2. GROUP LEADERSHIP TECHNIQUES
The success of a team and an organization depends on effective leadership, that has the ability of driving a company's growth, progress, and innovation upwards. Also, all leaders must be capable of acting decisively in a variety of situations, without decisive and capable leaders, no successful organization would be where it is today. If you are manager/supervisor there is no doubt that your staff is keeping an eye on you at work, not because they want to critique you but they watch to identify your values as a professional which reflect the culture and values of the company, something that as a leader must inspire you to work harder in order to inspire them to do the same them. A leader must demonstrate for others how to stretch and strive for excellence because I the real world only hard-working leaders that inspire thrive. A leader becomes someone who others desire to follow when their words and deeds are consistent. A group of psychology researchers led by Kurt Lewin back in 1939 identified the three main leadership technique categories after an on-site experiment. The following categories are still considered the core leadership techniques even though the more distinct type of leaderships were identified: Authoritarian Leadership (Autocratic), Participative Leadership (Democratic) and Delegative Leadership (Laissez-Faire). It’s important to say that a work leader doesn’t need to follow one of the above categories but it’s in his best interest to know their specifics in order to use them when they identify the need. Leadership that is authoritarian (Autocratic) Autocratic or authoritarian leaders establish precise guidelines for what must be done, when it must be done, and how it should be done. This form of leadership places a great emphasis on both the leader's authority and the followers' subordination. The leader and the members are clearly separated from one another. Authoritarian leaders make choices without consulting the rest of the group. Researchers discovered that authoritarian leadership reduced the creativity of decision-making. Lewin also came to the conclusion that switching from an authoritarian to a democratic style is more difficult than the opposite. Abusing this technique is typically seen as being tyrannical, domineering, and authoritarian. When there is little time for collaborative decision-making or when the leader is the group's most knowledgeable member, authoritarian leadership is best used. When a situation necessitates making quick choices and taking prompt action, the autocratic style might be beneficial. However, it frequently turns followers against the tyrannical leader and produces dysfunctional, toxic situations. Participative Leadership (Democratic) According to Lewin's research, democratic leadership, also referred to as participatory leadership, is often the most effective type of leadership. Democratic group leaders provide direction, but they also engage with the group and welcome feedback from other participants. This type of leadership can make workers be a little less productive than those in the authoritarian group, but their contributions will be of a better calibre and they work in a better environment because they feel a part of a team and not just another tool in the boss’s toolbox. Participant leaders promote group participation while maintaining final decision-making authority. Members of the group are more driven and inventive because they feel invested in the process. Democratic leaders frequently instil a sense of belonging in their subordinates, which encourages devotion to the group's objectives. Delegative Leadership (Laissez-Faire) Delegative leaders leave the decision-making to the group members and provide little to no direction. Even though this approach can be helpful when working with highly competent professionals, it frequently results in poorly defined responsibilities and a lack of drive. Lewin discovered that of the three groups, the leaders that used the delegative leadership style, also referred to as laissez-faire leadership, was the least effective. The subordinates of this style of leading were the least productive, less cooperative, placed more expectations on the leader, and were unable to work on their own.