Lewin’s Leadership Styles: Autocratic vs. Democratic vs. Laissez-Faire

In 1939, Kurt Lewin introduced three classic leadership styles that you may consider adopting in today’s disruptive competitive environment. Although these three styles appear contradictory, each can be effective in mobilising people when applied in the right context. Autocratic leadership centralises decision-making authority, democratic leadershipinvolves others in making decisions, and laissez-faire leadership delegates decision-making authority to others.

Leadership and decision-making are two sides of the same coin. Every leadership style is inevitably connected to decision-making. If you want to make decisions quickly, adopt autocratic leadership. If you want decisions to be accepted by everyone, adopt democratic leadership. If you want to test the quality of decisions entrusted to others, adopt laissez-faire leadership. Perhaps you should not underestimate laissez-faire leadership when you have carefully selected the right people to make decisions. It is possible that laissez-faire leadership produces more accurate decisions than autocratic leadership, even when speed is a priority. Could that be true, my friends?

Ideally, all three of Lewin’s leadership styles should be reflected in your approach to leadership. You need to know when to be autocratic, democratic, or laissez-faire. Remember, my friends, a fast-moving and uncertain competitive environment requires hybrid leadership, or a combination of leadership styles. The various opportunities and problems facing an organisation require decisions made through a combination of these three styles. Both speed and accuracy in decision-making are essential in a disruptive business environment. The question is: which opportunities and problems should be addressed through autocratic, democratic, or laissez-faire leadership?

Autocratic leadership may enable quick decisions, but those decisions are not necessarily accurate. As a leader, you do not necessarily know everything or have experience dealing with the various opportunities and problems your organisation faces. Do not insist on maintaining an autocratic approach merely to protect your pride. You might think autocratic leadership simply means refusing to listen to others. But that is not always the case. Autocratic leadership can also emerge when you persistently engage in unproductive arguments with the people you lead until your team eventually gives up debating with you. Your pride as a leader drives you to maintain your autocratic approach. It may appear democratic, but in reality, you have exhausted and discouraged everyone through endless discussions. This is what I call soft autocratic leadership. When you refuse to listen to anyone at all, that is hard autocratic leadership. Does this sound familiar, my friends?

Democratic leadership may take longer to reach decisions, but it allows everyone to participate in decisions about seizing opportunities or solving problems. Such involvement encourages people to implement decisions with enthusiasm and a sense of satisfaction. This enthusiasm can lead to the best possible outcomes. Remember, my friends, democratic leadership still requires decisions to be reached, whether through deliberation aimed at consensus or through voting. If every meeting ends without a decision simply because everyone’s opinions are being accommodated, that is not democratic leadership. It is merely discussion or brainstorming. Leadership is about both leadership and decisions, not leadership or decisions. You might argue that discussions without decisions are simply a way of postponing decisions. That is a fair point. But remember, competition demands speed, not just accuracy.

Laissez-faire leadership may be adopted when you want to test the decisions made by those to whom you have delegated authority. Speed is almost certain, although accuracy may be at stake. Remember, no one is perfect. Everyone has weaknesses. Perhaps you need to distinguish which opportunities and problems should be addressed through autocratic or democratic leadership, where you remain directly involved, and which should be entrusted to people you trust to make decisions. Laissez-faire leadership provides a foundation for the distribution of authority within an organisation. Distributed authority gives rise to decentralisation, which is essential in today’s disruptive business environment. In fact, employee empowerment can reach its full potential when leaders also embrace laissez-faire leadership.

However, you must be discerning when choosing the people you trust to make decisions under laissez-faire leadership. So, who in your organisation would you trust to make decisions? If your immediate answer is “no one,” perhaps autocratic leadership dominates your organisation. Perhaps your democratic leadership approach has not yet developed highly capable people. Perhaps you have chosen the wrong people to work in your organisation. Or perhaps you have not yet effectively combined Lewin’s three leadership styles. What do you think? Which of these possibilities reflects what is happening in your organisation?

Have a good day!

Greetings of Transformation