• All decision-making powers are centralized in the leader• Leaders do not entertain any suggestions or initiatives fromsubordinates• It permits quick decision-making, as only one person decides for thewhole group and keeps each decision to him/herself until he/shefeels it needs to be shared with the rest of the group• By virtue of their position and job responsibilities, they not onlycontrol the efforts of the team, but monitor them for completion –often under close scrutiny
• Little or no input from groupmembers• Leaders make the decisions• Group leaders dictate all the workmethods and processes• Group members are rarely trustedwith decisions or important tasks• Rely on threats and punishment toinfluence employees• Do not trust employees• Do not allow for employee input
• Employees become tense, fearful, or resentful• -Employees expect to have their opinions heard• -Employees begin depending on their manager to make alltheir decisions• -There is low employee morale, high turnover andabsenteeism and work stoppage• Group members were more likely to exit their group andtake their resources elsewhere if they were supervised byan autocratic style leader• Autocratic leadership is not a stable long-term solution tothe problem of public goods in groups.• autocratic leadership leads people to reconsider theirmembership and leave the group, thereby removingvaluable resources from it.
• Autocratic style leaders will do whatever they feel isnecessary to provide the common good.• They decide which group members should contribute howmuch without asking anyone for input.• Under an autocratic leader, group members were unhappyabout the amount of control they could exercise over thedecision-making process.• This type of leadership can threaten the stability of a group.• We hypothesized that autocratic leaders would threatengroup stability by provoking members to exit the group,thus removing vital resources from it.• If opportunities to voice their concerns are lacking, thengroup members will resort to exit, and if exit opportunitiesare absent, then they will resort to voice.
• Based on a notion of extended self-interest, group membersmay prefer to stay in a group with a democratic rather thanautocratic leader, because having some input into thedecision-making process may lead to better personaloutcomes in the long-run than having no input at all• In some cases Autocratic leaders maybe somebody fromoutside the group who was assigned to lead on an unclearbasis, rather than being elected by group members orappointed on the basis of particular leadership skills.Leaders are presumably more legitimate sources ofinfluence under the latter conditions.• Fewer members might have exited the autocratically ledgroups if their leaders had been elected or appointed onmerit.
• Decisions is faster than democratic style of leadership• It’s best used in situations where control is necessary, oftenwhere there is little margin for error.• When conditions are dangerous, rigid rules can keep people outof harm’s way.• According to the realist ideologists the only viable solution tosocial dilemma conflicts is the adoption of a coercive, non-democratic regime• For example, in his book Leviathan, the philosopher Hobbes(1651/1939) asserted that only a strong central authority orleader figure can save society from the ruthless competition ofselfish individuals. This is echoed in the work of manycontemporary writers who claim that social dilemma tragediescan only be prevented if groups are willing to implementdictatorial solutions.• There seems to be an assumption that autocratic leadershipeffectively resolves social dilemmas by forcing members to investin their group
• Autocratically led groups wereslightly more productive thandemocratically led groups incompleting various group tasks.• Autocratic leadership is regarded bymany analysts as the most efficientsolution to group conflicts involvingthe distribution of scarce resourcesor the provision of public goods
• Autocratic leadership is the coercive type ofleadership in which power concentrates in thehand of one person or a group of individual.• In this style of leadership decision and policymaking process decided by the single leaderwithout contribution of others.• It could have advantages for short term groupstability and anarchy, but it doesn’t havepositive impacts in long term.