Autocratic leaders use readily available information to make decisions without involving other people. In certain cases, leaders utilize the limited input provided by team members but do not involve them in decision-making. The little input involves the supply of information that could help the leader in making decisions. Two classes of autocratic leadership include type 1 and type 2. Type 1 leaders make decisions based on the information available to them at the time, while type 2 leaders make decisions based on information collected from followers (Pershing & Austin, 2015).
Consultative leadership, in turn, is also divided into type 1 and type 2. Type 1 leaders seek the opinion of followers individually but do not involve them in the decision-making process. The final decision is made by a leader. Type 2 leaders seek the opinion of followers as a group. Followers discuss alternatives, and a leader makes the final decision alone. Group-based leadership involves the participation of followers in decision-making. Whatever decision the group agrees on, the leader goes along with it and does not try to impose ideas on followers (Pershing & Austin, 2015).
A manager proceeds to choose one of these five types of leadership by asking a series of questions based on three main concepts, namely decision quality, subordinate commitment, and time constraints (Pershing & Austin, 2015). A manager should determine the required quality of the decision. Higher-quality decisions require more people to participate. The managers should also consider the importance of follower’s buying into the decision (Pershing & Austin, 2015). It is important to consider the amount of time available to make the decision. If time is limited, employees’ participation will make the process tedious and long. On the contrary, if time is unlimited, then a manager can consider allowing employees to participate.
The strengths of total quality management (TQM) in governance organizations include improved employee morale, improved and innovative processes, higher productivity, enhanced customer focus and satisfaction, and reduced costs (Pershing & Austin, 2015). In addition, it improves the process of resolving the problems of citizens and employees (Pershing & Austin, 2015). TQM had a significant impact on citizens and clients because its main focus is on people and not profitability. Strength is enhanced recognition and responsiveness to organizational behaviors and systems.
For example, it improves employees’ understanding of nonlinear communication within and across teams and improves overall system performance (Pershing & Austin, 2015). Weaknesses include complexity and high costs of implementation. The complexity of TQM makes it difficult for it to come to fruition and be sold to employees due to the need to entirely change the way how things are approached, considered, and carried out. Lack of proper communication regarding the team approach to TQM implementation could cause employee resistance and lead to low morale and productivity. Implementation of TQM requires additional employee training, improvement of infrastructure, team development, and extensive consultations, which are expensive.
The shift from production organizations to service organizations affects the implementation of TQM techniques in numerous ways because it involves more interaction and customer demands addressing. In production organizations, customers only interact with a product as a final output while in service industries, customers interact with products and services during the whole production process. The process of measuring quality is long and difficult because, unlike a tangible product that can be easily assessed in terms of quality, services are not so straightforward in this regard. Organizations depend on customer feedback in order to make improvements. On the other hand, the quality of services is evaluated based on aspects such as convenience, accuracy, courtesy, and consistency. The shift from production to service industries makes the implementation of TQM techniques more challenging and complex.
Pershing, S. P., & Austin, E. K. (2015). Organization theory and governance for the 21st Century. New York, NY: CQ Press.