Management styles

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Management styles are characteristic ways of making decisions and relating to subordinates. Management styles can
be categorized into two main contrasting styles, autocratic and permissive.
[1]
Management styles are also divided in the
main categories of autocratic, paternalistic, and democratic.
[2]
This idea was further developed by Robert Tannenbaum
and Warren H. Schmidt (1958, 1973), who argued that the style of leadership is dependent upon the prevailing
circumstance; therefore leaders should exercise a range of management styles and should deploy them as appropriate.
Contents
1 Autocratic
2 Consultative
3 Persuasive
3.1 Advantages to a persuasive style of management
3.2 Disadvantages to a persuasive style of management
4 Democratic
5 Laissez-faire
6 MBWA
7 Paternalistic
8 Asian paternalistic
9 See also
10 References
11 Further reading
Autocratic
An autocratic management style is one where the manager makes decisions unilaterally, and without much regard for
subordinates. As a result, decisions will reflect the opinions and personality of the manager, which in turn can project
an image of a confident, well managed business. On the other hand, strong and competent subordinates may chafe
because of limits on decision-making freedom, the organization will get limited initiatives from those "on the front
lines", and turnover among the best subordinates will be higher.
There are two types of autocratic leaders:
a directive autocrat makes decisions unilaterally and closely supervises subordinates
a permissive autocrat makes decisions unilaterally, but gives subordinates latitude in carrying out their work.
Consultative
A more paternalistic form is also essentially dictatorial. However, decisions take into account the best interests of the
employees as well as the business. Communication is again generally downward, but feedback to the management is
encouraged to maintain morale. This style can be highly advantageous when it engenders loyalty from the employees,
leading to a lower labor turnover, thanks to the emphasis on social needs. On the other hand for an autocratic
management style the lack of worker motivation can be typical if no loyal connection is established between the
manager and the people who are managed. It shares disadvantages with an autocratic style, such as employees
becoming dependent on the leader.
A good example of this would be David Brent or Michael Scott running the fictional business in the television show
The Office.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Management_styles 04/08/2012 00:18
1 of 4
Persuasive
A persuasive management style involves the manager sharing some characteristics with that of an autocratic manager.
The most important aspect of a persuasive manager is that they maintain control over the entire decision making
process. The most prominent difference here is that the persuasive manager will spend more time working with their
subordinates in order to try to convince them of the benefits of the decision that have been made. A persuasive
manager is more aware of their employees, but it wouldn't be correct to say that the persuasive style of management is
more inclusive of employees.
[3]
Just as there are occasions where the use of an autocratic management style would be appropriate, there are also
instances where a company will benefit from a persuasive management style. For example, if a task that needs to be
completed but it is slightly complicated it may be necessary to rely upon input from an expert. In such a situation, the
expert may take to time to explain to others why events are happening in the order in which they will occur, but
ultimately the way in which things are done will be that person's responsibility. In those circumstances, they are highly
unlikely to delegate any part of the decision making process to those who are lower down in the hierarchy.
Advantages to a persuasive style of management
1. Decisions are able to be made quickly. This is also true with the autocratic style of management, persuasive
managers are able to make decisions very quickly because they don't use a consultation process with employees.
2. The employees will have a clear understanding of what's likely to happen and what their role will be. As all of the
decisions are made centrally and the communication is entirely top-down, employees will be able to perform their tasks
in an efficient manner.
3. Difficult or tedious situations are able to be managed effectively. Just as an autocratic manager will be able to
navigate through challenging situations, a persuasive manager will be in a position which allows them to steer an
organization towards a challenging outcome as well.
Disadvantages to a persuasive style of management
1. There may not be enough or even an entire lack of support from employees for management. Seeing as how the
employees will have no input into the decision making process. They also may not trust the decisions that are made.
2. A system that has no input from employees minimises access to one of the most valuable resources that a business
has; the ideas of the people who are working on the "front line". As a result, employees will show no initiative, which
can reduce productivity.
3. One-way communication models are unlikely to be effective when compared to Two-way communication.
Democratic
In a democratic style, the manager allows the employees to take part in decision-making: therefore everything is agreed
upon by the majority. The communication is extensive in both directions (from employees to leaders and vice-versa).
This style can be particularly useful when complex decisions need to be made that require a range of specialist skills:
for example, when a new ICT system needs to be put in place, and the upper management of the business is computer-
illiterate. From the overall business's point of view, job satisfaction and quality of work will improve, and participatory
contributions from subordinates will be much higher. However, the decision-making process could be severely slowed
down unless decision processes are streamlined. The need for consensus may avoid taking the 'best' decision for the
business unless it is managed or limited. As with the autocratic leaders, democratic leaders are also two types i.e.
permissive and directive.
Laissez-faire
In a laissez-faire leadership style, the leader's role is as a mentor and stimulator, and staff manage their own areas of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Management_styles 04/08/2012 00:18
2 of 4
the business. Thus it is only successful with 1] inspirational leadership that understands the different areas of initiative
being taken by subordinates, and 2] strong and creative subordinates who share the same vision throughout the
organization. It is a style that is best for strong, entrepreneurial subordinates in an organization with dynamic growth in
multiple directions. This style brings out the best in highly professional and creative groups of employees; however in
cases where the leader does not have broad expertise and ability to communicate a strong vision, it can degenerate into
disparate and conflicting activities. Lacking a strong maestro as leader, there is a risk in both focus and direction.
MBWA
Management by Walking Around (MBWA) is a classic technique used by managers who are proactive listeners.
Managers using this style gather as much information as possible so that a challenging situation doesn't turn into a
bigger problem. Listening carefully to employees' suggestions and concerns will help evade potential crises. MBWA
benefits managers by providing unfiltered, real-time information about processes and policies that is often left out of
formal communication channels. By walking around, management gets an idea of the level of morale in the
organization and can offer help if there is trouble.
A potential concern of MBWA is that the manager will second-guess employees' decisions. The manager must maintain
his or her role as coach and counselor, not director. By leaving decision-making responsibilities with the employees,
managers can be assured of the fastest possible response time.
One downside is that MBWA poses the threat of the manager losing authority as the employees feel that they can run
the business.
Paternalistic
An autocratic style means that the manager makes decisions unilaterally, and without much regard for subordinates. As
a result, decisions will reflect the opinions and personality of the manager; this in turn can project an image of a
confident, well managed business. On the other hand, strong and competent subordinates may chafe because of limits
on decision-making freedom, the organization will get limited initiatives from those "on the front lines", and turnover
among the best subordinates will be higher.
Asian paternalistic
Like consultative and easily confused with autocratic and dictatorial; however, decisions take into account the best
interests of the employees as well as the business, often more so than interests of the individual manager.
Communication is downward. Feedback and questioning authority are absent as respect to superiors and group
harmony are central characteristics within the culture. This style demands loyalty from the employees, often more than
to societies' rules in general. Staff turnover is discouraged and rare. Worker motivation is the status quo with East
Asians often having the world's highest numbers of hours worked per week, due to a sense of family duty with the
manager being the father, and staff being obedient children, all striving for harmony, and other related Confucian
characteristics. Most aspects of work are done with a highly collectivist orientation. It shares disadvantages with an
autocratic style, such as employees becoming dependent on the leader, and related issues with seniority based systems.
An Asian Paternalistic style means that the manager makes decisions from a solid understanding of what is desired and
best by both consumers and staff. Managers must appear confident, with all answers, and promote growth with
harmony, often even if hiding harmful or sad news is required.
See also
Administrative incompetence
Management science
Management system
Management by objectives
Management by observation
Seagull manager, management style
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Management_styles 04/08/2012 00:18
3 of 4
References
^ "Management Styles" (http://www.rpi.edu/dept/advising/free_enterprise/business_structures/management_styles.htm) .
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. http://www.rpi.edu/dept/advising/free_enterprise/business_structures
/management_styles.htm.
1.
^ "Exploring Different Management Styles" (http://www.managerialskills.org/management-styles/) . ManagerialSkills.org.
http://www.managerialskills.org/management-styles/. Retrieved 24 May 2012.
2.
^ "Management Styles - Persuasive" (http://business.mrwood.com.au/unit3/styskil/styskil2.asp) . MrWood.com.au.
http://business.mrwood.com.au/unit3/styskil/styskil2.asp. Retrieved 24 May 2012.
3.
Further reading
Tannebaum, R., Schmidt, W (1973). How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard Business Review, May/June
1973.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Management_styles&oldid=500693996"
Categories: Management
This page was last modified on 4 July 2012 at 19:33.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See
Terms of use for details.
Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Management_styles 04/08/2012 00:18
4 of 4