Autocratic Leadership

Key Characteristics, Strengths, and Weaknesses of Autocratic Leadership

Autocratic leadership, also known as authoritarian leadership, is a leadership

style characterized by individual control over all decisions and little input from group
members. Autocratic leaders typically make choices based on their ideas and
judgments and rarely accept advice from followers. Autocratic leadership involves
absolute, authoritarian control over a group.

Like other leadership styles, the autocratic style has both some benefits and some
weaknesses. While those who rely on this approach to heavily are often seen as bossy
or dictator-like, this level of control can have benefits and be useful in certain
situations.

When and where the authoritarian style is most useful can depend on factors such as
the situation, the type of task the group is working on, and characteristics of the team
members. If you tend to utilize this type of leadership with a group, learning more about
your style and the situations in which this style is the most effective can be helpful.

Characteristics
Some of the primary characteristics of autocratic leadership include:1

 Allows little or no input from group members

 Requires leaders to make almost all of the decisions
 Provides leaders with the ability to dictate work methods and processes
 Leaves group feeling like they aren't trusted with decisions or important tasks
 Tends to create highly structured and very rigid environments
 Discourages creativity and out-of-the box thinking
 Establishes rules and tends to be clearly outlined and communicated

Benefits
The autocratic style tends to sound quite negative. It certainly can be when overused or
applied to the wrong groups or situations. However, autocratic leadership can be
beneficial in some instances, such as when decisions need to be made quickly without
consulting with a large group of people.

Some projects require strong leadership to get things accomplished quickly and

efficiently. When the leader is the most knowledgeable person in the group, the
autocratic style can lead to fast and effective decisions. The autocratic leadership style
can be useful in the following instances:2
Provides Direction
Autocratic leadership can be effective in small groups where leadership is
lacking. Have you ever worked with a group of students or co-workers on a project
that got derailed by poor organization, a lack of leadership and an inability to set
deadlines?

If so, the chances are that your grade or job performance suffered as a result. In such
situations, a strong leader who utilizes an autocratic style can take charge of the group,
assign tasks to different members, and establish solid deadlines for projects to be
finished.

These types of group projects tend to work better when one person is either assigned
the role of leader or simply takes on the job on their own. By setting clear roles,
assigning tasks, and establishing deadlines, the group is more likely to finish the
project on time and with everyone providing equal contributions.

Relieves Pressure
This leadership style can also be used well in cases where a great deal of pressure is
involved. In situations that are particularly stressful, such as during military conflicts,
group members may prefer an autocratic style.

This allows members of the group to focus on performing specific tasks without
worrying about making complex decisions. This also allows group members to
become highly skilled at performing certain duties, which is ultimately beneficial to
the success of the entire group.

Offers Structure
Manufacturing and construction work can also benefit from the autocratic style. In
these situations, it is essential that each person have a clearly assigned task, a deadline,
and rules to follow.

Autocratic leaders tend to do well in these settings because they ensure that projects
are finished on time and that workers follow safety rules to prevent accidents and
injuries.

Downsides
While autocratic leadership can be beneficial at times, there are also many instances
where this leadership style can be problematic. People who abuse an autocratic
leadership style are often viewed as bossy, controlling, and dictatorial. This can
sometimes result in resentment among group members.

Group members can end up feeling that they have no input or say in how things or
done, and this can be particularly problematic when skilled and capable members of a
team are left feeling that their knowledge and contributions are undermined. Some
common problems with autocratic leadership:2
Discourages Group Input
Because autocratic leaders make decisions without consulting the group, people in the
group may dislike that they are unable to contribute ideas. Researchers have also found
that autocratic leadership often results in a lack of creative solutions to problems,
which can ultimately hurt the group from performing.

Autocratic leaders tend to overlook the knowledge and expertise that group members
might bring to the situation. Failing to consult with other team members in such
situations hurts the overall success of the group.
Hurts Morale
Autocratic leadership can also impair the morale of the group in some cases. People
tend to feel happier and perform better when they feel like they are making
contributions to the future of the group. Since autocratic leaders typically do not allow
input from team members, followers start to feel dissatisfied and stifled.

How to Be Successful
The autocratic style can be beneficial in some settings, but also has its pitfalls and is
not appropriate for every setting and with every group. If this tends to be your
dominant leadership style, there are things that you should consider whenever you are
in a leadership role.2
Listen to Team Members
You might not change your mind or implement their advice, but subordinates need to
feel that they can express their concerns. Autocratic leaders can sometimes make team
members feel ignored or even rejected.

Listening to people with an open mind can help them feel like they are making an
important contribution to the group's mission.
Establish Clear Rules
In order to expect team members to follow your rules, you need to first ensure that
guidelines are clearly established and that each person on your team is fully aware of
them.
Provide Tools
Once your subordinates understand the rules, you need to be sure that they actually
have the education and abilities to perform the tasks you set before them. If they need
additional assistance, offer oversight and training to fill in this knowledge gap.

Be Reliable
Inconsistent leaders can quickly lose the respect of their teams. Follow through and
enforce the rules you have established. Establish that you are a reliable leader and your
team is more likely to follow your guidance because you have built trust with them.

Recognize Success
Your team may quickly lose motivation if they are only criticized when they make
mistakes but never rewarded for their successes. Try to recognize success more than
you point out mistakes. By doing so, your team will respond much more favorably to
your correction.
A Word From Verywell
While autocratic leadership does have some potential pitfalls, leaders can learn to use
elements of this style wisely. For example, an autocratic style can be used effectively
in situations where the leader is the most knowledgeable member of the group or has
access to information that other members of the group do not.

Instead of wasting valuable time consulting with less knowledgeable team members,
the expert leader can quickly make decisions that are in the best interest of the group.
Autocratic leadership is often most effective when it is used for specific situations.
Balancing this style with other approaches including democratic or transformational
styles can often lead to better group performance.
Historically, autocratic leadership has been associated with tyrants and dictators who
used authoritarian means to cajole and threaten underlings into performing tasks
he combination of progressive ideas, self-determination and autocratic leadership led to
some of history’s most significant events. These include:

 The rise of the Roman Empire under Julius Caesar

 The settling of the U.S. Colonies thanks to John Smith
 The popularity of the automobile due to Henry Ford
Ford, who helped perfect assembly-line manufacturing and economies of scale, is one of the
clearest examples of an autocratic leader who changed society. Although Ford remains a
controversial figure as an authoritarian industrial magnet, he created hundreds of thousands
of jobs and raised wages for assembly-line workers.

Was Lincoln an autocratic leader?

President Abraham Lincoln is sometimes categorized as an autocratic leader because of the
many autonomous decisions he made throughout the Civil War.
Although Lincoln did not exhibit many of the authoritarian characteristics of autocratic
leaders, American history demanded a bold president who was willing to make difficult and
unpopular decisions from 1861 to 1865. Lincoln rose to the occasion and became the
autocratic leader the United States needed at the time.

Other historic examples of autocratic leaders:

 Genghis Khan
 King Henry VIII
 Queen Elizabeth I
 Napoleon Bonaparte
 Father Junipero Serra
 Queen Isabella I

Examples of autocratic leadership

Discipline, preparation and victory are three pillars of autocratic leadership. These objectives
are present on all successful football teams — from the Alabama Crimson Tide to the New
England Patriots.

Outstanding gridiron coaches such as Bill Belichick, Bear Bryant, Bill Parcells and Woody
Hayes belong on the list of autocratic leaders. None of these coaching legends managed
their football programs with democracy in mind, yet all succeeded fabulously in their careers.

In addition to sports, autocratic leadership works well in environments that require near-
perfect accuracy, such as manufacturing. The autocratic, or authoritarian style, is necessary
with staff that need training quickly and efficiently. Fast-food enterprises frequently fall under
this category.

Autocratic leadership is also common in professions where life-and-death decisions occur.

Think ambulatory care and hospitals, police, military personnel and fire departments.

Autocratic leadership in the music industry

The music business is often overlooked when it comes to autocratic leaders. Whether it’s the
maestro of the Boston Pops orchestra or the lead guitarist for a chart-topping band, every
successful music ensemble requires a leader to maintain consistency and longevity.

Two unlikely contemporary examples of popular bands with autocratic leaders are Tom Petty
and the Heartbreakers and the Eagles.

Petty, a Florida native and the leader of his self-titled band, is an infamous perfectionist. As a
leader, he is autocratic and demanding. Petty is credited with single-handedly leveraging
record labels to share a larger take of the profits, from which today’s music artists still benefit.
Petty is also unabashed about his decision to dismiss the founding drummer from his band
for what amounted to a perceived lack of commitment.

Glenn Frey, a Michigan native turned permanent Arizona resident, co-founded the Eagles.
Frey has a reputation as an autocratic leader who espoused the “my way or the highway”
style throughout the Eagles’ successful, if rocky, road to stardom. Frey makes no apologies
for his belief that he and co-founder Don Henley were the engines that drove the Eagles to
fame and fortune.
Examples of autocratic leadership in business
Contrary to popular opinion, most enterprises are well-suited for the autocratic leadership
style at some level. Although start-ups are often best launched under a transformative,
democratic or laissez-faire style of leadership, most businesses later benefit from autocratic
leadership.

This doesn’t mean mature businesses must switch to a top-down autocratic leadership style.
It means that autocratic leaders are often recruited to improve efficiencies within specific
departments.

The founders of many of today’s successful companies learned from industry innovators —
including Wal-Mart’s Sam Walton, McDonald’s Ray Kroc, and Oracle’s Larry Ellison — that
autocratic leadership is necessary to streamline processes, grow their customer base, and
pave the way for long-term survival.

Other industries well-suited for autocratic leadership:

 Restaurants: People go to restaurants with big expectations. Whether it’s a fast-food

chain or an upscale establishment, customers expect consistent service, well-
mannered hosts and efficient servers. Whether they order the combo burger and fries
or a seven-course gourmet meal, customers expect their food to be good. Dining
establishments need an autocratic leadership style to meet these expectations. Even
the most cheerful and lively restaurant runs on slim margins that can tolerate minimal
mistakes.
 Manufacturing: The LCD TV business took decades to perfect through a combination
of trial-and-error R&D and autocratic leadership. To meet consumer demand for
affordable thin-screen TVs, LCD manufacturers endured significant rejection rates of
liquid crystal display panels. Thanks to the implementation of tight quality control
tolerances, achieved through autocratic leadership, today’s consumers can buy large-
screen TVs for $499 that cost upwards of $5,000 in the 1990s.
 Aerospace: Autocratic leadership that emphasizes error-free processes leads to safety
and affordability in aerospace manufacturing. Considering the millions of commercial,
cargo and NASA flights that launch and land safely every year, the aerospace industry
deserves credit for consistent passenger safety. Their successes would not be possible
without autocratic leaders and innovators.
Famous autocratic leaders
Most successful business and political icons exhibit a variety of leadership styles. This
makes it difficult to label them as strictly democratic, laissez-faire, transformative or even
autocratic leaders.

Nevertheless, plenty of leaders stand out as having autocratic leadership characteristics.

These executives, publishers, producers, directors and coaches display authoritarian traits
that contribute to their success:

 Lorne Michaels: One of the 20th century’s most influential figures, Michaels changed
television comedy and altered American culture in subtle and extraordinary ways. As
creative producer of NBC’s “Saturday Night Live,” Michaels launched hundreds of
comedians’ careers, from Dan Aykroyd and Gilda Radner to Eddie Murphy and Will
Ferrell. Michaels’ instinct for tapping into America’s pulse and his ability to get the most
out of talent are unrivaled on TV. He is known as a demanding producer, but he
exemplifies the best traits of an autocratic leader.
 Roger Ailes: The president of the Fox News Channel has a reputation as an autocratic
leader dating to the late 1960s, when he worked as an advisor to President Nixon. Ailes
began his career in television broadcasting before migrating to political consulting. Ailes
joined media mogul Rupert Murdoch’s launch of the Fox Entertainment Group in the
late 1980s. Although controversial and authoritarian, Ailes is an accomplished
 executive who redefined news broadcasting for the 21st century through his autocratic
leadership style.
 Helen Gurley Brown: The former editor-in-chief of Cosmopolitan magazine is notable
for many things, not least of which was her ability to consistently turn a profit in
publishing for more than three decades. Brown moved to New York City early in her
career and blended in immediately. She assumed the helm of Cosmopolitan and
revolutionized the women’s fashion market, leveraging her position to reflect and
influence American culture. Brown was known as a task master in a business that
thrives on getting things done with minimal corrections.
 John Chambers: The chairman of Cisco Systems, Chambers assumed the CEO
position of a relatively unknown Silicon Valley company that made telephone switches.
After 25 years, Cisco evolved into an estimated $47 billion company that dominates the
networking industry. Today, Cisco stock is one of a handful of bellwether holdings used
to measure the U.S. economy. This was accomplished under Chambers’ autocratic
leadership in which no detail was purportedly too small for his attention.
 Ridley Scott: In an industry where box-office receipts measure success, Scott remains
one of the few Hollywood directors whose films are profitable and critically acclaimed. A
short list of his films includes “Blade Runner,” “Alien,” “Thelma & Louise,” “White
Squall,” “Gladiator,” “American Gangster,” “Prometheus” and his recent “Exodus: Gods
and Kings.” Scott, who began his career as a graphic designer, has a reputation as a
perfectionist. Actors are expected to know their lines, positions and cues before the
camera starts rolling.
 Tony La Russa: The retired manager of the Oakland Athletics, St. Louis Cardinals and
Chicago White Sox, La Russa is one of Major League Baseball’s winningest coaches.
La Russa, who earned a law degree and was admitted to the Florida state bar, is
ranked third in MLB coaching history with 2,728 victories. La Russa won three world
championships, six league championships and 12 division titles during his 33 seasons
coaching baseball. On the field, La Russa came across as laid-back, but he was
constantly strategizing and studying players.
Quotes about autocratic leadership
These leaders have reputations as being hands-on perfectionists. Here are some quotations
that reflect their autocratic leadership styles:

 Vince Lombardi: “Leaders aren’t born, they are made. And they are made just like
anything else, through hard work.”
 Henry Ford: “Quality means doing it right when no one is looking.”
 Tony La Russa: “There are always distractions, if you allow them.”
 Napoleon Bonaparte: “Men are moved by two levers only: fear and self-interest.”
 Ridley Scott: “I think, at the end of the day, filmmaking is a team. But eventually
there’s got to be a captain.”
 Michael Bloomberg: “Nobody is going to delegate a lot of power to a secretary that
they can’t control.”
 Ray Kroc: “You’re only as good as the people you hire.”
 Alfred Hitchcock: “If an actor comes to me and wants to discuss his character, I say,
‘It’s in the script.’ If he says, ‘But what’s my motivation?’ I say, ‘Your salary.’”
 Roger Ailes: “Audiences are shifting. Platforms are shifting. Ages are shifting. It’s
better to be in charge than to have to react to change.”
 Gordon Ramsey: “Kitchens are hard environments and they form incredibly strong
characters.”
 Lorne Michaels: “To me there’s no creativity without boundaries. If you’re gonna write
a sonnet, it’s 14 lines, so it’s solving the problem within the container.”
 John D. Rockefeller: “I do not think that there is any quality so essential to success of
any kind as the quality of perseverance.”
Autocratic leadership case study: Blue Cross of California
Leonard D. Schaeffer considered himself an autocratic leader when he became CEO of Blue
Cross of California in 1986. At the time, the company was a fiscal disaster, the lowest
performing of all the Blue Cross plans around the United States. His job was to turn it
around. Schaeffer described his experience in an article in Harvard Business Review:  “The
Leadership Journey.” Here’s an excerpt:

“When a business needs to change relatively quickly, it’s much more important to just make
a decision and get people moving than it is to take the time to conduct a thorough analysis
and attempt to influence others to come around to your way of thinking. Therefore, I would
define the autocratic leader not as someone who bullies others needlessly but as the
managerial equivalent of an emergency room surgeon, forced to do whatever it takes to save
a patient’s life.”

Schaeffer eventually abandoned the autocratic method even though he had used it
effectively earlier in his career. Likewise, students who gravitate toward this style can learn
how to adapt and perfect their leadership techniques as times change.

Autocratic leadership style requirements

Autocratic leaders typically make all major decisions on their own, with little or no input from
others. Extreme authoritarian leaders often insist on making even minor decisions.

Leaders needing to control minute tasks often are derided as micromanagers. Although the
military traditionally encourages superiors to make unchallenged decisions, civilian
organizations may not respond to this leadership style much longer.

The first formal study of leadership, including the autocratic style, is credited to Kurt Lewin
and others in an article that appeared in the “American Journal of Sociology” in the 1930s.
Lewin and his colleagues found autocratic leaders:

 Generally do not solicit or accept input from others for decision-making purposes
 Make all company or group decisions
 Mandate all workplace methods, policies and procedures
 Can exhibit a lack of trust in the advice, suggestions, ideas and decision-making ability
of others
Autocratic leadership has pluses and minuses. The prevailing view is that the style depends
on the ability of one person while disregarding the input of other skilled people. Still, many
workplaces can benefit from autocratic leadership.

Who works well under autocratic leaders?

Individuals who march to the beat of their own drum generally don’t work well under
autocratic leaders.

By comparison, people who can successfully lead a couple dozen diverse, figurative
drummers to stay in sync and keep rhythm without missing a beat make excellent autocratic
leaders.

How to leverage the autocratic style to manage successfully

After centuries as the standard management style, autocratic leadership can still succeed in
the contemporary arena if leaders keep the following in mind:

 Respect subordinates. Exhibit fairness, objectivity and show respect for co-workers.
They will see or feel it. Leaders’ respect for others engenders mutual respect, which
helps  defuse workplace discord.
  Communicate and explain. Most employees realize autocratic leaders expect them to
obey rules and follow procedures. Communicating details helps staff understand the
rules. In turn, they are less likely to rebel and more likely to cooperate.
 Practice consistency. Employees respect fairness and unbiased treatment. In light of
the potential distrust that autocratic leadership may foster, treating all staff consistently
generates trust and earns respect.
 Allow opinions. Encourage staff to express themselves. Permitting employees to offer
suggestions is a valuable component of success among autocratic leaders. Even if
ideas aren’t adopted, people appreciate the freedom to share their thoughts.
Advantages and disadvantages of autocratic
leadership
The autocratic leadership style has many variations. It can range from strict authoritarian
military leaders, as exemplified by Napoleon and Patton, to modern manufacturing
department directors.

At its worst, autocratic leadership can be stifling, overbearing and demoralizing.

At its best, the autocratic style is liberating for people who work well with clear directives
under leaders who understand exactly what people do and why their roles are important.

For anyone placed in a position that requires an autocratic leadership style, it’s helpful to
identify pitfalls that can cause staff to question whether it is the right approach.

Here are some advantages and disadvantages to the autocratic leadership style:

Autocratic leadership pros

 Effective when decisions must come quickly, without time to consult others
 Prevents businesses or projects from becoming stagnant because of poor organization
or lack of leadership
 Keeps individuals, groups or teams from missing important deadlines
 During stressful periods, autocratic leaders can be more effective, and their teams
appreciate their leadership
Autocratic leadership cons
 Invites potential abuse by overly powerful personalities
 Can stifle staff and discourage team creativity
 Modern employees may not react well to authoritarian leadership
 Can discourage open communication between leaders and subordinates

Benefits of autocratic leadership

Exceptional leaders adopt the style that fits their vision, behavior and personality. The
autocratic leadership style still works well in some institutions, such as the military,
manufacturing, restaurants and companies with aggressive sales quotas.

The downside of autocratic leadership

Autocratic leadership isn’t as prevalent as it once was for several reasons. These include:

 Better-educated workforces and the growth of knowledge-based industries that

encourage decision-making at all levels
 Mentoring as a leadership style, popular among millennials who generally frown on
authoritarians
 Democratic, laissez-faire and transformative leadership styles that incorporate many
levels of decision-makers
The upside to autocratic leadership
As we move further into the 21st century, now is a good time to reassess the age-old
benefits of autocratic leadership.

People who dislike this style often point to its demoralizing “my way or the highway”
mentality. But we shouldn’t be quick to abandon autocratic leadership when it’s appropriate.

Even creative businesses — such as advertising, product design and social media firms —
reach a point when autocratic leadership is necessary. When a marketing campaign,
advertising program or product design moves into the launch phase, for example, its success
or failure hinges on precision timing.

That’s where autocratic leadership comes into play.

Whether it’s an athletic shoe company like Nike or a social media powerhouse like
Facebook, autocratic leadership is sometimes vital. Autocratic leaders help guarantee
deadlines are met by training people properly to assume responsibility for their respective
roles and to reach their goals.

At the end of the day, autocratic leadership shares the same objectives as other styles. It’s
all about achieving success.