"Is Authoritarian leadership or shared ruled leadership best or most effective within a given society?"Leadership is a crucial factor that affects the failure or success of any organization, religious movement, country and the society as a whole....Read More
~Posted on
Jan 2019
"Is Authoritarian leadership or shared ruled leadership best or most effective within a given society?"
Leadership is a crucial
factor that affects the failure or success of any organization, religious
movement, country and the society as a whole. It is becoming quite difficult
for any single person to have all the skills and abilities to lead the nation
competently in today's society. Various leadership styles have worked in the
past societies among them being authoritarian leadership transformation
style, the shared ruled leadership, and many others. Authoritarian leadership
requires the subordinates to do as they are told without question. It is
characterized by a clear boundary set between the leaders and subjects, keeping
the subordinates in line through threats and punishment rather than softer
approaches (Germano). This paper will try to explain why the authoritarian
leadership style is the best and most effective in getting this done through
identifying how it has been used in the past and determine the impact it has
left in the society.
As stated earlier, the
authoritarian leadership style gives the leader absolute power to control the
subjects. The ruler chooses fear over love by the subordinates as through fear
people can accomplish things because they would not want to get on the wrong
side of the leader. The leader, therefore, may end up being ruthless like some
of the most notable leaders in history including Adolf Hitler from Germany,
Saddam Hussein from Iraq and Kim Jong-un from North Korea who is still the
ruler. The logic behind the ruling is that the end justifies the means in that
as long as there is something good at the end of an action then it would be
worthwhile no matter the cost. Authoritarianism in almost every case disregards
the ethical perspective of an action. The logic presents itself in the book
Price by Machiavelli. In many situations where the leadership has been used the
results are attained almost immediately as people are ruled by fear and few
people find the courage to oppose the leaders ("Authoritarian Leadership
Explained").
The effectiveness of
the authoritarian system can be understood through real examples. A good
illustration is the compulsive education law of Georgia. The law requires
children between the age of six and sixteen to attend school and failure to do
so would cost the parties involved. The law dictates the penalties for failure
to be fines and or imprisonment. Parents have the option to enroll the children
in public, private and homeschooling institutions. Also, for the homeschooling
option, the state dictates the curriculum and the requirements of the children.
Among them being; having a regular attendance record and receiving the
education comparable to the one offered but the public schools in the state. A
child found not attending to any of the three options may be placed in the
custody of an officer provided by the state. If it is not the parent's fault
and that of the child, he/she may be subjected to juvenile court processing.
The strict law was effective as the literacy levels in Georgia increased. The
number of school going children studying is also high compared to other states
that do not have strict laws ("Georgia Compulsory Education Laws -
Findlaw").
Another authoritarian
example is in taxation laws. Every citizen in this country is required to file
and pay taxes at the end of every financial year. It is something that every
citizen who earns money knows, and if they fail do so they know the
consequences. Paying taxes is a concept that nobody bothers questioning yet if
someone were to be told to choose between using the money or paying the tax,
they would opt to use the money without a doubt. It is a form of ruling that
has been in existence since the ancient times only that the use of taxes has
changed from paying the rulers to helping develop the country and grow its
economy.
The leaders who desire
to have complete power in making decision use the authoritative leadership
approach. In most cases, the leaders use the style when expressing their ideas
to the people he/she is leading. The style is however not recommended as the
leader may be seen as bossy and may lead to resistance and the head may fail to
inspire. The ultimate results may be reduced commitment from the people being
led. John F. Kennedy is among the many leaders who used the style. Kennedy,
however, used an approach that portrayed cheerfulness and optimism which
inspired the American people. John F. Kennedy was able to engage different
generations in America through communicating his philosophy of hope (History.com Staff). Some people found it difficult to
relate to his ideas of upcoming future, but his inspiration led American to
become the first human beings to land on the moon although he was not around to
see this happen. Authoritarianism assures the followers that a leader knows
what exactly he/she is talking about therefore leads people to by his/her idea.
Lastly, the
effectiveness of authoritarianism is practical as it is the only method of
leadership applicable when making a decision that needs an immediate response.
It is because of this that military uses authoritarianism as its primary method
when undertaking many of its activities. The leader is expected to make orders
that are followed by the subordinates without question. In the end, the method
is effective as it gets things done. How effective a leadership style is,
depends on the goal. Authoritarian leadership gets things done but in most
cases disregards ethics and human rights. It is effective in that the aim is
achieved. Other leaderships are always open to having back and forth
conversations which slow the commencement of any project, with authoritarianism
nothing of the sort happens, therefore, an ideal way of being effective.