Participative Leadership And How It Affects The Group Essay

In this leading undertaking the definition of participative will be given. There will besides be some background given on what makes up a participative leader. The advantages and disadvantages of utilizing this attack will be given and whether or non this attack worked in the group that I studied. The different leading manners will be discussed how they were incorporated into my research undertaking. In this research paper I will give an account of how I became a participative leader and how it affected the group that I was analyzing.

Participative leading or participative democratic leading “ is a manner of leading in which the leader involves subsidiaries in end scene, job resolution, squad edifice, etc. , but retains the concluding determination doing authorization ( Business Dictionary, 2010 ) ” . The facets that makeup a participative leader is the fact that it encourages group supervising, so that there can be better communicating among subsidiaries and leaders, coherence in the organisation, and less struggle among the group in order for the organisation to run expeditiously. This manner of leading helps to convey out the strengths of other persons in the organisation so they can hold some input into what needs to be done and how it should be done in order to be good to the organisation. As a participative you must be willing to allow others hold some of the power in the organisation, so that there can be less emphasis on the leader and helps with the continued success of the organisation.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The benefits of being a participative leader is the fact that it helps the leader to put more accent on his/her subsidiaries endowments, accomplishments, creativeness and believing power of the squad because the subsidiaries tend to be more familiar with what works for the organisation in order for it to go on to be successful. Another benefit of this leading manner is that it gives a leader the chance to acknowledge and find if its employee has the possible to go a future leader of the organisation. A 3rd benefit is that there is more determination credence because employees are more likely to accept a determination that another colleague at a manus in because it is based on past experience. This manner besides encourages the active engagement of all employees form top to bottom in all facets of determination devising activities in the organisation expect for the concluding determination in which is left up to the leader.

Another benefit to this is that it increases the figure of solutions that the leader and subsidiaries have to take from in order to happen the best possible solution that will outdo profit the organisation. There are state of affairss in which participative or democratic leading should non be used and it is when there is non adequate clip to acquire everyone sentiment on how things should be done in a given state of affairs. I believe that leaders should ever do the clip to acquire everyone ‘s sentiment because the subsidiaries tend to cognize what works in the organisation. Another state of affairs in which participative leading should non be used is when it is “ more cost-efficient for the leader to do the determinations ( Vector Study.com, 2008 ) ” .

Another ground why this survey should non be used is when the director feels threatened by its subsidiaries input because other direction forces may experience that they do n’t cognize anything about their occupation. Another ground why this manner should non be used is in a state of affairs where the subsidiary ‘s safety is put at hazard, i.e. there are non plenty employees available to finish the undertaking even if the leader has stepped in to assist. A last ground non to utilize this manner of leading is when there is major opposition from employees and it will be better to lodge with the leading manner that is already in usage in the organisation. The leading attacks used up to this point in our text are Charismatic leading, democratic or participative, Laissez-Faire, people-oriented, task-oriented, transactional and transformational leading.

A magnetic leader is a leader who acts with high energy in his/her company, this type of leader are excessively high strong of a leader and does non suit my leading manner. A Individualistic leader is a leader that does n’t care what his employee does because his employees already have the cognition of what needs to be done, this type of leading manner does n’t hold adequate interaction between leaders and employees. The people-oriented leader makes certain that its employees have the proper support on issues, preparation and development so everyone can be happy. My ground for non utilizing this manner of leading is because the leader merely offers support but does n’t really assist his employees.

Task-oriented leader is concerned with the occupation and the assigned work of each employee needed to acquire to the overall end. This leading manner to me nowadayss for there to be a batch of emphasis and struggle in the organisation and that is one thing that I do non desire for my employees. Transactional leading is a leading manner that implies that group members are willing to follow all the leaders ‘ orders when they take on a given undertaking. The ground why I did non utilize this leading manner is because it makes me experience as if I were a dictator ; I want employees to hold their ain sentiments and non merely mine.

A transformational leading is a leader that looks at everything and likes employees that get things done. I liked this leading manner because this manner looked to the hereafter but it did n’t acquire any input from employees on how future programs would be met. The last leading manner was democratic or participative leading in which the leader invites input from employees on how things should be ran in the organisation and is willing to assist employees to finish a undertaking when they are shorthanded but finally do the concluding determination on what is traveling to be done. I choose this manner because it allows me to work custodies on with my employees, so that I can happen out what their thoughts are, alterations that should be made, and how to work out jobs in a speedy and efficient manner.

The ground why I consider myself a participative leader is the fact that I use authorization when needed to assist employees who are non to the full knowing of all processs in the organisation. I besides feel that in utilizing this manner of leading helps me to better interact with my employees, so that I can hold a better apprehension of who I am as a leader, see how my employees work in a given state of affairs, and see if any alterations need to be made for there to be continued success in the organisation. I besides feel like I am a good at deputation because I am able to see how knowing an employee is and can depute some of my leading duties to them. I know that I am non an expert in all facets of the organisation but I welcome every bit much input as possible from employees and other leaders in order to come up with a solution that will be good to the organisation.

Scenario:

Mrs. Crumpton has a Masters grade in leading and owns a confer withing house that helps companies with leading issues that they are confronting in happening what leading manner would be affectional for the success of their organisation. Mrs. Crumpton has 15 old ages of experience in analyzing organisations and directing them on which manner would be affectional for them. The company that Mrs. Crumpton was hired to analyse was SC Company, it has been in concern for about 8 old ages and the major issue in the company has been that the production director has been uneffective and the employees in Mr. Edwards section have been using their ain leading manners. Ms. Andrews is the adjunct production director in the section uses magnetic leading manner because other employees in the section like her high energy in acquiring things done in the section.

Mrs. Andrews realized that by speaking to Mrs. Crumpton that she was more of a Individualistic leader who does n’t give employees any input on how or what they are suppose to be making because she feels that they are knowing plenty to make it on their ain. Mr. Edwards on the other manus was afraid to demo his leading manner because he felt that it would be rejected by his employees. Mrs. Crumptons analyzation of Mr. Edwards is that he is a participative leader. Mr. Edwards agreed with this analysis because he welcomes employees input on what should be done and how jobs should be solved in the company. He proposed this type of leading manner to his employees and they welcomed it because they saw that he was more involved with what they were making. The other employees in the production section said that they would take on this leading manner because it allows for everyone ‘s input on a given state of affairs.

The employees in the production section would utilize this manner to better trade with alterations that have been made and helps in the analysis of future leaders. Employees besides like this manner because they have more freedom and are able to voice their concerns without anyone stating them that their sentiment does n’t count when seeking to happen a solution to a job. In my sentiment on the given leading manner is that it worked because it helped the leader to find what leading manner that it had. This leading manner besides worked because it helps to convey the section together as a squad and helped with productiveness and coherence.

The strengths of the participative leading is that employees tend to “ experience of import, well-thought-of and recognized as valuables ” to the company ( Moutet, 2010 ) . Another strength of this leading manner is that it helps employees to demo their section what they learned and what they hope to carry through while utilizing this manner. This manner besides encourages employees to make more in the company and go more aroused about what they do in the company. A failing of this manner of leading is that the determination procedure can be clip devouring.

Another failing is that this manner can be misused because a director tends to set off more of the determination doing procedure on employees, so that they can avoid making it themselves. A 3rd failing is that this manner allows others to force their positions off on others, doing the leader to pick that position because they feel pushed into it. The last failing of this manner is that it can do a failure of direction control doing more jobs in the company. A director must maintain control of all facets of this leading manner, so that he and employees do n’t acquire overwhelmed and they do n’t experience that they are being pushed to make excessively much.

In decision I gave background on what participative leading is and what makes up a participative leader. I besides listed the other leading manners and explained why I did non pick those manners. This leading undertaking allowed me to show the benefits and disadvantages of utilizing this manner of leading. There was besides a scenario given to demo how this leading manner was used and whether it worked in this state of affairs or non.