<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on Can an autocratic leadership style work? ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-23T21:14:56-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Message has been deleted.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3305978]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3305978]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[emicsoft123]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2010 23:08:00 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Excellent question]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3060181]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The answer is &quot;You can't.&quot;  Many posters to this discussion appear to be incapable of grasping this concept.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3060181]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[NickNielsen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:41:41 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Autocracy in transactional roles]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3059972]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Ok - I'm new here, please be gentle!Surely there is still a place for Autocratic style leadership in transactional type role, where creativity or innovation is not required.  For example, a McDonalds employee works in a highly structured, processed environment.  How can you be democratic or transformational in this type of industry?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3059972]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[haylesshave@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 12:19:38 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Slipping back]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3049680]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I can understand your point Mihnea. When managers, not leaders backs are against the wall they will go back to what they are comfortable with; which may be the &quot;do it my way because I said so&quot; style.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3049680]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Gh0stMaker@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2009 05:42:27 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: You are probably a very good leader]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3048876]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The environment you describe is scary. I think that this kind of managers is a huge barrier to organizational innovation. They fit into what is known as mechanistic organization. In most cases, you'd see that such individuals are intrinsically incompetent. They use this autocratic approach to shield their incompetence. I honestly think that good to great managers first value their people because good to great organizations consider people as their primary capital.I would suggest anyone to read &quot;Why Some Companies Make the Leap... and Others Don't&quot; (Jim Collins) and &quot;The Customer Comes Second: Put Your People First and Watch 'em Kick Butt&quot; by Hal Rosenbluth and Diane Mcferrin Peters. No human work is perfect. However, these two books provide excellent insight that can help both organizational leaders and the people they lead.Have a great weekend!J-P]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3048876]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jperick.mbei@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 05:35:57 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Well said Danny,]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3045494]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[In technology professionals for the most part can do their skill set with many companies. The environment to success is what we'll keep them from going to a better company environment.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3045494]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Gh0stMaker@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 06:51:45 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[You are probably a very good leader]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3044481]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Why do I make that assertion?  Because only those who are confident in their ability to grow and adapt are willing to try to look at a situation and determine if maybe they need to modify something about themselves in order to achieve a mutually beneficial goal.Almost all the bad managers I have endured are all inward focused.  Their sense of worth comes from others (ususally their boss) affirming that they have done a fine job.  Their focus is literally on forwarding their own careers.  Promoting others is the last thing on their mind, especially if others do not see the world exactly as they do.  Ultimately, they usually aren't even that concerned about the company that they sacrifice their staff to.  The goal is to feather their own nest, and to heck with anyone else.Since the opinions of others - especially staff - do not come into play with managers like this, any considerations about how they can become better at the job typically do not include dialogue with the &quot;enemy&quot; (which is how employees who don't hold similar opinions to theirs are treated).  I have heard from such managers the common question &quot;What do these people want from me?!&quot;  It never occurs to them to ask the people in question.  Or if they do ask, they are mightily angered when less than complimentary feedback is the result.I have worked for several egoists who declared that their way was the only correct way.  And in one extreme case, the manager stated that if others would only open their minds, they would see just how right he was (and, by extension, how wrong they were).  For another, he saw the right way as delivering *exactly* whatever his boss dictated, regardless of the terms, the deadlines, the consequences.  In his case, staff were mere chess pieces to be reactively played, sacrificed or cast aside as needed to fulfill the latest dictates.  It never occurred to him that perhaps his people needed representation, support and advocacy from the company.  And the idea that perhaps his staff could even assist him with the goal of being more responsive if their needs were considered as well was totally foreign for him.  Both were terrors to work for, even though their motivations were fairly different from each other.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3044481]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[ThePoster]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2009 10:30:17 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Completely Agree!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3044468]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Thank you, Jean-Pierre, for verbalizing my thoughts so eloquently.Case in point - I currently work for an individual who has (I guess) studied many of the mechanics of management, but who (by way of his behavior) has internalized virtually nothing of the essence of management.  He tends to think that most of his staff simply don't &quot;get&quot; him, and that many of us have problems.  It never occurs to him that perhaps he may be the source of some of his problems.  He also doesn't seem to understand why many of his staff are reluctant - or refuse outright - to give anything more than just the bare minimum to get by.  He is an obstacle to be endured.  While he does deliver the numbers that make his boss happy, he doesn't seem to place any value on engendering the respect and benevolent regard of his minions.I hope that he never suffers a serious setback professionally.  He has generated such ill will towards himself that many would actually relish seeing him fail.  Which I find to be quite sad, actually.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3044468]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[ThePoster]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2009 09:56:06 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[That may be the point]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3044463]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[From reading through the various responses on this thread, I would say that most people who do not agree with the autocratic management style share the same basic issue - namely, that this style can be useful only if certain conditions exist.  Otherwise, autocratic management can be a powerfully destructive weapon.  Unfortunately, the majority of management that I have experienced use the autocratic management style nearly 100% of the time.  It is only (partially) relaxed for those who behave in a way that implies agreement with whatever management directs.  Any difference in opinion - let alone actual dissent - is viewed as a form of disloyalty, a bent towards being a loose cannon, and being a subversive malcontent.Do I think that autocratic methods are sometimes necessary?  Yes.  But as a knowledge worker, I feel that having to rely on that method a majority of the time indicates that something is wrong.  Either staff have been misallocated, or management is insufficiently skilled in leadership.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3044463]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[ThePoster]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2009 09:08:43 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[It's always nice to see...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3043305]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[...somebody who doesn't allow facts to color his opinions.The military has the lion's share of the national budget?  Where did you get your numbers?  This link: http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm ?  This sentence on that page made me laugh out loud: [We added $162 billion to the last item to supplement the Budget?s grossly underestimated $38 billion in ?allowances? to be spent in 2009 for the ?War on Terror,? which includes the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan].In other words, &quot;The numbers didn't say what we wanted them to, so we changed them until they did.&quot;  Their problem is obvious...as is yours.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3043305]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[NickNielsen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 18:28:04 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Standard models]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3043226]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Why do we keep hearing about the military as a model?They FAIL every single time they have a job to do.&quot;Bring us more billions&quot; is ALWAYS the cry once actual battle is joined, despite having the lion's share of the national budget.Can't do the job despite having 6 times more to spend than all competitors combined?FAILURE!!!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3043226]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[mykmlr@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 15:14:03 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[&quot;...Armed forces work very clearly in this viewpoint,...&quot;]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3043224]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Which is why Iraq went so well, yes?So well the nation fell back on BRIBES to get Shieks to do our killing of resistance FOR US because we could not find them.No input, no adaptation, no flexibility...no success.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3043224]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[mykmlr@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 15:11:19 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Yes, SOME people indeed]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3043221]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[egomaniac sociopaths do tend to hate it when the facts about exploitation, capitalism, coercion and yes, Nazism, are brought into the conversation.In the end, Capitalism is only allowed to continue in order to serve the need in every economy to MOVE PROFITS DOWN THE FOODCHAIN.Any other system would work as well...if the profiteers didn't control access to capital.They do, so we all put up with it.Repeat 1932, you get another FDR.Or another Hitler.Simple as that.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3043221]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[mykmlr@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 15:06:34 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Interesting topic for the times we live]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3042806]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I think it's very interesting such a topic should arise during the current economic conditions! As part of a former communist country, I witnessed how the management style has gone through autocratic to semi-consultative to democratic over the last 20 years. It was a mentality change our leaders (or managers if you prefer this appellation) had to go through, and they did so especially after working together with managers from different countries or after attending western management schools.But the change was very slow, painfully slow for the ones who were young enough to begin their work life under the new economic order. Now when the times are tough again I am sadly witnessing a new rise of the autocratic style, usually from the very same people who actually never changed on the inside, but who borrowed a mask and worn it willy-nilly. It's quite a favorable environment for such kind of people, when employment options are scarce and people are afraid of what comes tomorrow that they are lowering their heads and obeying. It seems that the ones who resort back to this leadership style are the entrepreneurs in the initial stages of their business, or the ones who behaved like this years ago and who were forced to change with the times.It's so sad this is happening again. I am not sure if it's happening only in the ex-communist countries or if this is a hot topic for western societies as well.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3042806]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Mihnea D. Mironescu]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 08:02:44 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Do you prefer the term adaptive?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3041437]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[You are correct that consistency is vitally important.  Your staff need to know and be able to predict (at least reasonably well) your approach based on circumstances, but they can be different responses based on different circumstances.A low urgency task assigned to a trusted and competent staff member/team may only require a brief comment of the need and then a few casual checks as to whether they need any support around the coffee pot to achieve a successful outcome.A critical task during a crisis assigned to the same staff member/team, may require a dictatorial command of precisely what is required.What is important for this consistency is mutual respect and trust.  You need to know your staff/teams (and their capacities and capabilities) and they need to know you and respect that if you are dictating (after they have earned the right to not be dictated to), there is a reason (it's not that you are just having a bad day).  It's worthwhile to have a debrief after any crisis (situation when you will dictate to staff who have earned the &quot;trusted and competent&quot; descriptor), to let everyone know what was happening.  This reinforces that your dictates were for a reason, even if you didn't stop to let them know at the time.As you can infer from the above, I believe that you can make levels of autonomy an &quot;earnable&quot; reward.  Demonstrate competence (in specific areas) and dedication and you earn more autonomy (except in emergencies) in those areas.  BUT this only works if you are as demanding of yourself.  If you don't know about an area, you must ask those that do - even if they are your subordinates.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3041437]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[kenr@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 15:11:57 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[What about the Worker or Work Type?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3041247]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[This concern may fall under 'situational' leadership, but frankly, I think when you deal with KNOWLEDGE WORKERS, you are not dealing with people who respond well to autocrats. The folks that like a set job which doesn't change from day to day and requires no independent thought don't fit well into a knowledge work environment. You can perhaps manage those specific employees better by being more commanding, but you cannot improve the output of the department until you get some _real_ knowledge workers, the kind that won't put up with bad mgmt.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3041247]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[minstrelmike@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:39:11 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Correct ....]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3040950]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The idea that someone is &quot;born a leader&quot; is pretty much bull.Yes, there are those who, through a combination of genetics AND early life experiences and learning, seem to be &quot;natural&quot; leaders.  That is they become good leaders without formal training in the subject.  And who, if given formal training, can become OUTSTANDING leaders, with skills above that obtainable by most who do not start out with the same early advantages.Much the same as there are those athletes who are born with just the right genetic characteristics so as to have a natural ability (above average) to excel at certain types of physical activity.However, if said &quot;natural born&quot; athlete does not actually train, practice, and learn his/her sport well.  He or she may well lose in a competition to someone without as much genetic advantage, but who has trained very hard and well, and spent the time to learn all the aspects of the sport.The point is, that genetics alone is not a final determining factor.  Maybe not even the most important one.We are humans, not simple animals.  And the human brain is capable of learning to be pretty darned good at learning to do something which does not &quot;come naturally&quot;.Even a person not particularly inclined, by genetics and early learned behavior, to be a good leader can LEARN to be a good leader.  If so motivated and presented with good training and education.  Maybe not as good as a so-called &quot;born leader&quot; who has precisely the same training and motivation to learn. But good, nonetheless.FWIW, as to your comments as to whether or not bad leaders know that they're bad.In my experience, some do, some don't.Hard to change or improve the ones that don't.  For instance, I am reminded of one particular individual who was a bad leader.  Oh, he got things done by his people.  By threats, intimidation, trickery, and so forth.  Which was the problem.  He did get things done. Even if the methods sucked.So even tho he was sent through a couple leadership courses, he pretty much mentally dismissed 90% of everything taught, barely paid attention to the remaining 10%.  In his mind, and I know from having discussed this with him ... he didn't give a r*t's a** about all that stuff.  Since his methods WORKED.  Got stuff done.  That was enough to make him happy.  He didn't care if those he lead liked him or not.  Didn't care if they applied for transfers at every opportunity.  Etc.  He simply didn't care about anything except achieving his own personal goals and advancement.I did admire him for that.  At least he was honest.Not that this made me any happier with him.And in fact, before I left the job where I worked for him I set certain things up so that he later experienced a catastrophic fall, so to speak.  Events happened that guaranteed he'd never see another promotion.  And in fact he was reassigned to duties that kept him at of the way, and out of mischief for the next couple years.  At which time he was eligible for retirement, and in fact HIS bosses insisted he do so.  Or else.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3040950]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Osiyo53@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 04:35:18 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Agreed]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3040488]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I still recall in the early 90s, my boss asking me where I wanted to be in a couple of years. I was a rising star in the desktop support world, doing support and projects around desktop software. I told her point blank, I didn't want her job. She was a little startled, and I explained that I didn't want the administrative and political aspects of the job.She rewarded my candor by making me fill in for her while she took a 3 week vacation. I learned alot from her boss, and I eventually took on a management position of my own.James]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3040488]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JamesRL]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 12:33:38 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[The Handshake was explained to me,]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3040480]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[by a former member of the Glasgow Junior Rangers in the mid 70s. I'm thinking he'd have known from pratical experience.If you young'uns change the convention, you can't expect me to keep up. James]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3040480]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JamesRL]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:41:13 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Yes, lets!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3040417]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[But....Being Scottish I know the answer anyway!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-304406-3040417]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[The 'G-Man.']]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 10:37:54 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

