An Analysis of Diverse Leadership Styles and Strategies

This essay provides a comprehensive overview of various leadership styles, including autocratic, bureaucratic, democratic, and laissez-faire approaches. It explores how these styles impact organizational culture and employee behavior. The essay also discusses executive mentoring, influential followers, and the importance of adapting leadership styles to specific situations and company needs. It highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each approach, emphasizing the significance of tailoring leadership to ensure effective outcomes and employee motivation. Furthermore, the essay underscores the role of organizational culture in shaping employee conduct and responses, offering a framework for smooth operations and individual growth.

Leadership
That which defines a leader is his or her ability to inspire others to follow in their footsteps.
The need for influence and the acceptance of less than honest methods to amass a
following go hand in hand. Many of history's most prominent figures have allegedly behaved
dishonestly or had views that aren't popular with modern audiences. (Peter R. Drucker)
Much greater emphasis is placed on the leader's personal qualities and abilities: "Leadership
is a function of knowing yourself, having a vision that is clearly conveyed, creating trust
among colleagues, and taking effective action to reach your own leadership potential."
[Warren Bennis]
Leadership, in its simplest form, may be thought of as the process of inspiring a group to
work together to achieve a shared objective.
It is important to tailor your choice of leadership style to the specific needs of your company.
However, not all novelty is welcome, and not all antiquity is undesirable. Leaders need to be
adaptable and utilise the appropriate style for the circumstance. Leadership approaches
characterise the personality of the leader.
This method works well if an employee is brought into a company without prior knowledge of
his or her responsibilities or the proper protocols to be followed. Only via the provision of
specific guidance and directives can monitoring be considered effective. Decision time is
really limited. It's important to work in tandem with other groups and departments. No one in
authority ever seems to have faith in their staff or take their ideas seriously. These methods
should be avoided in situations when employees are anxious, scared, and dependent on
their supervisors to make choices.
Governmental Bureaucracy as a Form of Leadership
The leaders that use this method adhere to a set of predetermined guidelines. Everything is
done properly in this mode to guarantee security and/or correctness. This kind of
management is common in workplaces when the environment is hazardous and strict
protocols must be followed to ensure everyone's well-being. The construction industry is one
of the greatest examples of occupations praised by the bureaucratic elite. This method is
especially beneficial for repetitive jobs that employees must do often. In cases when workers
must be familiar with certain policies and processes. Workers who handle money as part of
their job duties get safety training in this fashion. When it is impossible to modify workers'
routines, this approach is useless.
Democratic Administration
Sometimes referred to as "participatory," this approach encourages interaction amongst
participants. Leaders that use a participatory approach include one or more of their
employees in making crucial decisions, such as what work must be completed. However,
these heads of state choose to preserve their decision-making powers to themselves.
Effective implementation of this strategy has been shown to have a favourable impact on
productivity in the workplace. This method is useful when a leader has little knowledge and

must consult others before making a decision on how to proceed. Leaders that adopt this
approach see sustained increases in output and morale from their teams because their
employees value the confidence they're given. It is the leader's responsibility to provide
strategies for employees to assess their own work. This approach allows workers to set
objectives, promotes internal mobility, and rewards outstanding performance. This method is
useful when managers want their employees to have a voice in important decisions and to
work together to solve problems. When time is of the essence and input from all parties is
unavailable, as well as when errors cannot be tolerated and the well-being of the personnel
is at risk, this method should be avoided.
Laissez-faire
Laissez-Faire "Hands-off" management is characterised by a lack of micromanagement and
an emphasis on employees' autonomy. Staff is allowed complete autonomy to choose their
own priorities, solve issues, and make choices. This approach works best when personnel
are very well-trained and educated. When employees are reliable and skilled, they are able
to get work done without supervision. Managers shouldn't operate this way because it
makes their employees feel unsafe and prevents them from receiving recognition for their
efforts.
Executive Mentoring
Leaders are concerned with the personal growth of their employees. The coaching team's
head will collaborate closely with the rest of the staff to ensure that everyone has the
knowledge and abilities they need to do their jobs successfully. When everyone is aware of
their flaws and open to suggestions, this method works well.
Influential Followers
This method is ideal for increasing enthusiasm and productivity on the job by making
workers feel valued and included in the decision-making process. This is quite similar to a
democratic management style, except it places greater emphasis on publicly acknowledging
and rewarding good work by employees.
Authority figures who use force to maintain their positions
The leader issues directives, and the subordinates do nothing but carry them out; this is the
defining characteristic of a command and control leadership structure. Sometimes this
approach might be harmful since it lowers employee motivation. This approach works best
as a last option or in the event of a crisis when the organisation requires a full shift in its
culture and methods of carrying out business.
According to this school of thought, a leader should operate in a way that ensures the
happiness, motivation, and productivity of his followers. Historically, this concept has been
used to describe a manager's capacity to help employees realise their own personal and
professional objectives by pointing them in the direction of the best ways to do so. This also
suggests that certain actions are context- and circumstance-dependent.

The term "organisational culture" is used to describe the prevailing attitudes and ways of
doing things inside an organisation (Brown, 1995). Organizational culture strongly ingrained
within the structure and people of the company. We may say that organisational culture (in
general) offers a framework or track for the company to run smoothly to success, and if it's
successful, it also gives its personnel with a chance to grow themselves, based on the
employee's own aspirations. As organisational culture is ingrained in the makeup and
responses of its members, it is essential for comprehending employee conduct, responses to
conditions, and actions in response to opportunities. When we walk in any organisation and
we receive specific emotions for it like the mobility and responsiveness of organisation or
whether we feels it old and backward looking, this sensation referred to organisational
culture. Any organisation organises itself, laws of business, processes of work, and beliefs
constitute the culture of organisation.