Free Research Paper On Supervision In Criminal Justice Field

Leadership Styles

It is a known fact that different employees will respond to different leadership styles. As a result, leaders should possess the flexibility and professionalism to use the leadership style that will match the different employees and the different circumstances. While this fact is true, some leaders also find it easy to overemphasize the importance of leading in their style. Managers need to adapt to their respective leadership styles and to evolve on a professional level.
For the manager to accomplish this feat, he would have to be cognizant of each employee’s character and temperament. He has to be aware of the situations and how the nature of these situations can change over a period of time. People in leadership positions should not only think about ways of motivating the higher number of their staff, but also each employee as an individual.
Leadership styles are different for each leader, and the way in which they manage staff is also different. Two of the leadership styles are autocratic leadership and participative leadership. These styles differ somewhat, but depending on the leader; they get the results that they desire. A participative leadership style is one in which all members of a team can identify the essential goals and are able to develop the procedures or the strategies that are required to meet those goals.
Based on this perspective, this type of leadership style is heavily reliant on the leader functioning as a facilitator, rather than someone who just issues orders, or is good at assigning tasks. This leadership style is one that requires involvement and can be used in businesses, volunteer settings, or even in the home. One of the many benefits of adopting a participative leadership style is the way in which the process enables the development of other potential leaders who can be beneficial to an organization later on.
Leaders who use this style encourage the active participation and involvement of every member of the team. The members can use their creativity and show their talents and abilities that would not be otherwise obvious. When these hidden talents are made obvious, they can benefit the team and influence the outcome of any situation. It also shows managers that there are people who, with the right opportunities presented to them, can become better individuals and leaders at a later date.
The range of possibilities that the team has, can be expanded with participative leadership. With a leadership style that empowers one person and gives them full autonomy to make the decisions, the viewpoint of others will not be seen. They will be excluded from the decision-making process. If it is a leadership style that encourages the participation of others, then different approaches can be made towards the course of action.
In doing this type of shared decision-making and brainstorming, potential strengths and weaknesses can be identified. A known disadvantage of a participative leadership style, is that there may be an issue with the time. Because of the involvement of others and the fact that different people need different amounts of time to process information and make decisions, there may be an issue with the time factor (Eagly & Johnson, 1990).
This issue can be a real problem, as decisions for a company are oftentimes urgent and need speedy resolutions. The extra time that is required to enable this process can result in decisions that will benefit the organization to a greater extent, than if the decisions were made faster within a more limited scope. A participative leader, who is effective, will use his team’s talents and skills to come to a decision before taking any course of action.
Even though the team leader bears the responsibility of making final decisions, shared functions within a team can provide the best environment for everyone to make their input. The result is a more well-rounded and profitable final decision for the company. An autocratic leadership style is one in which the leader has individual control over the final decisions, or any decision of a company. It requires no input from team members.
The autocratic leader makes their own choices and this is based on their own judgements and ideas and never, or rarely accepts input from team members. An autocratic leader retains complete authoritarian control of a group. The leaders will make the ultimate decisions, dictate the work- processes and methods and the members of the group are not trusted with important tasks or decision-making.
The benefits of being an autocratic leader is that decisions can be made more quickly, as the leader will not have to wait for anyone else to come to a conclusion. For projects that require strong leadership, that leader can get it done efficiently and without time constraints. In an instance where projects get derailed because of poor organization, or a lack of proper leadership skills, or an inability to adhere to strict deadlines, an autocratic leader would have been the best type to get the project done.
In stressful situations, such as military conflicts or any other type, the members of such a group may choose an autocratic leader. In such a situation, group members are charged with carrying out specific tasks, instead of being charged with making difficult and time-consuming decisions. It further enables the members to become even more skilled with certain tasks that they perform and be an asset to their group.
The disadvantages of being an autocratic leader are that people who are in the position may be considered bossy, dictatorial or controlling and lead to group members resenting the leader. Because of the ability of the autocratic leaders to make decisions solely, the members may become un-cooperative, because of their inability to contribute. Research showed that with an autocratic leader at the helm of a company, creative solutions to problems that arise are oftentimes lacking and the groups’ performance can be severely hindered.
In spite of the pitfalls of being an autocratic leader, there can be elements of this particular style that can be of importance to a company. If the leader, for instance, has knowledge, or access to information that other group members do not, then the leader can be a force to be reckoned with, in business. Both participative and autocratic styles of leadership can be effective in running a business, as both styles have their advantages and disadvantages.
Depending on the type of business, the employees and the decision-making processes, the leadership styles can contribute a lot to the successful outcome of any resolution. In disciplining an employee, the different styles can either cause a problem, or hamper the disciplinary process. If the employee is to be reprimanded, the autocratic leader can decide independently and get the process completed, while the participative leader would have to wait on the decision of the members of the team to come to a decision (B. Sarver & Miller, 2014).
This process may be time-consuming and cause the employee unwanted stress, during the delay, or a longer period of suspension, if that is the case. Leaders are supposed to lead effectively and in doing so, employ whatever tactics are necessary for their particular style of leadership. This process may, or may not be to the liking of the insubordinate employee, or other workers. A serious problem can develop during the process.
The type of leadership style that best describes me is an autocratic leadership style. I think that the leadership style that best describes my style is autocratic, but I would also practice a bit of participative as well. Even though, just like an autocratic leader I would have a weakness in delegating authority, and wish for speedy resolutions to problems and processes, I am also of the opinion that as an effective leader, I would strongly feel that the work that I did was not reflected by my efforts only, but also my associates.
My role would be to help them to achieve whatever goal they wanted to. I know that it is good to lead by example, so I would display the attributes that I wanted my subordinates to display. I would work hard to set good examples for employees and clients, as well as friends and even family. I would listen attentively, before I made any informed decisions, in any type of situation. I would exemplify the performance that I wanted them to emulate.
In certain situations, not all, I would allow my subordinates to say what they are thinking, even if I am not in agreement. I would show integrity, allow them to show their talents and skills and give them the feeling that they were participating in the decision-making process. This, I feel would be the key to being successful and have my subordinates in a cohesive unit. Even though the leadership style dictates that certain norms are practiced, I think that incorporating certain traits can make a more successful outcome for the leader.
The success of the company would depend on the ability of us, as employees working successfully to make it more successful and employee participation would be a key factor in doing so.

References

B. Sarver, M., & Miller, H. (2014). Police chief leadership: styles and effectiveness. Policing: An International Journal Of Police Strategies & Management, 37(1), 126-143. doi:10.1108/pijpsm-03-2013-0028
Eagly, A., & Johnson, B. (1990). Gender and leadership style: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108(2), 233-256. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.108.2.233