Autocratic leadership occurs when a leader makes decisions without involving others; the leader
tells the employees what is to be done and how it should be accomplished. [14] Lewin et al. found
that this style creates the most discontent. [15] However, this style works when all the information
needed for a decision is present, there is little time to make a decision, the decision would not
change as a result of the participation of others, the employees are well motivated, and the
motivation of the people who will carry out subsequent actions would not be affected by whether
they are involved in the decision or not. [16] This leadership style should not be used very often.
Democratic leadership involves other people in the decision making—for example, subordinates,
peers, superiors, and other stakeholders—but the leader makes the final decision. Rather than
being a sign of weakness, this participative form of leadership is a sign of strength because it
demonstrates respect for the opinions of others. The extent of participation will vary depending
on the leader’s strengths, preferences, beliefs, and the decision to be made, but it can be as
extreme as fully delegating a decision to the team.[17] This leadership style works well when the
leader has only part of the information and the employees have the other part. The participation
is a win-win situation, where the benefits are mutual. Others usually appreciate this leadership
style, but it can be problematic if there is a wide range of opinions and no clear path for making
an equitable, final decision. [18] In experiments that Lewin et al. conducted with others, the
democratic leadership style was revealed as the most effective. [19]