Encyclopedia of Security Management, Essay Example

There are many different types of leadership styles that individuals can enact in different situations. Ultimately, the style selected depends on the needs of the individual’s organization in addition to their own personality. Autocratic leaders tend to make decisions without regards for rules, laws, or the opinions of others, so these individuals often select action or policy based on their own personal opinion (Fay, 1993). Bureaucratic leaders are the opposite of autocratic leaders, and choose to follow a strict interpretation of rules and procedures. Diplomatic leaders make their decisions by first determining the opinions of others and then incorporating these ideas into their own beliefs. Furthermore, these individuals use elements of persuasion in order to ensure that others will cooperate with them. Participative leaders emphasize the importance of group decision making, which allows group members to exert influence on decisions within their organization. Free-reign leaders tend to allow their workers to do whatever they please. These individuals regularly avoid making decision.

My favorite leadership style is diplomatic leadership because while it is valuable to incorporate the expertise of others into the decision making process, it is essential for leaders to do what they consider to be the best decision. It is expected that leaders have the most experience in a particular field, so it is these individuals that are best at listening to the advice of others and determining whether it is correct or not. However, these suggestions are valuable because it allows the leader to consider points that he or she has not thought about previously, which ultimately contributes to a more effective decision being made. Furthermore, employees or organization members that have the opportunity to become actively involved in the decision making process tend to remain more satisfied with their employment or participation in the organization. Thus, retention rates will improve as a part of this process.

Diplomatic leadership becomes more apparently beneficial when it is compared to the alternatives, such as autocratic leadership and free-reign leaders (Leadership Central, n.d.). Autocratic leaders tend to leave employees out of the decision making process altogether, which contributes to a reduction of insight and experience that could have been incorporated into the forming of an important resolution to a problem. Thus, the decision is made solely by one individual and may be short-sighted. On the other hand, individuals that allow free-reign leadership appear to care less about the decisions that are made by the organization. This is detrimental because the leader is expected to make decisions, and if he or she does not do so, the organization will not be able to progress. Furthermore, workers will be unsure of their job roles, which will ultimately contribute to chaos in the organization. Thus, it is beneficial for leaders who wish to remain effective to consider that they can take control over the type of leadership style used. It is preferable to use diplomatic leadership as a default, but to alter styles to cater to unique needs and situations. A good leader is able to be flexible, which typically isn’t true of individuals that enact autocratic or free-reign leadership. It is helpful for leaders to think about the needs of the organization in addition to the characteristics of the employees to be sure about the style of leadership that should be used. Overall, doing so involves thinking and analysis for this to be successful.

References

Fay, J.J. (1993). Encyclopedia of Security Management. Butterworth-Heinnmann.

Leadership Central. (n.d.). Leadership Styles. Retrieved from http://www.leadership-central.com/leadership-styles.html#axzz3o0bJPvqM