the process of completing tasks, such managers either do everything themselves or forgive endless delays. Wake up guys, this is a business! Here you need to make tough decisions and take big risks, otherwise you risk going broke and going bankrupt.

Advantages of an individual approach

1. Good relationships in the team. Human relations are perhaps the most important thing for half of the employees. If you are lucky enough to find an understanding boss, many will hold on to this position with their hands and teeth, even despite the low salary and small career prospects.
2. In a crisis situation, employees will stand behind the boss and will not allow the company to collapse . “One for all, and all for one” - this slogan still works.

Basic mistakes

Types of communication in psychology - what they include, its functions

The authoritarian leadership style is a tool that is advisable to use for a limited time, otherwise the authoritarian leader may cross the line by feeling the power and beginning to abuse it. Given that the authoritarian style does not allow for the usual friendly conversations with subordinates, many managers often forget themselves, and instead of giving the usual order, they resort to sharp criticism, including insults and humiliation. In this leadership style, rewards are also not welcome, but punishments for disobedience or incorrect execution of orders may take on an inadequate form.

An authoritarian leader bears great responsibility

An authoritarian leader is a person with a huge amount of responsibility. It is unacceptable to neglect this responsibility, as well as to attempt to assign it to subordinates. However, in the pursuit of productivity, some managers may lose self-control, taking out their anger for existing failures, missed deadlines, etc. on employees. The only thing this will lead to is the loss of employees one after another, which clearly will not benefit the organization. It is one thing to punish or fire an employee for insubordination. Another is to intimidate him so that other team members decide to leave their jobs, deprived of motivation and faith in the positive results of hard work.

general characteristics

In the modern world it is not so common because the idea of ​​equality and support prevails. This allows you to unlock the potential of employees, inspire them to achieve and, in general, motivate them to work. In the Soviet Union, authoritarianism was very popular in various enterprises. People of that time had few opportunities for development, and most did not even think about their vocation.

There are such varieties:

• Dictatorial - the manager makes decisions, and his subordinates strictly follow them. But not because of trust in a significant figure, but due to existing sanctions and punishments.
• Autocratic - characterized by the power of the apparatus of power, which is simply limitless.
• Bureaucratic - the use of outdated, sometimes ineffective management techniques in work. The authority of the boss is formal.
• Patriarchal - subordinates treat the director as a father figure. They are ready to follow him and voluntarily obey.
• Benevolent - the manager enjoys authority due to the fact that he treats his team more kindly than with other types of management.

When is it effective?

Human resource management - what it is, principles and functions of the process

There are a number of reasons why it is necessary to adopt an authoritarian leadership style. Among them, there are periods in an enterprise when the discipline of employees decreases, and along with it, the financial indicators of the organization itself and its income decrease. An autocratic director is required in order to improve the work of the team, albeit by taking tough measures. In extreme cases, the weakest links will leave their positions, and other employees will be hired to fill them. With characteristic management, an organization in decline will soon regain its previous position and strive for progress.

Note! Employees who have experienced a change in leadership style should remember that this is a temporary phenomenon. With maximum patience, obedience and skills, each team member will be able to become part of that historical moment when the organization emerges from the crisis.

Tips for Authoritarian Leaders

— If you find like-minded people who tolerate your “authoritarian style,” appreciate these people;

— Decide what type of communication you can choose depending on your tasks and priorities, they can be very different even within the same style;

- Think about issues on which you allow disagreement, discussion, concessions or delegation;

- Give positive signals to people you really value (give people at least minimal but objective feedback);

- Make sure that after a decision is made, all employees must implement it, otherwise a “false sense of control and manageability” arises. I wonder, by the way, how Mark Zuckerberg’s order to ban iPhones will be implemented?

Managerial generosity in words, emotions, communications, even in combination with an authoritarian style, is a good behavior option. In another case, the feeling that subordinates are “lazy mediocrities”, that the manager is saving the world and everyone owes him because he pays is very dangerous.

Examples of authoritarian leadership type

One of the clearest positive examples of authoritarian leaders is Henry Ford. He was so careful in selecting employees that he literally studied all their ins and outs. Focus on structural details, efficient and thoughtful work allowed him to found a world-famous company.

Another example belongs to another automobile company, which was in crisis for some time. In the end, a specialist was invited who managed to combine authoritarian and democratic governance. As a result, this commonality of management orientations helped the company reach the global level.

Chrysler management combined democratic and authoritarian management styles

The authoritarian leadership style is characterized as contradictory. Many people consider this style to be cruel, since the opinions, experience and skills of subordinates are not taken into account. On the other hand, there are many examples where this type of government pulled organizations out of decline. One way or another, it has its place among managers; it is often resorted to in cases where the company is exposed to a crisis.

Risks of authoritarian governance

Not all interesting candidates will want to work at. These candidates will quickly terminate their employment relationship or will not consider such a place of work as an employer at all.

Not everyone can work under the pressure of a dictator. The most valuable categories of employees are the most sensitive to style. Their absence or frequent changes will affect the stability of business processes.

It’s more difficult and scary with those who are willing and able to work with a dictator. This layer of personnel seems to me to be the most “harmful”; by enthusiastically executing the decisions of managers, they create an intolerable environment for good employees.

One head is good, but two are better

Even an experienced expert can make mistakes, and his thought process can be blinkered, which negatively affects the quality of decisions made. But not only the financial well-being of the company, but even the lives of people may depend on many such decisions.

Suffice it to recall the sad experience of Korean Air. At the end of the last century, the company suffered a series of major plane crashes and a host of minor incidents, which threw Korean Air far down in the ratings of air carriers and dealt a crushing blow to its reputation. One of the reasons for this situation was precisely the authoritarian style of the company, when co-pilots did not dare to point out the mistakes of commanders even under the threat of the destruction of the aircraft.

Thus, prescriptive management risks less than optimal quality of decisions made.

How does authoritarianism develop?

An authoritarian leadership style is the result of the rule of an individual who is prone to making individual decisions and does not take into account the position of other people. The development of authoritarianism is associated with the formation of a person’s personality, as well as the traits inherent in him from birth. It is no secret that cruel, despotic leaders had tough characters from an early age.

However, a tyrant is formed not only under the influence of inherent inclinations, but also under the influence of external conditions and various situations. Such people tend to be aggressive, have high ambitions and demands on themselves and others, at the same time, they do not have developed reflection, and their thinking is stereotypical.

At the same time, authoritarianism as a character trait manifests itself not only in solving work issues, but also in personal life. Authoritarianism is a negative character trait. Such people are despotic in the family and at work, do not tolerate objections and tend to impose their vision of the world on others.

Under certain circumstances, an authoritarian person who has gained access to power can hold his position for a long time, which is especially clearly seen in the histories of countries where authoritarianism and totalitarianism once reigned or currently reign.

Summary

Extremes are dangerous in everything, and it is worth considering that any approach has both disadvantages and advantages. Authoritarianism in work, education, marriage can be caused by good intentions, the desire to achieve great goals, but can lead to disastrous consequences.

We educate and lead as we see fit, but it is always worth learning, studying available and successful methods and not forgetting to follow the example of successful people - leaders, parents, wives, husbands who have achieved success and happiness. Look for a middle ground, listen to the opinions of others, not forgetting your own opinion, be able to make decisions and take responsibility, but do not forget to listen to the advice of those who can be useful.

We recommend: How to improve your life?

The art of communication, leadership, education is a complex art. But it can be comprehended without limiting oneself to boundaries and without accepting any methods as the final truth. After all, the goal of education is to raise a harmonious, happy and successful personality, and such a personality will not be formed in an atmosphere of fear and pressure. It’s the same in the business sphere: no brilliant ideas will appear and no rapid success will await the enterprise if fear and negativity reign in the team. Author: Vasilina Serova

Types and examples of authoritarian regimes

Various examples of an authoritarian regime were presented in his classification by German political scientist D. Berg-Schlosser. He identified several types of authoritarianism:

1. Military and dictatorial regimes－ Egypt under G. Nasser, Libya under M. Gaddafi, Argentina under H. Peron or Chile during the time of A. Pinochet.
   They can exist in three forms: as strictly one-party regimes, military juntas and dictatorial systems with a pronounced personal character of power.
2. Traditional regimes with oligarchic clans (typical of Latin American states).
3. Authoritarianism dressed in a monarchical form (Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Nepal until 2007).
4. Hegemonic type of new oligarchic circles (Tunisia, Cameroon).
5. States of the former or current “socialist orientation”, which have their own egalitarian traditions (Myanmar, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Venezuela, Algeria and others).

Berg-Schlosser argues that authoritarian states emerged in China and Mexico. The scientist classifies them as neo-authoritarian regimes .

They are characterized by the presence of opposition forces, the holding of elections and the presence of rights and freedoms of citizens. However, these pseudo-democratic signs are of a formal nature, with strict controls applied to citizens and the media.

Nationalist authoritarianism has formed in a number of Central Asian countries (Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan) .

It is distinguished by the dominant position in the ruling elite of representatives of one ethnic group, which monopolizes the right to power. This situation leads to the creation of a pronounced system of preferences (what is this?) for one nationality, which automatically classifies other ethnic groups (what is this?) as opposition.

In a corporate authoritarian regime, positions of power are occupied by oligarchs, as well as shadow or bureaucratic forces that combine political power and property.

This combination creates a situation in which political decisions are made in the interests of a narrow ruling elite, which uses power to achieve its own goals, which are far from the aspirations of society.

an example of theocratic authoritarianism . The supreme leader of the country is a spiritual leader elected for life.

He has a higher status than the president and stands above all branches of government. In accordance with the principle of “velayat-e faqih” put forward by the founder of the Islamic Republic, R. Khomeini, the last word in making political decisions should always remain with the clergy.

More information about the various forms of modern authoritarianism can be found here:

The theory of unconditional parental authority

Parental authority... In what sense is this concept used? Last time we talked about two types of authority - rational and irrational. It is clear that in the overwhelming majority of cases, and especially when it is considered sacred, parental authority means precisely irrational authority. That is: parents are always right, and they should be listened to and obeyed only because they are parents.

Moreover, the words “parental authority” usually directly imply parental authority . And there is a great suspicion that often for parents this is simply a legitimate form of realizing their unhealthy desire for power, in other words, of an authoritarian nature.

There are many people with this tendency, and some of them tried and came up with a whole theory that justifies the authoritarian approach to education. As befits theories, it is either implanted ideologically, or it goes to the masses on its own if there are enough people who really like the theory, meeting their inclinations. In general terms, the parental authority theory states:

The child needs the authority of his parents; he feels very bad without it. In general, a child cannot live for a second without authority, and if there is no authority from his parents, he will definitely find someone on the side to obey. And therefore, it is the sacred duty of parents to instill and strengthen this authority at any cost, for the benefit of the child" :))) (I don’t like to put emoticons in articles - but I can’t resist here!)

It is quite understandable why this ideology was implanted in our country during the Soviet era - a totalitarian state needed subjects with an authoritarian character in order to successfully govern them. It is no less clear why authoritarian relations existed in peasant families before the revolution, which is usually cited as a “tradition” to justify the theory of parental authority. “The peasants were almost slaves for hundreds of years. Of course, the best means of preventing rebellion is the ideology of the sacredness of lordly power. And in order to accept it, a person from a young age must idolize power in general. The aristocracy raised its children according to completely different principles.

It is not difficult to notice that those who are now preaching the ideology of parental authority on the Internet, for example, simultaneously preach family relationships according to the principles of power and submission. The concepts of freedom, personal dignity, the possibility of trust and partnership are alien to them... And it is not surprising that they often turn out to be adherents of dubious and destructive sects, preaching their teachings instead of psychology.

They can christen themselves “Vedic psychologists,” let’s say, and, without hesitation, bring to the people the “Vedic wisdom” of the “Krishna Consciousness” sect, without having any idea about psychology. That’s right: the goals of this sect are absolute power over the bodies and souls of its members, and not at all their development, happiness or personal growth. In order to prepare people to accept this teaching, it is necessary to cultivate and strengthen the authoritarian character in them.

For a person with an authoritarian character, this theory of unconditional parental authority is an expression of the “law of nature.” He cannot imagine life without power and submission, and relationships without this too. But no matter how widespread this disease, which Fromm calls “authoritarian character,” is, it is still a disease. And no matter how much the patient convinces himself that there is no other way, and “everyone is like that,” everyone is not like that. There are a lot of healthy people who live and communicate according to completely different principles. And especially not like that - children.

Friendly style of personnel management

Loyal form of democratic style. In companies using it, it is difficult to identify a clear hierarchy. Discipline problems often arise.

Adherents of a comradely management style freely discuss the internal affairs of the company with subordinates, sometimes even if this is not necessary. They welcome informal communication not only within the team, but also with themselves. They can set tasks and help subordinates complete them, while employees have maximum freedom of action.

A manager who uses a friendly management style is an “insider.” Company employees can easily hand over part of their work to him, take a couple of days off while maintaining their salary, or drink beer after work.

The classic motivation system does not take root with a friendly management style. The manager may try to introduce a system of fines or rewards for fulfilling (exceeding) KPIs, but there is little practical benefit in this. Workers do not perceive him as a boss, so they complete tasks at a pace that is convenient for them.

Communication within the team and with the manager is built on equal terms. The manager does not actually show his power and communicates with subordinates as with friends. Because of this, employees become slack and may miss deadlines or perform poor quality work.

Pros of a friendly management style

• Loyalty to the company. People are comfortable working where there is no strict discipline, so they will strive to keep their jobs. But they will not do this too actively, as could be the case with a democratic style of personnel management.
• Development opportunities. With a friendly style, everyone can express their opinion without regard to hierarchy - sometimes this helps to get good ideas for business development and implement them.

Disadvantages of a friendly management style

• Possible anarchy. The risk of getting a team that misses deadlines and does not complete assigned tasks is much higher with a comradely management style than with a democratic one. Communicating with subordinates on equal terms gives them the idea that setting a task is not an order from a manager, but a request from a friend that can be postponed until later.
• Narrow niche of application. Because of its specificity, the friendly management style is suitable only for small teams, in which each is an expert in his own narrow field, but also has skills in other areas and can make informed decisions. In such a situation, everyone is interested in common goals, and employees are capable of self-organization and self-control.
• Falling profits. One of the main business risks is associated precisely with the choice of management style: if the manager is not able to demand discipline, this threatens to miss deadlines and, as a result, deteriorate financial performance.