In response to the lecture# 1


It is not for me to judge which one of the leadership theories is the most valid of all. Teamwork I've had so far has undermined my creativity, enthusiasm, efficiency, quality of worksmanship and relationship with other students. Thus, I had neither opportunities or ambition to be a good leader. But based on my observation of successful leaders in the world, I found the "Situational Theory" to be the most agreeable.
         Each leadership style has its own pros and cons. It is paramount for a leader to change his or her style to meet the demands of a situation. For example, in a life or death situation, it would be utterly foolish to democratically debate over which course of actions to take when you have only minutes to save a person. In this case, the authoritarian style of leadership is needed to take a fast decisive course of actions to save the dying person. But the authoritarian leadership style limits freedom, creativity and enthusiasm of each member. Thus, it is most likely plagued with mutinies and hatred between the leader and the subordinates. Most of the time, however, the democratic style of leadership is the most just and effective way to encourage the group members to work together. But the democratic leadership style is not flawless either. Individual member of the group must constantly compromise with other members with differing opinions. In the process, the individual has a risk of losing enthusiasm, efficiency and creativity due to criticisms made by other members.The Laissez-faire style of leadership works the best, if each group member is highly skilled and capable of making his/her own decisions without any intervention from the leader. It allows the most freedom, creativity and enthusiasm. However, the laissez-faire leadership style is the most time consuming of all three leadership styles. Therefore it is important for the leader to assess the situation and make appropriate leadership style adjustments to get the best result out of the group.