What Is Authoritarian Leadership? | Definition, Pros, And Cons Of Authoritarian Leaders

A company’s leadership can determine its success. Successful companies understand the importance of quality leadership.

In 1939, psychologist Kurt Lewin and a team of researchers worked together to identify the different leadership styles.

Their research identified three leadership styles:

1. Authoritarian leadership (or autocratic leadership)

2. Participative leadership (or democratic leadership)

3. Delegative leadership (or laissez-faire leadership)

While there are leadership skills that all good leaders possess, there are many different leadership styles. We are no longer confined to the three styles determined by Kurt Lewin’s team nearly a century ago.

Each style of leadership is best suited for certain scenarios. Good leaders understand when to implement one style over the other. This is considered “situational leadership.”

Situational leadership is a newer concept, developed in 1969 by Ken Blanchard and Paul Hersey. However, we still hold to the belief that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to leadership today. Instead, truly effective leaders can read a situation and adjust their approach—tailoring their leadership style to the situation.

Authoritarian leadership was one of Lewin’s original three, and it is a leadership style we still see implemented today.

What Is Authoritarian Leadership?

Authoritarian leadership, or autocratic leadership as it is often called, is a leadership style that implements a “my way or the highway” philosophy.

Leaders who implement this style of leadership control every aspect of decision-making. Think dictatorship versus leadership: Napoleon Bonaparte, Adolf Hitler, and Fidel Castro were all considered authoritarian leaders.

An authoritarian leader focuses on control, discipline, and organization. There is an expectation of obedience and compliance. Employees are expected to accept the leader’s decisions as final and not question any decision or direction given. Those who step out of line are likely to be punished.

Authoritarian leaders lay down the law and leave no wiggle room. There will be clearly defined and strictly enforced rules, many regulations, and sometimes severe penalties with authoritarian leadership.

They make all the decisions with little to no input from their managers or employees. It is unlikely they would even bother to consult anyone on their decisions.

One of Lewin’s original three leadership styles, authoritarian leadership, was the most prominent leadership style at the time. While it is still prevalent in many ways, it is no longer the prominent leadership style in business.

While some business leaders have certainly found success with this leadership style—Martha Stewart, Bill Gates, and Donald Trump are considered authoritarian leaders in business—it is not often successful in the long term.

Authoritarian leaders will often display negative traits such as manipulative behavior, intimidation tactics, and blatant bullying. The overbearing and sometimes hostile environment created by this leadership style will negatively impact employees in the long term.

Authoritarian Leadership vs. Authoritative Leadership

Though the terms “authoritarian” and “authoritative” sound nearly identical and are often used interchangeably, this is a mistake. Authoritarian leaders and authoritative leaders are quite different.

Authoritarian leaders are referred to as dictatorial leaders and often abuse their power. They rely on commands and control, threatening punishment for anyone who does not comply with their strict rules and regulations. As a result, employees feel controlled and lack motivation.

Authoritative leaders, on the other hand, are often referred to as visionary leaders. They implement a “come with me” approach and attempt to guide their employees by example. As a result, employees feel a sense of accomplishment, and they feel valued and motivated.

Though they sound incredibly similar, they mean quite the opposite. Where authoritarian leaders try to control, authoritative leaders try to mentor.

Characteristics of an Authoritarian Leader

Each leadership style will have its own set of characteristics that make it easily identifiable. If you aren’t sure what leadership style your manager or boss uses, you can easily determine the style based on these characteristics.

You can identify authoritarian leaders by how they behave in the workplace. Leaders who implement an authoritarian leadership style:

• They are often controlling and manipulative

• Provide little to no feedback to their subordinates

• Accept little to no input from employees or managers

• Do not give praise to employees, instead choosing only to point out what the employee did wrong

• Make all decisions

• They are often perfectionists and demand excellence from those who serve them

• Tend to harbor feelings of superiority

• Dictate all methods and processes with no wiggle room

• Create a highly structured environment

• Discourage creative thinking and initiative

• Provide clearly defined rules and processes

• Directly supervise and monitor employees

• Are competitive and action-oriented

• Micromanage employees every step of the way

The Consequences of Authoritarian Leadership

When a leader is described as a controlling, manipulative, micromanager often equated to a dictator, it isn’t hard to believe there are consequences to this leadership style.

Draconian, inflexible, overbearing; all words used to describe authoritarian leaders. This leadership style has consequences even in the short term.

Employees who work under authoritarian leaders often display increased stress levels. These levels are even higher when the leader expects blind obedience and mistake-free work and punishes harshly when expectations are unmet.

This leadership style is demoralizing and, unsurprisingly, leads to a high turnover rate. With leaders who are not often empathetic and are often openly hostile, this comes as no surprise. It is difficult to retain employees when they are being undermined and abused.

In the long term, this style of leadership often leads to abuses of power. In addition, employees subjected to this leadership style for extended periods grow resentful, feel undervalued, and lack motivation.

A Time and Place for Authoritarian Leadership

The authoritarian leadership style should not be used long-term. It can be more damaging than rewarding. And, while it can do damage even in the short term, there is a time and a place for authoritarian leadership.

Situational leadership recognizes that all leadership styles have their place. Authoritarian leadership is no different. However, there are certainly situations where this leadership style should be applied.

1. When there is urgency. If a task needs to be completed quickly or a decision needs to be made soon, this leadership style can help to move the process forward at an elevated pace.

   With limited time for planning or processing and responsibility for the decision falling on the person in charge, deciding with little to no input from others makes sense. It simplifies the situation and expedites the process; things will keep moving forward.

2. When there is danger. If the conditions on the job are dangerous, implementing and enforcing strict rules and procedures is necessary. Closely monitoring employees in this situation would also be considered necessary.

3. When there is a lack of experience. If the team, or specific team members, do not have the skills or experience required to complete certain tasks, a more authoritarian leadership style may be needed.

4. When performance needs to be monitored closely. Closely monitoring employees, even micromanaging each step, can help identify problems and take corrective action.

5. When strict coordination is crucial to productivity. In situations like this, it can be easier to leave decision-making to the leadership to allow employees to focus on their tasks and responsibilities.

In addition to certain situations, some industries are better suited to authoritarian leadership.

The manufacturing industry relies on consistent quality and impressive productivity. With strict daily quotas and potentially dangerous environments, an authoritarian leadership style makes sense for this industry.

The military is entirely authoritarian. However, unlike other industries or jobs, this leadership style is expected. People do not enlist in the military expecting to have a commanding officer (CO) who employs a participative or democratic leadership style.

Like the manufacturing industry, construction relies on quality and productivity within a dangerous environment. The authoritarian leadership style once again suits the industry.

Final Thoughts

Though the authoritarian leadership style can have benefits — boosts in productivity, fewer mistakes made, etc.— it is not good for morale. It can result in resentment and high employee turnover rates.

It certainly has its place in the world of business. However, some situations and industries are perfectly suited to this leadership style, whereas other leadership styles could be detrimental.

But, this is not a long-term leadership solution. Situational leadership is a much more effective leadership style that allows for all leadership styles so long as they suit the situation.

A good leader can make an organization just as easily as a bad one can break it. Good leaders will tailor their leadership style to their employees as well as their work environments and expectations.

Some authoritarian leaders have found success with this style long-term. The examples listed above—Martha Stewart, Bill Gates, and Donald Trump—are all extremely successful businessmen and women. They should be viewed as the exception and not the rule.

In reality, the authoritarian leadership style leads to a hostile work environment that dampens creativity and destroys morale. However, just because the person in charge has more experience, more knowledge, more anything doesn’t mean that the input of others is unnecessary.

Just think about the words used to describe authoritarian leaders:

• Dictator

• Draconian

• Manipulative

• Controlling

• Bully

• Tyrant

Those aren’t pretty words. And, while there are certainly some leaders who adopt this style who don’t fall into these categorizations, the majority will. Even if the leader is kind in handling things, it can still lead to employees feeling undervalued and unappreciated.

People don’t want to feel like they’re just another cog in the machine. They want to feel like what they’re doing has value, that it matters.

Author

Samantha Goddiess

Samantha is a lifelong writer who has been writing professionally for the last six years. After graduating with honors from Greensboro College with a degree in English & Communications, she went on to find work as an in-house copywriter for several companies including Costume Supercenter, and Blueprint Education.