Types of leaders
Every leader is characterized by its individuality, i.e. its existing business, moral, social and psychological qualities. However, the diversity of individual characteristics of the head can be reduced to certain types, using this classification criterion, as the relationship of the leader with subordinates. With these positions there are three types of leaders: autocratic, democratic and liberal.
Autocratic type of leader is characterized by a tendency to unity of command in the hypertrophic forms, the excessive centralization of power, personal decision is not only significant, but relatively minor issues, the conscious restriction of contacts with subordinates.
The leader of the autocratic type, dogmatic, seeks to subjugate the whole team to his will, does not tolerate objections and did not listen to the opinions of others, frequently interfere in the work of subordinates and tightly controls their actions, requires the punctual fulfilment of their instructions.
Meetings are held just for formality, because the solution he prepared in advance.
Criticism and his mistakes did not recognize, but he loves to criticize. Of the opinion that an administrative penalty is the best way to influence subordinates in order to achieve high performance of labor. Works hard, makes the work and others, including outside of school time. Can make calculated risk.
Nobody allows "ragged", but requires subordinates everything that it sees fit, despite the fact that its requirements often go beyond just official relations and lead to the violation of labor laws.
In dealing with people is often short-tempered, and even rude. However, it may be correct to listen carefully and to show to remember the ideas of subordinates, but neglected their opinion when making final decisions. In General, for the leader-autocrat typical lack of respect for subordinates.
In practice, autocratic type of leader is such a relief form is found rarely. Sometimes existing autocrat methods and techniques of work can arouse the sympathy and respect due to operational problem solving.
It should be noted that in the imagination of some subordinates autocrat sometimes appears and a leader who quite reasonably acting in accordance with a clear plan and implements it, overcoming any obstacles. In this case, it can be tough, uncompromising, but fair, power that does not suppress the initiative of others, decisive, but not arrogant. Of course, such a leader is able to do much to solve the problems of the economic system skilled self-organization of its departments, safely and timely decisions and consistently implement them. However, in most cases, autocratic leaders such as those attractive personal qualities are not well developed, but the prevalent desire to command and to achieve unquestioning obedience. And then the most able and enterprising subordinates, who know their value, have a sense of self-worth, trying to get away from such a leader.
Here, perhaps, it is appropriate to warn against possible mistakes to consider autocracy as a synonym for unity of command. We are talking about a completely different order, although at first glance it may seem like they have much in common. The desire of a head to the monarchy of itself may not cause any objections, because it is one of the fundamental principles of management. But to be a man Manager does not mean all questions of leadership to solve it alone, and even more so to resort to "screwing the screws".
It is surprising that a leader who does not want to abandon the administration. Sometimes the explanation for this phenomenon is that he just can't manage another: used only to deny, but can't win like-minded people, encourage their initiative execution of their duties.
The appearance of the head autocrat is often due to the peculiarities of his character. Mostly men of power, persistent and stubborn, puffed up with excessive ideas about their capabilities, with disproportionately developed a desire for prestige and excessive desire for external attributes of power. Temperament is predominantly choleric, although it is possible that an autocrat can become a man of a different type of higher nervous activity.
However, the persistence of the autocrat is due also to objective reasons. Autocratic style occurs especially in conditions, when the most important symptom is the result of the functioning of the economic system, and the means to achieve it is not given significant value. This type of head was characteristic of the command-administrative, totalitarian system that existed in our country. It was built on the wide use of pressure, physical coercion, combined with arrogance and rudeness, disregard the opinions of subordinates.
The autocratic leader does not necessarily use the methods of influence on subordinates, but is inclined to it. In practice many managers do not always manage to stay in the border, for which the necessary policy decisions quietly transformirovalsya in fact no reasoned arbitrariness. To act differently requires a certain level of moral maturity. When a sufficient culture of education of the head's ability in difficult situations to resort to strong-willed self-restraint and the preservation of dignity.
Such opportunities neglected by leaders with selfish inclinations. Often authoritarianism serves to disguise the incompetence of the chief or his lack of organizational skills.
Now, with the increasing role of the subjective factor and intelligence of workers, tight autocratic leader becomes unacceptable. It is no exaggeration the statement that in our day, to be an autocrat is a sign rather of weakness than of strength. Autocrat often looks more confident, but can be traced back to his confusion, inability to adapt to the new situation, the inability to abandon traditional habits are all to close on themselves, to build relations with subordinates on trust and respect.
Democratic type of leader unlike the autocrat seeks to provide subordinate autonomy in accordance with their qualifications and the functions they perform to attract them to such activities as goal setting, job evaluation, training and decision-making creates a need to perform background work and justly appreciates their efforts, respects people and cares about them.
The head of the democratic kind is personally involved in only the most complex and important issues, providing the right subordinates to solve all the rest. He tries to consult with them and listens to colleagues, does not emphasize their superiority and reasonable response to the criticism, not avoiding responsibility for their own mistakes or the mistakes of the performers. Of course, he, like every human characteristic fear for their own well-being. However, if required by the interests of business, he boldly goes on the calculated risk. The maximum justifying the decision that are being developed, he firmly embodies them in life.
Stimulating the initiative and stressing his respect for subordinates, he gives instructions in the form of orders, and in the form of proposals, suggestions and even requests, not only listens to their opinions, but consider it.
Control over the activities of subordinates carries out not alone, but with the involvement of team members. Attempts to take into account the opinions of subordinates and colleagues explained, as a rule, it is not the absence of an opinion or wish to share the responsibility and the firm belief that when skillfully organized process of discussion can always be found an optimal solution.
Such a leader does not comply with stereotypes, and varies its behavior according to changes in situation, structure of the team etc. He is well versed in the good qualities and disadvantages of subordinates, calmly listens to the objections to their own positions on certain issues, he believes it is unreasonable to always insist on your own decision and she is not ashamed to make concessions without compromising their fundamental interests. The conflicts he perceives as a natural phenomenon, trying to get good use of them for the future, getting into their source and essence. Where the autocrat would have acted by order, demanding the unconditional fulfilment of their instructions, the head of the democratic type achieves the desired results of persuasion performers in the appropriateness and relevance of their mandated duties.
Well informed about the true state of Affairs led them to the organization and the mood of his subordinates he's in a relationship with them is always considerate, sympathetic to their interests and needs, widely use their possibilities to influence them by persuasion and psychological techniques, and the monitoring of their activities focuses not only on compliance with formal guidance, but also on results.
The head of the democratic kind is committed to the continual and thorough, with all sincerity, to inform subordinates about the state of Affairs and prospects of development of the team. Under this system, communication is much easier to mobilize subordinates for the implementation of its tasks, to bring them the feeling of genuine
Thus, the head of the Democrat focused on the ability of the subordinate to his natural self-expression of their intellectual and professional potential. Thereby stimulating the perception system objectives as their own, his proactive actions in terms of self-government and self-control. In this approach, functional activity of the head, blending with his work of educating the workers, between them is a growing sense of trust and respect.
Democratic leader stimulates the creativity of subordinates (mainly the delegation of authority), promotes the creation of a creative atmosphere of mutual trust and cooperation in which people realize their importance and responsibility to the team, discipline transformirovalsya in self-discipline.
It is also important to note that when this occurs a certain leveling of holistic orientations and needs of team members.
The democratic approach is absolutely not difficult to implement unity of command and did not weaken the power of the Executive. On the contrary, his real power and authority increase as it manages without serious pressure and unnecessary exaggeration of the role of attributes of administrative action, based on the ability of people and respecting them.
The liberal type of leader is characterized by a lack of scale in activities, lack of initiative and constant expectation of instructions from above, unwillingness to accept responsibility for decisions and their consequences. Head-liberal little to interfere in the Affairs of subordinates, and does not show sufficient activity, acts mainly in the role of a mediator in its relations with other groups. As a rule, it is very limited, perhaps through his lack of confidence in own competence, and hence in the position it occupies in the pecking order. Such a leader is unexpected in the action, easily subjected to the influence of others, inclined to yield to circumstances and accept them, without serious reason to cancel the earlier decision.
In relationships with subordinates, the head of the liberal polite and good-natured, treats them with respect and tries to help solve their problems. Willing to listen to criticism and suggestions, but in most cases is unable to implement suggested to him the thought. Insufficiently demanding of subordinates. Not wanting to spoil relations with them, often avoiding decisive action. Able to neglect their principles, if their implementation threatens his popularity in the eyes of the higher superiors or subordinates.
The desire to acquire and strengthen the authority of the subordinate is able to provide various benefits to pay undeserved bonuses, to allow unjustified service needs of travel, is inclined to postpone the dismissal of the disability of the employee. Rarely uses his right to say "no" easily gives unrealistic promises.
When senior managers ask him to do something that does not fit the existing regulations or rules of conduct, he rejects the notion that it is entitled to refuse to comply with such a request. If the slave does not detect a desire to fulfill his instructions, he himself will perform the required work, than forced to do so undisciplined worker.
Can't defend their position in a complex and even more extreme situations. Often it refers to the fact that it has limited rights and therefore cannot afford to take any decision. Focuses on the unconditional adherence to applicable regulations and official instructions, administrative regulations. In this he finds a means of compensating for his lack of, or insufficient abilities for independent action and communication. Subordinates, having a large freedom of action, use it at discretion, themselves, set goals and choose ways of their solution. In result prospects of certain works are heavily dependent on interests and moods of the workers themselves. It is clear that the leader of the liberal prefers such an organization of activity, where everything on the shelves and rarely there is a need to take original decisions and interference in the Affairs of subordinates.
The head of the liberal type finds no clearly defined organizational skills, irregular and weak controls and regulates the actions of subordinates, and, consequently, his solutions to the problems of system is not sufficient performance. However, he does not seek official career and realizing that takes his place, as a rule, ready to give it to another.
The formation of the head of a liberal can be attributed to many reasons. Among them we will note first and foremost the type of temperament and character: in most cases, such leaders half-hearted and good-natured, avoid disputes and conflicts. Another reason might be the underestimation of the social significance and activities of the staff and their duty to him. In the end it may be visacommercial personality entirely captured by any particular interest, but without the organizational talent, resulting in duties of the administrator be for not.
Given the typology of leaders is somewhat arbitrary. In the real activities of a particular head can trace the features of all three psychological types of leaders. However, every leader to some extent tends to be one of the considered types.