Autocratic and Democratic

Autocratic

This is sometimes seen as a very militant way to complete a task, clear expectations are set and a very linear way to complete it is expected. This style will have a clear leader who gives the dirctions and the crew will then follow the orders.

Positive: Clearly this style of leadership requires a strong leader with dedicated followers in order to succeed. It is an effective and appropriate form of leadership in situations where there is no time for group discussion and a strong, knowledgable leader must make rapid decisions in order to bring about a clear result in a clear time scale.

Indeed, when a group 'buys into' a strong autocratic leader they often function well under his guidance to achieve a clearly set-out goal to clear parameters.

Example: I recently was involved in an exercise, which involved lifting a heavy object off of a casualty with limited tools available. As there were a number of possible ways to achieve the objective, everyone had their own idea of what to do, however, the manager in charge of the exercise used an Autocratic leadership style, he explained his plan of what we were going to do to achieve the objective, how we would do it and his expected time-scale.

Get quality help now

Writer Lyla

Verified writer

Proficient in: Leadership

5 (876)

“ Have been using her for a while and please believe when I tell you, she never fail. Thanks Writer Lyla you are indeed awesome ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

As a result of this, the team bought into and fully understood his plan, got to work very and very quickly the task was achieved. Very often during Fire Service incidents this can be the most appropriate leadership style due to the dynamic nature of the challenges that we face.

Negative: there is potential that creativity and new ideas are stifled and that the leader is seen as controlling, bossy or dictatorial by the group who may resent this and not work as well to achieve goals as they would if they felt more valued. As such individuals who have good ideas can often feel under-valued by this leadership style and of course new ideas are not aired and therefore systems do not progress or improve. When clear communication and instruction are not available to teams who usually work under an Autocratic leader, the team will sometimes not know how to act to best achieve a goal as they are used to such clear guidance and instruction.

Example: When first joined the Fire Service, the Watch Manager at my retained station had a very Autocratic leadership style at all times, because of this there was a cultural feeling that he was 'bossy' and unapproachable. Indeed, I often found myself asking other team members for advice rather than approaching him and always felt uncomfortable expressing opinion or new ideas/solutions.

Democratic

Explanation: Democratic leaders offer guidance to groups and individuals. They participate as members of team, invite new ideas, suggestions, and input from all members.

Positive: Group members feel engaged in the process and are more motivated and creative. Democratic leaders tend to make individuals feel like they are an important part of the team, which encourages commitment to the goals of the group. Also, because we all think about a situation in different way, involving and inviting the thoughts of the whole group will generally produce the most effective plan.

Example: My first, retained station was a very quiet one operational activity-wise and it is widely agreed that a busier station is more likely to be happy and more effective. Our Area Manager spoke to us one drill night and we were all invited to have a think and a discussion over the following weeks about what activities we could partake in order to become busier and more productive. As a result all individuals were involved in and could contribute towards the future of the station. Many suggestions were made, many of which would not have been considered otherwise and some of these suggestions were actuated.

The group became more proactive and more productive and the team became closer. Individuals also became more inspired to make suggestions and creativity and enthusiasm improved.

Negative: This style of leadership can lead to decisions being slower and plans being more vague. Especially when there is a culture of Democracy, individuals can often feel that they have a right to air their opinions. This can be to the detriment of clear leadership.

Example: I can remember one particular incident, an RTC where a newly appointed CM took too democratic an approach to his leadership, constantly inviting the opinion and suggestions of his crew. As such, every stage of the operation was slowed down while there was a group discussion about the bast course of action. In this particular incident, had the CM taken a more confident, autocratic approach I am sure that the objectives would have been achieve far more effectively and quickly. When a clear plan is not laid out and voiced by a leader, operations of this type can become confused and therefor unsafe, inefficient and/or slow.