Participative vs Directive Leadership

1931 Words8 Pages
Executive Summary The following paper is an analysis of participative and directive leadership styles in relation to performance in in organizations. The views of different authors are explored and analysed for their strengths and weaknesses. Findings on strengths include empowerment and innovation when applying participative leadership, and channelling people towards a same direction for autocratic leadership. Findings on weaknesses include lack of experience when making decisions for directive leadership and difficulty to reach consensus for participative leadership. Under the theories discussed it is assumed that managers have the ability to choose the right kind of leadership under any situation. The issues discussed involve when and which styles of leadership should be used and applied. In this report suggestions are also made about the best style of leadership being not only one but a combination of different styles depending on the situation. In order to have a broader understanding definitions of the different styles are discussed along with organizational behaviour theories relevant to this analysis. It is also concluded that it would be inaccurate to state that participative leadership is always more effective than an autocratic style. 1. Introduction Leadership is one of the most significant and highly regarded competencies in all types of organizations. Empirical evidence suggests that many organizations embrace the idea that leadership, whether in large or small teams, is directly related to performance in terms of effectiveness and efficiency. The two leadership styles discussed in this paper, attempt to incorporate these two elements as the best possible approach of reaching an objective and the best use of resources. While there is consensus about the need of leadership in teams among various authors, conflicts arise
Open Document