summary of management and leadership styles

7/28/2019 Summary of Management and Leadership Styles

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/summary-of-management-and-leadership-styles 1/20

1

SUMMARY OF MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP STYLES

DOUGLAS MCGREGOR’S THEORY X & THEORY Y

McGregor's ideas suggest that there are two fundamental approaches to managingpeople. Many managers tend towards Theory X and generally get poor results.Enlightened managers use Theory Y which produces better performance and resultsand allows people to develop.

McGregor's ideas significantly relate to modern understanding of the PsychologicalContract, which provides many ways to appreciate the unhelpful nature of X-Theoryleadership, and the useful constructive beneficial nature of Y-Theory leadership.

Theory x ('authoritarian management' style)

The average person dislikes work and will avoid it he/she can. Therefore most people must be forced with the threat of punishment to work

towards organizational objectives. The average person prefers to be directed; to avoid responsibility; is relatively

unambitious, and wants security above all else.

Theory y ('participative management' style)

Effort in work is as natural as work and play. People will apply self-control and self-direction in the pursuit of organizational

objectives, without external control or the threat of punishment. Commitment to objectives is a function of rewards associated with their

achievement. People usually accept and often seek responsibility. The capacity to use a high degree of imagination, ingenuity and creativity in

solving organizational problems is widely, not narrowly, distributed in thepopulation.

In industry the intellectual potential of the average person is only partly utilized.

http://www.businessballs.com/psychological-contracts-theory.htm






2

TANNENBAUM AND SCHMIDT’S LEADERSHIP STYLE

The Tannenbaum and Schmidt Continuum is a simple model of leadership theory which

shows the relationship between the level of freedom that a manager chooses to give to

a team, and the level of authority used by the manager. As the team's freedom is

increased, so the manager's authority decreases.



3

The Tannenbaum and Schmidt Continuum levels of delegated freedom:

1. The Manager decides and announces the decision.

The manager reviews options in light of aims, issues, priorities, timescale, etc., thendecides the action and informs the team of the decision. The manager will probablyhave considered how the team will react, but the team plays no active part in makingthe decision. The team may well perceive that the manager has not considered theteam's welfare at all. This is seen by the team as a purely task-based decision.

2. The manager decides and then 'sells' the decision to the group.

The manager makes the decision as in 1 above, and then explains reasons for thedecision to the team, particularly the positive benefits that the team will enjoy from thedecision. In so doing the manager is seen by the team to recognize the team'simportance, and to have some concern for the team.

3. The manager presents the decision with background ideas and invitesquestions.

The manager presents the decision along with some of the background which led to thedecision. The team is invited to ask questions and discuss with the manager therationale behind the decision, which enables the team to understand and accept or

agree with the decision more easily than in 1 and 2 above. This more participative andinvolving approach enables the team to appreciate the issues and reasons for thedecision, and the implications of all the options. This will have a more motivationalapproach than 1 or 2 because of the higher level of team involvement and discussion.

4. The manager suggests a provisional decision and invites discussion about it.



4

The manager discusses and reviews the provisional decision with the team on the basisthat the manager will take on board the views and then finally decide. This enables theteam to have some real influence over the shape of the manager's final decision. Thisalso acknowledges that the team has something to contribute to the decision-makingprocess, which is more involving and therefore motivating than the previous level.

5. The manager presents the situation or problem, gets suggestions, thendecides.

The manager presents the situation, and maybe some options, to the team. The team isencouraged and expected to offer ideas and additional options, and discuss implicationsof each possible course of action. The manager then decides which option to take. Thislevel is one of high and specific involvement for the team, and is appropriate particularlywhen the team has more detailed knowledge or experience of the issues than themanager. Being high-involvement and high-influence for the team this level providesmore motivation and freedom than any previous level.

6. The manager explains the situation, defines the parameters and asks the teamto decide.

At this level the manager has effectively delegated responsibility for the decision to theteam, albeit within the manager's stated limits. The manager may or may not choose tobe a part of the team which decides. While this level appears to gives a hugeresponsibility to the team, the manager can control the risk and outcomes to an extent,according to the constraints that he stipulates. This level is more motivational than anyprevious, and requires a mature team for any serious situation or problem.

7. The manager allows the team to identify the problem, develop the options, anddecide on the action, within the manager's received limits.

This is obviously an extreme level of freedom, whereby the team is effectively doingwhat the manager did in level 1. The team is given responsibility for identifying andanalyzing the situation or problem; the process for resolving it; developing andassessing options; evaluating implications, and then deciding on and implementing acourse of action. The manager also states in advance that he/she will support thedecision and help the team implement it. The manager may or may not be part of theteam, and if so then he/she has no more authority than anyone else in the team. Theonly constraints and parameters for the team are the ones that the manager had

imposed on him from above. This level is potentially the most motivational of all, butalso potentially the most disastrous. Not surprisingly the team must be mature andcompetent, and capable of acting at what is a genuinely strategic decision-making level.

OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY LEADERSHIP STUDIES



5

The Ohio State University sought to identify the observable behaviors of leaders insteadof identifying personality traits. To accomplish this, they generated a list of 150statements designed to measure nine different dimensions of leadership behavior.These statements were used to develop the Leaders Behavior DescriptionQuestionnaire (LBDQ). According to the findings of these studies, leaders exhibit two

types of behaviors, people-oriented (consideration) and task-oriented (initiatingstructure), to facilitate goal accomplishment.

Consideration is the extent to which a leader is concerned with the well-being of their followers and the extent to which a leader is personable and understanding. Some of the statements used to measure this factor in the LBDQ include:

being friendly and approachable treating all group members as his/her equal looking out for the personal welfare of group members making him/herself accessible to group members

Initiating structure is the extent to which a leader defines leader and group member roles, initiates actions, organizes group activities, and defines how tasks are to beaccomplished by the group. This leadership style is task-oriented. Some of thestatements used to measure this factor in the LBDQ include:

letting group members know what is expected of them maintaining definite standards of performance scheduling the work to be done asking that group members follow standard rules and regulations

BLAKE AND MOUTON’S MANAGERIAL GRID

A popular framework for thinking about a leader‟s „task versus person‟ orientation wasdeveloped by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton in the early 1960s. Called the ManagerialGrid, or Leadership Grid, it plots the degree of task-centeredness versus person-centeredness and identifies five combinations as distinct leadership styles.

The Managerial Grid is based on two behavioral dimensions:

Concern for People – This is the degree to which a leader considers the needsof team members, their interests, and areas of personal development whendeciding how best to accomplish a task.

Concern for Production – This is the degree to which a leader emphasizesconcrete objectives, organizational efficiency and high productivity when decidinghow best to accomplish a task.



6

Using the axis to plot leadership „concerns for production‟ versus „concerns for people‟,Blake and Mouton defined the following five leadership styles:

Country Club Leadership – High People/Low Production

This style of leader is most concerned about the needs and feelings of members of his/her team. These people operate under the assumption that as long as teammembers are happy and secure then they will work hard. What tends to result is a workenvironment that is very relaxed and fun but where production suffers due to lack of direction and control.

Produce or Perish Leadership – High Production/Low People

Also known as Authoritarian or Compliance Leaders, people in this category believe that

employees are simply a means to an end. Employee needs are always secondary to theneed for efficient and productive workplaces. This type of leader is very autocratic, hasstrict work rules, policies, and procedures, and views punishment as the most effectivemeans to motivate employees.



7

Impoverished Leadership – Low Production/Low People

This leader is mostly ineffective. He/she has neither a high regard for creating systemsfor getting the job done, nor for creating a work environment that is satisfying andmotivating. The result is a place of disorganization, dissatisfaction and disharmony.

Middle-of-the-Road Leadership – Medium Production/Medium People

This style seems to be a balance of the two competing concerns. It may at first appear to be an ideal compromise. Therein lies the problem, though: When you compromise,you necessarily give away a bit of each concern so that neither production nor peopleneeds are fully met. Leaders who use this style settle for average performance andoften believe that this is the most anyone can expect.

Team Leadership – High Production/High People

This is the pinnacle of managerial style. These leaders stress production needs and theneeds of the people equally highly. The premise here is that employees are involved inunderstanding organizational purpose and determining production needs. Whenemployees are committed to, and have a stake in the organization‟s success, their needs and production needs coincide. This creates a team environment based on trustand respect, which leads to high satisfaction and motivation and, as a result, highproduction.

LIKERT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Rensis Likert and his associates studied the patterns and styles of managers andidentified a four-fold model of management systems:

System 1 - Exploitative Authoritative: Responsibility lies in the hands of thepeople at the upper echelons of the hierarchy. The superior has no trust andconfidence in subordinates. The decisions are imposed on subordinates and they

do not feel free at all to discuss things about the job with their superior. Theteamwork or communication is very little and the motivation is based on threats.

System 2 - Benevolent Authoritative: The responsibility lies at the manageriallevels but not at the lower levels of the organizational hierarchy. The superior hascondescending confidence and trust in subordinates (master-servantrelationship). Here again, the subordinates do not feel free to discuss thingsabout the job with their superior. The teamwork or communication is very littleand motivation is based on a system of rewards.



8

System 3 - Consultative: Responsibility is spread widely through theorganizational hierarchy. The superior has substantial but not completeconfidence in subordinates. Some amount of discussion about job related thingstakes place between the superior and subordinates. There is a fair amount of teamwork, and communication takes place vertically and horizontally. The

motivation is based on rewards and involvement in the job. System 4 - Participative: Responsibility for achieving the organizational goals is

widespread throughout the organizational hierarchy. There is a high level of confidence that the superior has in his subordinates. There is a high level of teamwork, communication, and participation.

The nature of these four management systems has been described by Likert through aprofile of organizational characteristics. In this profile, the four management systemshave been compared with one another on the basis of certain organizational variableswhich are:

Leadership processes

Motivational forces Communication process Interaction-influence process

Decision-making process

Goal-setting or ordering Control processes

On the basis of this profile, Likert‟s studies confirmed that the departments or unitsemploying management practices within Systems 1 and 2 were the least productive,and the departments or units employing management practices within Systems 3 and 4were the most productive.

Advantages the systems

With the help of the profile developed by Likert, it became possible to quantify theresults of the work done in the field of group dynamics. Likert theory also facilitated themeasurement of the “soft” areas of management, such as trust and communication.

Conclusion

According to Rensis Likert, the nearer the behavioral characteristics of an organizationapproach System 4 (Participative), the more likely this will lead to long-term

improvement in staff turnover and high productivity, low scrap, low costs, and high

earnings.

HOUSE’S TYPICAL LEADERSHIP STYLE



9

Another leadership theory to emerge in the Situational/Contingency category wasRobert House's Path-Goal theory, in his 1971 paper: A Path-Goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness, which he refined three years later in cooperation with T R Mitchell.

House said that the main role of a leader is to motivate his followers by:

1. Increasing or clarifying the (group's/followers') personal benefits of striving for and reaching the group's goal.

2. Clarifying and clearing a path to achieving the group's goals.

House's theory matched four ways of behaving to four sets of circumstances, or 'situations'. The circumstances in this theory are driven by 'follower characteristics' and 'workplace characteristics'.

Follower characteristics include:

What they believe about their ability - Do they feel they are capable of fulfillingthe task well? Where control resides - Do group members believe they have control over the

way they approach the task and the chances of achieving the goal? Or do theysee themselves as being controlled by other people and outside events?

Attitude to power and those in power - Do members want to be told what to doand how to do it... or not? What do they think of those in the organization whohave more official power than they do, especially the leader?

Workplace characteristics include:

The kind of task - Is it repetitive? Is it interesting? Is it predictable or structured?Is it unpredictable, creative or unstructured? The leader's formal authority - Is it well-defined? Group cohesion - Do those working in the group feel a sense of unity?

House took these two external dimensions and matched them with four leadershipbehavioral styles, as this diagram summarizes:

House's Path-Goal theory diagram- workplace/follower characteristics and four

leadership styles

LEADERSHIP

STYLE

WORKPLACE

CHARACTERISTICS

FOLLOWER

CHARACTERISTICS



10

DIRECTIVE

Unstructured interesting tasks

Clear, formal authority

Good group cohesion

Inexperienced followers

They believe they lack power

They want leader to direct them

SUPPORTIVE Simpler, more predictable tasksUnclear or weak formal authority

Poor group cohesion

Experienced, confident followersThey believe they have power

They reject close control

PARTICIPATIVE

Unstructured, complex tasks

Formal authority could be either

clear or unclear

Group cohesion could either be

good or poor

Experienced, confident followers

They believe they have power

They reject close control,

preferring to exercise power over

their work

ACHIEVEMENT-

ORIENTATED

Unstructured, complex or

unpredictable tasks

Clear, formal authority

Group cohesion could either be

good or poor

Experienced, confident followers

They think they lack some power

They accept the idea of the leader

setting their goals and have a lot

of respect for the leader

House's Path-Goal Theory - four leadership styles descriptions

LEADERSHIP

STYLE DESCRIPTION

DIRECTIVE

In House's Directive style, the leader clarifies the path to the goal bygiving clear direction and guidance on goals, tasks, and

performance standards. The work will normally be complex and

unstructured, and followers will usually lack experience and accept a

high degree of outside control. In essence, the leader is telling the

followers exactly the required methods and outcomes. There is little

or no emphasis on personal needs (for example emotional or



11

financial) in striving for and achieving the goal, because the work is

considered (by the leader and organization) to be sufficiently

satisfying and rewarding in its own right.

SUPPORTIVE

House's Supportive style puts more emphasis on improving theworking atmosphere (notably making it more friendly and helpful)

and safeguarding followers' welfare. This leadership approach is

appropriate where followers can perform their tasks skillfully, and

believe they have a high degree of control over the outcome.

Followers don't want close supervision, but they do need protection

and care in handling stresses and frustrations arising from repetitive,

uninteresting tasks. In this Supportive style, the leader removes or

reduces the effects of emotional obstacles on the path to the goal.

PARTICIPATIVE

Followers of House's Participative leadership style are similar to

followers of the Supportive style: confident and experienced, they

believe they largely control the outcome, and they reject close

control. However, unlike typical Supportive workplace

characteristics, here work is much less structured, repetitive and

predictable. The leader consults followers (perhaps more likely here

to be called 'colleagues') on decisions concerning goals and

methods, and genuinely takes account of followers' opinions and

ideas. Here the Participative leader strengthens the path-goal

connection in three ways: First, aligning followers' values andconcerns with the goals. Second, ensuring followers are happy with

how they are to achieve the goals. Third, giving followers a strong

sense of autonomy and satisfaction, so improving motivation to

achieve the goal.

ACHIEVEMENT-

ORIENTATED

House's Achievement-orientated leadership style is based on

encouraging followers to achieve personally outstanding results.

Followers are competent and confident, and crucially also accept

the principle of the leader setting ambitious goals. Followers trust

and respect the leader, and draw personal motivation and increased

confidence from the leader's belief that the individual follower can

achieve demanding aims and targets.



12

In the grid diagrams above Robert House effectively describes four different'situations' (in this case combinations of 'workplace characteristics' and 'follower characteristics') which he matched to four different leadership styles.

House's Path-Goal theory asserts that leaders can and should vary their behavior

according to the situation and the problems or opportunities that each situationpresents. By implication, Path-Goal theory assumes that a leader can vary his or her mindset and behavior as needed.

REDDIN’S TRI-DIMENSIONAL MODEL OF LEADERSHIP STYLE

Prof. Bill Reddin developed the first relatively simple method of measuring “situationaldemands” – i.e. the things that dictate how a manager must operate to be mosteffective. Reddin‟s model was based on the two basic dimensions of leadership

identified by the Ohio State studies called Task-orientation and Relationships-orientation. However, he introduced a third dimension – Effectiveness. Effectivenesswas what resulted when one used the right style of leadership for the particular situation.

Reddin identified four major leadership styles on the high effectiveness plane and four corresponding styles on the low effectiveness plane, effectiveness being where theleadership style matched the demands of the situation. So a manager whodemonstrated a high level of task-orientation and low relationships orientation where itwas the style that was required was called a Benevolent Autocrat while a manager whoapplied that style of behavior where the situation did not call for it was labeled an

Autocrat.

The r eal theoretical breakthrough with Reddin‟s 3-D model was the idea that one couldassess the situation and identify what behavior was most appropriate. His model relatesthe level of managerial effectiveness to the most appropriate use of each of thesestyles.

Reddin‟s basic management styles result from the different levels of concern for thepeople and the task. From these four basic styles, Reddin added a third dimension tomeasure managerial effectiveness. Where the four styles are being used in the mostinappropriate way, this is the lowest level of effectiveness and those occupying these

quadrants are labeled as: Missionary, Compromiser, Deserter, and Autocrat. Where thefour styles are being used in the most appropriate way and thus at the highest levels of effectiveness, Reddin labeled the roles as: Developer, Executive, Bureaucrat, andBenevolent Autocrat.



13

HERSHEY AND BLANCHARD’S SITUATIONAL MODEL OF

LEADERSHIP

The theory states that instead of using just one style, successful leaders should changetheir leadership styles based on the maturity of the people they're leading and thedetails of the task. Using this theory, leaders should be able to place more or less

emphasis on the task, and more or less emphasis on the relationships with the peoplethey're leading, depending on what's needed to get the job done successfully.

Leadership Styles According to Hersey and Blanchard, there are four main leadershipstyles:

Telling (S1) – Leaders tell their people exactly what to do, and how to do it. Selling (S2) – Leaders still provide information and direction, but there's more

communication with followers. Leaders "sell" their message to get the team on

board. Participating (S3) – Leaders focus more on the relationship and less on

direction. The leader works with the team, and shares decision-makingresponsibilities.

Delegating (S4) – Leaders pass most of the responsibility onto the follower or group. The leaders still monitor progress, but they're less involved in decisions.



14

Styles S1 and S2 are focused on getting the task done. Styles S3 and S4 are moreconcerned with developing team members' abilities to work independently.

Maturity Levels

According to Hersey and Blanchard, knowing when to use each style is largelydependent on the maturity of the person or group being led. They break maturity downinto four different levels:

M1 – People at this level of maturity are at the bottom level of the scale. Theylack the knowledge, skills, or confidence to work on their own, and they oftenneed to be pushed to take the task on.

M2 – At this level, followers might be willing to work on the task, but they stilldon't have the skills to do it successfully.

M3 – Here, followers are ready and willing to help with the task. They have moreskills than the M2 group, but they're still not confident in their abilities.

M4 – These followers are able to work on their own. They have high confidenceand strong skills, and they're committed to the task.

The Hersey-Blanchard model maps each leadership style to each maturity level, asshown below.

Maturity Level Most Appropriate Leadership Style

M1: Low maturity S1: Telling/directing

M2: Medium maturity, limited skills S2: Selling/coaching

M3: Medium maturity, higher skills

but lacking confidence

S3: Participating/supporting

M4: High maturity S4: Delegating

To use this model, reflect on the maturity of individuals within your team. The tableabove then shows which leadership style Hersey and Blanchard consider the mosteffective for people with that level of maturity.

A good leader develops “the competence and commitment of their people so they‟reself-motivated rather than dependent on others for direction and guidance.” Accordingto Hersey, the leader‟s high, realistic expectation causes high performance of followers;the leader‟s low expectations lead to low performance of followers. According to Ken

Blanchard, "Four combinations of competence and commitment make up what we call'development level.'"

D1 - Low competence and high commitment D2 - Low competence and low commitment D3 - High competence and low/variable commitment D4 - High competence and high commitment



15

OUCHI’S THEORY Z

Theory Z is an approach to management based upon a combination of American andJapanese management philosophies and characterized by, among other things, long-term job security, consensual decision making, slow evaluation and promotionprocedures, and individual responsibility within a group context. Proponents of Theory Zsuggest that it leads to improvements in organizational performance.

LONG-TERM EMPLOYMENT

In the United States, employment at will, which essentially means the employer or theemployee can terminate the employment relationship at any time, has been among thedominant forms of employment relationships. Conversely, Type J organizationsgenerally make life-long commitments to their employees and expect loyalty in return,



16

but Type J organizations set the conditions to encourage this. This promotes stability inthe organization and job security among employees.

CONSENSUAL DECISION MAKING

The Type Z organization emphasizes communication, collaboration, and consensus indecision making. This marks a contrast from the traditional Type A organization thatemphasizes individual decision-making.

INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY

Type A organizations emphasize individual accountability and performance appraisal.

Traditionally, performance measures in Type J companies have been oriented to thegroup. Thus, Type Z organizations retain the emphasis on individual contributions thatare characteristic of most American firms by recognizing individual achievements, albeitwithin the context of the wider group.

SLOW EVALUATION AND PROMOTION

The Type A organization has generally been characterized by short-term evaluations of performance and rapid promotion of high achievers. The Type J organization,

conversely, adopts the Japanese model of slow evaluation and promotion.

INFORMAL CONTROL WITH FORMALIZED MEASURES

The Type Z organization relies on informal methods of control, but does measureperformance through formal mechanisms. This is an attempt to combine elements of both the Type A and Type J organizations.

MODERATELY SPECIALIZED CAREER PATH

Type A organizations have generally had quite specialized career paths, withemployees avoiding jumps from functional area to another. Conversely, the Type Jorganization has generally had quite non-specialized career paths. The Type Zorganization adopts a middle-of-the-road posture, with career paths that are less



17

specialized than the traditional U.S. model but more specialized than the traditionalJapanese model.

HOLISTIC CONCERN

The Type Z organization is characterized by concern for employees that goes beyondthe workplace. This philosophy is more consistent with the Japanese model than theU.S. model.

ALLAN ROWE AND ASSOCIATES’ MANAGEMENT STYLE

Developed by Rowe, Reardon, and Bennis, the Leadership Style Inventory (LSI)identifies differences in style used by leaders that are based on how adaptive leaders

are when dealing with the issues they face and how leaders communicate with,persuade, and energize employees in the process of change.

The LSI identifies four basic styles: commanding, logical, inspirational, and supportive.One of its major strengths is that it also describes combinations of the basic stylescalled “patterns.” These patterns help to describe the complexity behind leader behavior and competence for radical change.

LEADER STYLE FOCUSPERSUADES

BYMAKES

CHANGESLEARNS BY

COMMANDING Results Directing Rapidly Doing

LOGICAL Innovation Explaining Carefully StudyingINSPIRATIONAL Opportunities Creating trust Radically Questioning

SUPPORTIVE Facilitatingwork

Involvement Slowly Listening

The commanding style focuses on performance and has a short-term goal orientation.Commanders are highly productive and results oriented. They can be very effectivewhen goal achievement is the primary focus. They learn better by their own successesand failures than by input from others.

The logical style pertains to leaders who insist on covering all alternatives. They have

long-term goals, use analysis and questioning, and learn by reasoning things through.They are particularly effective when the goal is strategy development.

The inspirational style is characteristic of those who are able to develop meaningfulvisions of the future by focusing on radically new ideas; they learn by experimentation.They show a high level of concern for assuring cohesiveness of members of theorganization and encouraging others to follow the vision. They are inquisitive, curious,and satisfied by finding radically new solutions.



18

Those leaders who are more concerned with consensus score high in the supportivedimension. They emphasize openness and operate more as facilitators than directors.They learn by observing outcomes and how others react to their decisions.

Most leaders do not possess a single style, but a combination. These combinationsindicate which styles leaders are predisposed to use. Inventory scores indicate leader style predispositions.

FRANCO’S ST YLES OF PINOY MANAGEMENT

Ernesto Franco identifies four general styles of Pinoy management.

Management-by-kayod (working like a dog) or Realist Manager is wielded by anautocrat who wants quick action, has gut feeling, priority-oriented, strives for optimalperformance, knows how to use people and resources, cuts problems down tomanageable size, practical, fast decision-maker, impatient and shrewd. The realistmanager places applicants against each other and hires the one that “survives”.

Management-by-l ibro (book) or Idealist Manager is a thinker and technocrat; ismeticulous, cautious, stubborn, planning-oriented and systematic; strives for professional performance; thinks first before deciding; seeks quality results; and hashigh ideals. The idealist manager chooses high-quality applicants with suitabledegrees and training.

Management-by-lusot (shortcuts, bribery, rule breaking) or OpportunistManager is willy-nilly, has no conscience, loves to get by, likes to resort to shakydeals to achieve easy settlements, avoids headaches, and believes in non-money-no-work philosophy. The opportunist manager headhunts people to take in.

Ugnayan (movement to interrelate)-management or Reconciler-Manager is across of idealist and realist manager, believes in contingency management, solid,shares his knowledge, and has excellent behavioral skills. In hiring, the reconciler-manager gets partly experienced candidates then tries them out and screens themmeticulously.

How do they act during implementation? The Realist Manager does-evaluates-plans alittle-does. The Idealist Manager plans a lot-does-evaluates-replans a lot. TheOpportunist Manager plans-does-does again and again. The Reconciler-Manager evaluates-plans-does and at the same time evaluates again.

Franco believes that Idealist-Managers eventually realize that they are ineffective in reallife and become Realist Managers. The same goes for the Opportunity Managers. The



19

best of the four are the Reconciler-Managers, claims Franco. It is noteworthy that thistype is equipped with superior human relations skills.

KOOPMAN, MIEL, AND MISNER’S AUTOCRATIC AND DEMOCRATICADMINISTRATOR

Koopman, Miel, and Misner, described 2 kinds of administrator; autocratic and

democratic.

Autocratic administrator

1. Thinks he can sit by himself and see all angles of a problem

2. Does not know how to use the experience of others3. Cannot bear to let any of the strings of management slip from his fingers

4. Is so tied to routine details that he seldom tackles the larger job

5. Is jealous of ideas. Reacts in one of several ways when someone else makes a

proposal.

Assumes that a suggestion implies criticism and is offended.

Kills a suggestion which does not at once strike him as excellent with a

withering or sarcastic remark

While seeming to reject it, neatly captures the idea and restates it as his

own, giving no credit to the originator of the idea

6. Makes decisions that should have been made by the group

7. Adopts a paternalistic attitude towards the group. “I know best”

8. Expects hero worship, giggles of delight at his attempt at humor, and so forth.

9. Does not admit even to himself that he is autocratic.

10. Sacrifices everything to the end of securing a smooth running system

11. Is greedy for publicity

12. Gives to others as few opportunities for leadership as possible. Makes committee

assignments, then outlines all duties and performs many of them himself.

Democratic administrator

1. Realizes the potential power in 30 or 50 brains.

2. Knows how to utilize that power.

3. Knows how to delegate duties.

4. Frees himself from routines in order to turn his energy to creative leadership



20

5. Is quick to recognize and praise an idea that comes from someone else.

6. Refers to the group all matters that concern the group

7. Maintains the position of friendly, helpful adviser both on personal and

professional matters.

8. Wishes to be respected as a fair and just individual as he respects others

9. Consciously practices democratic techniques

10. Is more concerned with the growth of individuals involved than with freedom from

annoyances.

11. Pushes others into the foreground so that they may taste success

12. Believes that as many individuals as possible should have opportunities to take

responsibility and exercise leadership.

summary of management and leadership styles

Documents