1.

Leadership Theory

Authoritarian leadership style

a). Definition

It is also known Autocratic leadership style (Bonebright, 2010). It is attributed by an overall

individual in control over the verdicts with a high negligence of the subordinate contribution.

The overall leader makes the decision based on the intuitions; hinged on the personal thinking

and opinions. Notably, the leader is the absolute verdict maker (Kiazad et al., 2010; Tuckman

and Jensen, 2010).

b). Explanation

Autocratic leadership is characterised with neglecting of the members input; the leaders are

the only with mandate to make the decision; methods and process are dictated by the leader

and the members are rarely entrusted with the task management (Bonebright, 2010).

2. Tuckman’s Theory

a). Definition

Tuckman came up with 5 stages that can be used in the exploration of group

development. The theory is applicable in the validation of the leadership acceptance and

refusal (Bhatti et al., 2012).

b). Explanation

Tuckman and Jensen, (2010), stated that the stages are:

Formation.

At this level the individualistic relation is characterised as by dependency. The

subordinate depends on the innocuous acts and sequential behaviour of the leader; rely on

him for guidance and directions to follow.

Storming

The level is attributed by the opposition and wrangles accruing in the personal
relationship within the leadership circle.

Norming

This level immense cohesion occurs among the interpersonal relations. Acknowledgment

among the members is vivid.

Performing

This level is not attainable to all groups. If to attain this level all the members must

emulate a true independence; exponential of their capacity, range and deeper in relating.

Adjourning

This level involves execution of tasks.

3. Application

On a family setting, autocratic leadership is involved with allot of problematic situations;

seldom many families brake up than they reach the fourth stage of Tuckman theory

(Bonebright, 2010).

In an armed force situation, autocratic leadership is more suitable as in such it

necessitated for a fast decision making, usually the setting the leadership attains the final

stage (Bhatti et al., 2012).

In political system, calls for a lot of consultation for decision making. Actually such

system needs democratic system. If autocratic applied there is allot of coercion, thus even

the second stage is hectic (Kiazad et al., 2010).

In a legal and police occurrence, the system is more applicable as these situations call for

enforcement of the law; often the decision is well validated through the five stages

(Miller, 2003).

4. Conclusion

Authoritative style of leadership has a lot of benefits as the applicability of the theory
 is high. With reference Tuckman theory the style of leaderships is has a few contains

that require keen when applying the style.

5. Reference

Bonebright, D.A., 2010. 40 years of storming: a historical review of Tuckman's model

of small group development. Human Resource Development International, 13(1),

pp.111-120.

Bhatti, N., Maitlo, G.M., Shaikh, N., Hashmi, M.A. and Shaikh, F.M., 2012. The

impact of autocratic and democratic leadership style on job satisfaction. International

Business Research, 5(2), p.192.

Kiazad, K., Restubog, S.L.D., Zagenczyk, T.J., Kiewitz, C. and Tang, R.L., 2010. In

pursuit of power: The role of authoritarian leadership in the relationship between

supervisors’ Machiavellianism and subordinates’ perceptions of abusive supervisory

behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(4), pp.512-519.

Miller, D.L., 2003. The stages of group development: A retrospective study of

dynamic team processes. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue

Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration, 20(2), pp.121-134.

Tuckman, B.W. and Jensen, M.A.C., 2010. Stages of small-group development

Revisited1. Group Facilitation, (10), p.43.