EMPLOYEE PRODUCTIVITY AND THE EFFECT OF AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 THE STUDY’S BACKGROUND
Centuries ago, it was widely held that leaders are born, not made. It was widely assumed that leadership was uniquely endowed with work ability as well as a love of people, allowing them to become leaders.
Autocratic leadership is characterized by leaders using coercive reward and even legitimate force on their subordinates. The leader also uses threats and punishments to achieve their goals and does not allow subordinates to contribute to the organization’s operations, making upward communication ineffective.
Other types of leadership styles include:
A. Laissez-Faire leadership style: leaders in this style place less emphasis on the achievement of organizational goals and more emphasis on the behavior of subordinates, so they are free to do whatever they want. These leaders serve only as showpieces.
B. Likere leadership style: Reisis Lifetree is a graduate of the University of Michigan, and his associate has spent decades focusing on leadership style in businesses. According to the findings of this study, an effective manager is one who is strong oriented to his subordinates and relies on communication to keep all parties working as a unit.
a. Goodwill
b. Consultative mode
c. Be a member of the group
1.2 THEORY OF FRAMEWORK
The researcher attempted to survey some theories that will further enhance understanding of the concept of Autocratic leadership and its effect on employee productivity during the course of this study.
Among the theories worth mentioning and explaining are
A. The leadership trait theory
B. Leadership theories based on behavior
C. Theories of Situational Leadership
The trait theory contends that the leader has always played a central role in management theory. Most early leadership researchers attempted to either compare the traits of people who became leaders with those who did not identify characteristics and traits possessed by effective leaders.
The trait approach to leadership, according to Weiss and Adler (1984:1), is the evaluation and selection of leaders based on their physical, mental, social, and physiological characteristics.
The behavioral school, on the other hand, arose as a result of dissatisfaction with trait theory. This theory focuses on how leaders should act rather than on any traits or characteristics they may have.
Several studies, including the Ohio state leadership studies, have been conducted in the United States. They conducted a series of in-depth studies on the behavior of leaders in various organizations. The main focus of the Ohio State University study was the leaders’ behavior in directing others’ support toward group goals.
The situational or contingency leadership theory is based on the assumption that appropriate behavior or style depends on the circumstances at the time. These theories have five implications. They have
a. Houses’ path goal theory
Tannebaum’s and Schmidt’s leadership continuum
Fielder’s contingency leadership theory
d. The normative leadership theory of Vrooms and Yatton
e. Heresy and the blachards situation leadership theory
All of the theories examined in the theoretical framework in this research work will assist the researcher and student in understanding and appreciating the topic of the researcher’s effort.
1.3 THE PROBLEM’S STATEMENT
All of the efforts made by the organization’s leader to improve worker productivity do not appear to be bearing fruit. Many organizations have concluded that using an autocratic leadership style would make employees more productive than using a democratic leadership style because
A. Workers are not putting forth their best efforts in production because they are not motivated rather than punished, thereby contributing to the organization’s demise.
B. Authoritarian leaders fail to achieve their company’s goals, and the rate of staff turnover is increasing, resulting in the loss of process-experienced workers.
C. In addition, some leaders in many organizations are autocratic, relying heavily on the power of their formal position. Highly authoritarian lowers prioritize completing assigned tasks over the needs of their subordinates.
D. Autocratic leaders run centralized organizational systems, taking no note and thus delegating no authority to subordinates, and prioritize the achievement of organizational goods over the welfare of employees and workers in the organization.
1.4 THE STUDY’S OBJECTIVE
The primary goal of this research is to help leaders identify the best leadership style for increasing employee productivity. The study would also serve as a resource for many administrative officers and business students both inside and outside of the school.
1.5 QUESTIONS FOR RESEARCH
A. Does autocratic leadership affect employee productivity?
B. Does the autocratic leadership style achieve its goal?
C. Is there a significant leadership relationship between autocratic leadership style and industrial harmony?
D. How does autocratic leadership affect employee morale?
1.6 HYPOTHESIS OF RESEARCH
The following hypotheses were developed for the study based on the research problem stated above.
A. Ho: Autocratic leadership has no effect on employee productivity in an organization.
B. Hello: autocratic leadership can have an impact on employee productivity in an organization.
C. Ho: Autocratic leadership cannot motivate employees to work hard, and productivity is low.
D. Hello, autocratic leadership encourages workers to be more productive, and he gives his full commitment to the work he does.
1.7 THE STUDY’S SIGNIFICANCE
The importance of autocratic leadership style on employee productivity cannot be overstated, as the research will aid in controlling and directing future managers. Organizations will use the book in their leadership style, and the study will change the perception of organizations’ leadership style, i.e. can also review the factors that are strengths and weaknesses cannoning job motivation on an organization.
Do You Have New or Fresh Topic? Send Us Your Topic
EMPLOYEE PRODUCTIVITY AND THE EFFECT OF AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE