tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1718313706521519171.post5958559801252925179..comments2024-01-19T01:58:47.396+05:30Comments on All About Business Strategy... Well, Almost...: Does an autocratic CEO perform better than other CEOs?A Sandeephttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02609616748691284175noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1718313706521519171.post-74013171441018390122011-02-20T14:44:20.802+05:302011-02-20T14:44:20.802+05:30@personal - Mr.personal, your comment is a bit con...@personal - Mr.personal, your comment is a bit confusing. When did i attend your classes?. are you trying to impersonate Sandeep sir? <br /><br />Well, I don't say authoritarian style of leadership doesn't work, of course it does. But, it doesn't work where your team consists of highly motivated people who take responsibilities and have the urge to perform. once you succeed in building great teams at different levels, you need to change the approach from authoritarian style to democratic or participative style.paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16065311871134026035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1718313706521519171.post-20236452301849805842011-02-20T07:25:56.500+05:302011-02-20T07:25:56.500+05:30But this will kill individuality
by this process w...But this will kill individuality<br />by this process we will be having machines not humans<br />talented people want freedom ,they want independence<br />do u know every fotball player wants to play for either Barcelona or Arsenal,because their they have independence.<br />dont know much about infosys <br />but i think people should work well in an environment wic allows them freedomStand Up Speak Uphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16049906196676653579noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1718313706521519171.post-27709470044024245582011-02-19T09:32:59.931+05:302011-02-19T09:32:59.931+05:30@Paul: Yes Paul, you may be right that in some peo...@Paul: Yes Paul, you may be right that in some people, the concept of a democratic style of leadership may work. But the number of such people, unfortunately, would remain less than a handful in an organization that has around ten thousand plus employees (that's the ratio I've found in my research). Therefore, if there is a role choice between good cop and bad cop, the CEO necessarily should play the bad cop role. Remember my classes when you attended them and try to think of the role that I had in front of the students. Now imagine the productivity increase that we were able to evidence. Of course, mine is only a singular example. That's the reason I've portrayed global research in this post :)<br />@Stand Up Speak Up:<br />Hi, yes. People who revolt are generally people who're not able to match up to the high work demands of the authoritarian boss. Corollary, such an organization over time only attracts those workers who can withstand high productivity demands under high stress. Such a style should be used only in organizations that are extremely process oriented (where a majority of work functions are process mapped and/or electronically measured; for example, from measuring work performance to even concepts like how many times the worker has taken the break). In such organisations, as one of my editorials would put forth in the coming weeks, instead of innovation, it is exnovation that employees should follow - in other words, just replicate the process that "we" have developed, rather than thinking you have a better process. Therefore, BPOs, IT firms, etc use the authoritarian style quite effectively - they have a high turnover (if Infosys stopped recruiting for 18 months, their whole workforce will be wiped out), so they have to keep recruiting more productive employees to ensure they keep growing. This is actually a benefit. The disadvantage in an authoritarian style is that innovation orientation of individual employees is killed. So be it! Designate specialized innovation teams to "think" about innovating processes, procedures and structures, and you have a killer of an organization where even the innovation process is process mapped; which is how it should have been in the first place, as defined by Champy and Hammer (BPR!).<br />Thanks for the comments guysPersonalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02689377705710766052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1718313706521519171.post-46824545122985252282011-02-18T16:38:27.951+05:302011-02-18T16:38:27.951+05:30These examples are good enough to prove your point...These examples are good enough to prove your point.<br />but when company is not in crisis i.e. in normal times ,don't you think people will revolt against your style<br />many may leave the company opposing your methods.Stand Up Speak Uphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16049906196676653579noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1718313706521519171.post-60763611936844304902011-02-17T01:56:36.152+05:302011-02-17T01:56:36.152+05:30Sir, I really liked the post. well, I agree to a c...Sir, I really liked the post. well, I agree to a certain extent that authoritarian style of leadership works. But in the process, once you get the right people in your team, People who have the fire to perform, democratic-participative style leadership works. <br /><br />Jack welch too shares his experience , how he was result-oriented and he would always encourage top performers and fire the non-performers. But in this process, many times he was being able to build great teams at different levels that delivered. whenever he got the right people in his team, he changed the approach. He listened more, encouraged people to be open, share and contribute, injected team spirit and always believed in team work.paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16065311871134026035noreply@blogger.com