argumentative essay of leadership style
ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY ON LEADERSHIP
A leader is one who keeps the vision in front of the people. He is also one who has an influential relationship with his subordinates so as to direct them towards the vision. Different leadership styles would affect an organisation differently, perhaps producing different results. As for me, I think the democratic leadership would result in greater productivity in the workplace.
Firstly, democratic leadership is participatory. This means that leaders allow everyone to share ideas, input or suggestions while maintaining the final decision. Since the group members may possess various skills and abilities, the leader capitalises on them to bring out contributions of higher quality.
Secondly, another argument for democratic leadership is that there is more motivation for performance. This is because members feel they are appreciated as their suggestions are considered. Also, with involvement comes a sense of responsibility. This ultimately creates a positive environment for better job performance and productivity.
The third argument is that democratic leadership offers empowerment to group members. There is a sense of trust and respect between the members and their leader. As a result, there will be better working relationship that leads to productivity.
However, some arguments against democratic leadership would be that ‘too many cooks spoil the broth’. With many different ideas and opinions, conflicts and misunderstanding can result. This can dampen motivation and work performance. Another counter argument is that democratic leaders are too lenient as they offer reward and appreciation freely. These may cause members to be laid back as there is no pressure to perform. Nevertheless, ‘two heads are better than one’. It is better to have members that contribute than to have none. As for the second counter argument, non-performing individuals will gradually get involved when they see others becoming successful.
In conclusion,
A leader is one who keeps the vision in front of the people. He is also one who has an influential relationship with his subordinates so as to direct them towards the vision. Different leadership styles would affect an organisation differently, perhaps producing different results. As for me, I think the democratic leadership would result in greater productivity in the workplace.
Firstly, democratic leadership is participatory. This means that leaders allow everyone to share ideas, input or suggestions while maintaining the final decision. Since the group members may possess various skills and abilities, the leader capitalises on them to bring out contributions of higher quality.
Secondly, another argument for democratic leadership is that there is more motivation for performance. This is because members feel they are appreciated as their suggestions are considered. Also, with involvement comes a sense of responsibility. This ultimately creates a positive environment for better job performance and productivity.
The third argument is that democratic leadership offers empowerment to group members. There is a sense of trust and respect between the members and their leader. As a result, there will be better working relationship that leads to productivity.
However, some arguments against democratic leadership would be that ‘too many cooks spoil the broth’. With many different ideas and opinions, conflicts and misunderstanding can result. This can dampen motivation and work performance. Another counter argument is that democratic leaders are too lenient as they offer reward and appreciation freely. These may cause members to be laid back as there is no pressure to perform. Nevertheless, ‘two heads are better than one’. It is better to have members that contribute than to have none. As for the second counter argument, non-performing individuals will gradually get involved when they see others becoming successful.
In conclusion,