•What do you think are the pros and
cons of these styles?
|
LEADERSHIP STYLE
|
PROS
|
CONS
|
|
AUTOCRATIC
|
·
Time effective.
·
Perfect for
some cultures, like Japanese.
·
Perfect for
some chaotic situations.
|
·
Rude
·
Not involve the
group.
·
Don’t know the
group needs.
·
Lack of variety
in ideas or plans.
·
It does not fit
all groups.
|
|
LAISSEZ-FAIRE
|
·
In my opinion
this style have not any pros, because it seems like is not a leader there,
the staff is along.
|
·
Too liberal.
·
It does not fit
all groups.
·
It doesn’t work
for delivering quick results.
·
Can be hard taking
decisions.
·
The Leader as a
person who guide is not there.
|
|
DEMOCRATIC
|
·
Variety in
ideas or plans.
·
Same Vision and
Mission.
·
Great work
environment.
·
The leader
knows the group needs.
·
The group is
motivated.
·
The results and
rewards are for the whole group and not only for the leader.
|
·
It does not fit
all groups.
·
Maybe the goals
can take longer.
·
|
•Do you think each person has one specific leadership style?
No, I think not.
I think that a person or a leader
can change the leadership style according to the situation, but also it is true
that for a person who have an Autocratic style is going to be very hard to become
in a Laissez-Faire leader.
•What style do you consider to be more effective? Why?
For me the more effective style of
leadership is the DEMOCRATIC STYLE, but as I told before not in all the
situations and the groups fit the same style.
But I think that the Democratic
Style is the more recommended style of leadership, in my opinion creates a very
nice environment to work, the staff feels like they belong to something because
their ideas are listened, and they work better, the leader can delegate responsibilities
in the people of the group because he knows their strengths and weaknesses so
he knows what they are capable to do.
I work better with a Democratic
Leader but I also knows that in some situations the group needs some authority.
.jpg)
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario