It can have a very costly outcome The first lesson of leadership is learning how to follow orders. That is also providing that the leader you are following knows what they are doing, and in the military, that can be a tricky question. If you do not learn how to follow orders, you will never be trusted to give them. It's something called character-based leadership. It is also taught at all of our military academies (i.e.
LEADERSHIP STYLES Authoritarian This is a direct leadership style where, without team negotiation or explanation, the leader will give orders that the team are expected to obey. An authoritarian style is used when the leader wants as much power and decision making control as possible. The team are usually working to a tight deadline and will have no personal relationship with the leader. The members of the team should be familiar with being led by an authoritarian leader and should be well motivated. The army would use this style of leadership when having to make quick life-or-death decisions.
In the public services, these types of leaderships will be used within different circumstances, authoritarian is best in urgent situations but laissez-faire is better for those who are experts and know exactly what they are doing and don't depend on a leader, they are similar because they both focus on the task in hand but one is directed every step by a demanding leader, sometimes, authoritarian could be bad style to use as it could make the other team members feel under pressure and lack motivation but leading in a laissez-faire manner will make the members feel more important because they have freedom to work the way they feel best. If there was to be a car accident, authoritarian would be a better approach because whether it was ambulance, police or fire, they will need to get the victims to hospital and road cleared as quickly as possible but it'd take longer if the team didn't know what their roles were and what they were
Explain the difference in the influence of managers and leaders on their teams. This would be based very heavily on a person’s leadership style and this is usually gauged through their levels of empathy and how they manage and lead their individual teams see below chart of management styles. Each style would affect the team in different ways and would play to their strengths but may also not be effective for all members of a team this is why it become important to skill mix teams and allow for all areas of experience to be given an opportunity to work together. 2.2. Evaluate the suitability and impact of different leadership styles in different contexts.
By obeying and following rules the services are able to deal with all kinds of situations that they are facing and achieve their goals. If the service was lacking discipline then everyone would be doing what they please and there wouldn’t be a good team work either. There would be no team cohesion because of everyone being undisciplined so therefore nothing would get accomplished and the country would suffer. Orders must be followed in order to have a good discipline in the services. The consequences of someone not following orders could be serious or even life threatening.
Decision making with your employees will let them gain respect for the leader and become more determined. This style will bring strength between you and your employees. Laissez-Faire-This style is used when the leader is lazy or distracted, it’s more of a you do what you want style. This style can be used when the team is highly capable and motivated, it’s when the team doesn’t need close monitoring or supervision. This style can cause failure when the leader expects the group to make the decision between themselves when they are un sure about what they need to achieve and how they need to accomplish the task.
People typically demand respect before giving it. This is an all to common misconception. If we all demanded respect, before giving it, no one would be respected in the first place. Respect can make or break relationships in the work place. Other example in this area include: your behavior and manners, your eating habits and exercising routine, your attitude and thoughts, and the way you respond to challenges.
S/he will just tell the team or individuals what s/he wants to be done, when to do it and even how to do it without consultation from the team members. If you are short of time this might be the best way to get your employees motivated. People see this style of leadership as the wrong way of motivating individuals and leaders using this style can appear bossy. Some also argue that this style of leadership must be used sparingly and the best way of motivating your team would be to use the democratic style. • Democratic This leadership style is used when the leader wants to involve the team members in the decision making process.
Below are all the different types’ leadership styles used in the public services and comparing all there advantages and disadvantages. Authoritarian Authoritarian leadership is a very direct leadership style where the team members MUST do what the team leader has said, if the work is not completed efficiently enough there will be consequences. This approach is not generally considered to be the most appropriate way to get the best response from a team in ordinary working life, but in the armed forces where urgency and pressure is needed to succeed, it is a necessary leadership style. Advantages Disadvantages Maintains order and discipline The team will rely just on the team leader to tell them what to do Decisions are made by only experienced leaders that know what they are doing Team members may feel devalued and fearful of punishment Allows inexperienced recruits to know how and when to do something Team members might not like being ordered what to do all the time without them being told why they have to do it Role of the team leader. The team leader I have chosen to identify is a Lieutenant in the Army.
This approach results in the passive resistance from the members of teams while requiring the consistent pressure as well as direction from the leader for getting things done. This approach is not considered appropriate for achieving the effective performance from teams. It can be said that this style can be appropriate for urgent actions or when the subordinates reflect their preference for this style (Muller, et al.,