Autocratic Leadership

Autocratic leadership is an extreme form of transactional leadership, where a leader exerts high levels of power over his or her employees or team members. People within the team are given few opportunities for making suggestions, even if these would be in the team's or organization's interest. Most people tend to resent being treated like this. Because of this, autocratic leadership usually leads to high levels of absenteeism and staff turnover. Also, the team's output does not benefit from the creativity and experience of all team members, so many of the benefits of teamwork are lost. For some routine and unskilled jobs, however, this style can remain effective where the advantages of control outweigh the disadvantages.

Bureaucratic Leadership
Bureaucratic leaders "work by the book", ensuring that their staff follow procedures exactly. This is a very appropriate style for work involving serious safety risks (such as working with machinery, with toxic substances or at heights) or where large sums of money are involved (such as cash-handling). In other situations, the inflexibility and high levels of control exerted can demoralize staff, and can diminish the organizations ability to react to changing external circumstances.

Charismatic Leadership
A charismatic leadership style can appear similar to a transformational leadership style, in that the leader injects huge doses of enthusiasm into his or her team, and is very energetic in driving others forward. However, a charismatic leader can tend to believe more in him or herself than in their team. This can create a risk that a project, or even an entire organization, might collapse if the leader were to leave: In the eyes of their followers, success is tied up with the presence of the charismatic leader. As such, charismatic leadership carries great responsibility, and needs long-term commitment from the leader.

Democratic Leadership or Participative Leadership

Although a democratic leader will make the final decision, he or she invites other members of the team to contribute to the decision-making process. This not only increases job satisfaction by involving employees or team members in what's going on, but it also helps to develop people's skills. Employees and team members feel in control of their own destiny, and so are motivated to work hard by more than just a financial reward.

As participation takes time, this style can lead to things happening more slowly than an autocratic approach, but often the end result is better. It can be most suitable where team working is essential, and quality is more important than speed to market or productivity.

Laissez-Faire Leadership
This French phrase means "let them do" and is used to describe a leader who leaves his or her colleagues to get on with their work. It can be effective if the leader monitors what is being achieved and communicates this back to his or her team regularly. Most often, laissez-faire leadership works for teams in which the individuals are very experienced and skilled self-starters. Unfortunately, it can also refer to situations where managers are not exerting sufficient control.

People-Oriented Leadership or Relations-Oriented Leadership

This style of leadership is the opposite of task-oriented leadership: the leader is totally focused on organizing, supporting and developing the people in the leader's team. A participative style, it tends to lead to good teamwork and creative collaboration. However, taken to extremes, it can lead to failure to achieve the team's goals. In practice, most leaders use both task-oriented and peopleoriented styles of leadership.

Servant Leadership
This term, coined by Robert Greenleaf in the 1970s, describes a leader who is often not formally recognized as such. When someone, at any level within an organization, leads simply by virtue of meeting the needs of his or her team, he or she is described as a "servant leader". In many ways, servant leadership is a form of democratic leadership, as the whole team tends to be involved in decision-making. Supporters of the servant leadership model suggest it is an important way ahead in a world where values are increasingly important, in which servant leaders achieve power on the basis of their values and ideals. Others believe that in competitive leadership situations, people practicing servant leadership will often find themselves left behind by leaders using other leadership styles.

Task-Oriented Leadership
A highly task-oriented leader focuses only on getting the job done, and can be quite autocratic. He or she will actively define the work and the roles required, put structures in place, plan, organize and monitor. However, as task-oriented leaders spare little thought for the well-being of their teams, this approach can suffer many of the flaws of autocratic leadership, with difficulties in motivating and retaining staff. Task-oriented leaders can benefit from an understanding of the Blake-Mouton

Managerial Grid, which can help them identify specific areas for development that will help them involve people more.

Transactional Leadership
This style of leadership starts with the premise that team members agree to obey their leader totally when they take a job on: the transaction is (usually) that the organization pays the team members, in return for their effort and compliance. As such, the leader has the right to punish team members if their work doesn't meet the pre-determined standard. Team members can do little to improve their job satisfaction under transactional leadership. The leader could give team members some control of their income/reward by using incentives that encourage even higher standards or greater productivity. Alternatively a transactional leader could practice "management by exception", whereby, rather than rewarding better work, he or she would take corrective action if the required standards were not met. Transactional leadership is really just a way of managing rather a true leadership style, as the focus is on short-term tasks. It has serious limitations for knowledge-based or creative work, but remains a common style in many organizations.

Transformational Leadership
A person with this leadership style is a true leader who inspires his or her team with a shared vision of the future. Transformational leaders are highly visible, and spend a lot of time communicating. They don't necessarily lead from the front, as they tend to delegate responsibility amongst their teams. While their enthusiasm is often infectious, they can need to be supported by "detail people". In many organizations, both transactional and transformational leadership are needed. The transactional leaders (or managers) ensure that routine work is done reliably, while the transformational leaders look after initiatives that add value. The transformational leadership style is the dominant leadership style taught in the "How to Lead: Discover the Leader Within You" leadership program, although we do recommend that other styles are brought as the situation demands.

Using the Right Style: Situational Leadership

While the Transformation Leadership approach is often highly effective, there is no one right way to lead or manage that suits all situations. To choose the most effective approach for you, you must consider:

- The skill levels and experience of the members of your team. - The work involved (routine or new and creative). - The organizational environment (stable or radically changing, conservative or adventurous). - You own preferred or natural style. A good leader will find him or herself switching instinctively between styles according to the people and work they are dealing with. This is often referred to as "situational leadership" For example, the manager of a small factory trains new machine operatives using a bureaucratic style to ensure operatives know the procedures that achieve the right standards of product quality and workplace safety. The same manager may adopt a more participative style of leadership when working on production line improvement with his or her team of supervisors.

Parliamentary Procedure for Meetings Robert's Rules of Order is the standard for facilitating discussions and group decision-making. Copies of the rules are available at most bookstores. Although they may seem long and involved, having an agreedupon set of rules makes meetings run easier. Robert's Rules will help your group have better meetings, not make them more difficult. Your group is free to modify them or find another suitable process that encourages fairness and participation, unless your bylaws state otherwise. Here are the basic elements of Robert's Rules, used by most organizations: 1. Motion: To introduce a new piece of business or propose a decision or action, a motion must be made by a group member ("I move that......") A second motion must then also be made (raise your hand and say, "I second it.") After limited discussion the group then votes on the motion. A majority vote is required for the motion to pass (or quorum as specified in your bylaws.) 2. Postpone Indefinitely: This tactic is used to kill a motion. When passed, the motion cannot be reintroduced at that meeting. It may be brought up again at a later date. This is made as a motion ("I move to postpone indefinitely..."). A second is required. A majority vote is required to postpone the motion under consideration. 3. Amend: This is the process used to change a motion under consideration. Perhaps you like the idea

proposed but not exactly as offered. Raise your hand and make the following motion: "I move to amend the motion on the floor." This also requires a second. After the motion to amend is seconded, a majority vote is needed to decide whether the amendment is accepted. Then a vote is taken on the amended motion. In some organizations, a "friendly amendment" is made. If the person who made the original motion agrees with the suggested changes, the amended motion may be voted on without a separate vote to approve the amendment. 4. Commit: This is used to place a motion in committee. It requires a second. A majority vote must rule to carry it. At the next meeting the committee is required to prepare a report on the motion committed. If an appropriate committee exists, the motion goes to that committee. If not, a new committee is established. 5. Question: To end a debate immediately, the question is called (say "I call the question") and needs a second. A vote is held immediately (no further discussion is allowed). A two-thirds vote is required for passage. If it is passed, the motion on the floor is voted on immediately. 6. Table: To table a discussion is to lay aside the business at hand in such a manner that it will be considered later in the meeting or at another time ("I make a motion to table this discussion until the next meeting. In the meantime, we will get more information so we can better discuss the issue.") A second is needed and a majority vote required to table the item being discussed. 7. Adjourn: A motion is made to end the meeting. A second motion is required. A majority vote is then required for the meeting to be adjourned (ended). Note: If more than one motion is proposed, the most recent takes precedence over the ones preceding it. For example if #6, a motion to table the discussion, is proposed, it must be voted on before #3, a motion to amend, can be decided. In a smaller meeting, like a committee or board meeting, often only four motions are used: To introduce (motion.) To change a motion (amend.)

 To adopt (accept a report without discussion.) To adjourn (end the meeting.)Remember, these processes are designed to ensure that everyone has a chance to participate and to share ideas in an orderly manner. Parliamentary procedure should not be used to prevent discussion of important issues. Board and committee chairpersons and other leaders may want to get some training in meeting facilitation and in using parliamentary procedure. Additional information on meeting processes, dealing with difficult people, and using Robert's Rules is available from district office staff and community resources such as the League of Women Voters, United Way and other technical assistance providers. Parliamentary Procedure at a Glance, by O. Garfield Jones, is an excellent and useful guide for neighborhood association chairs. Tips in Parliamentary Procedure The following summary will help you determine when to use the actions described in Robert's Rules. A main motion must be moved, seconded, and stated by the chair before it can be discussed. If you want to move, second, or speak to a motion, stand and address the chair. If you approve the motion as is, vote for it. If you disapprove the motion, vote against it. If you approve the idea of the motion but want to change it, amend it or submit a substitute for it. If you want advice or information to help you make your decision, move to refer the motion to an appropriate quorum or committee with instructions to report back. If you feel they can handle it better than the assembly, move to refer the motion to a quorum or committee with power to act. If you feel that there the pending question(s) should be delayed so more urgent business can be considered, move to lay the motion on the table.

 If you want time to think the motion over, move that consideration be deferred to a certain time. If you think that further discussion is unnecessary, move the previous question. If you think that the assembly should give further consideration to a motion referred to a quorum or committee, move the motion be recalled. If you think that the assembly should give further consideration to a matter already voted upon, move that it be reconsidered. If you do not agree with a decision rendered by the chair, appeal the decision to the assembly. If you think that a matter introduced is not germane to the matter at hand, a point of order may be raised. If you think that too much time is being consumed by speakers, you can move a time limit on such speeches. If a motion has several parts, and you wish to vote differently on these parts, move to divide the motion.IN THE MEETING TO INTRODUCE A MOTION: Stand when no one else has the floor. Address the Chair by the proper title. Wait until the chair recognizes you. Now that you have the floor and can proceed with your motion say "I move that...," state your motion clearly and sit down. Another member may second your motion. A second merely implies that the seconder agrees that the motion should come before the assembly and not that he/she is in favor of the motion. If there is no second, the Chair says, "The motion is not before you at this time." The motion is not lost, as there has been no vote taken. If there is a second, the Chair states the question by saying "It has been moved and seconded that ... (state the motion). . ., is there any discussion?"

DEBATE OR DISCUSSING THE MOTION: The member who made the motion is entitled to speak first. Every member has the right to speak in debate. The Chair should alternate between those "for" the motion and those "against" the motion. The discussion should be related to the pending motion. Avoid using a person's name in debate. All questions should be directed to the Chair. Unless there is a special rule providing otherwise, a member is limited to speak once to a motion. Asking a question or a brief suggestion is not counted in debate. A person may speak a second time in debate with the assembly's permission. VOTING ON A MOTION: Before a vote is taken, the Chair puts the question by saying "Those in favor of the motion that ... (repeat the motion)... say "Aye." Those opposed say "No." Wait, then say "The motion is carried," or "The motion is lost." Some motions require a 2/3 vote. A 2/3 vote is obtained by standing If a member is in doubt about the vote, he may call out "division." A division is a demand for a standing vote. A majority vote is more than half of the votes cast by persons legally entitled to vote. A 2/3 vote means at least 2/

How to Write an Effective Resolution

When Do You Need a Resolution?

A simple, but not complete, answer to this question is anytime the commission is proposing a new policy or making significant revisions to

existing policy statements. Policy matters, which are a primary responsibility of the commissions, should be highlighted and documented in resolution format for discussion by University Council so that the policy may be approved and adopted by the university community. A Presidents Policy Memorandum, which is used to announce an approved policy to the relevant members of the university community, will not be issued unless a formal resolution has been considered and approved by University Council and recommended to the President. There are other significant actions commissions may consider, however, that do not necessarily fall into the category of policy actions. Some of these require, or would certainly benefit from, passage of a formal resolution. For example, the approval of a new degree program should be highlighted through a resolution and brought to the attention of University Council for approval. As a general rule, if it is something important, you should probably be presenting it to Council in a resolution format. From time to time, commissions may be asked to review proposed procedural guidelines and to give their advice to the administrative officers responsible for implementing a particular policy. Generally, such advice is given by commission members without using a resolution format; nor are procedural matters generally sent to University Council for approval. Exceptions to this are those cases where procedures are embedded in a new policy statement-- such as procedures related to reduction in force and post-tenure review-- or procedures adopted by the commissions themselves for conducting the business with which they are charged-- examples are procedures for reviewing new graduate degree programs or CUSP procedures for approving courses. These were cases where important, new procedures required discussion and agreement by the broader university community and hence attention by University Council.

Resolution Format (links to samples in the right column):

An effective resolution is one that conveys a sense of the issue or problem that led to the proposed action, provides an explanation or justification for the particular proposed solution, gives the reader enough background so he/she can understand what is being proposed, and makes it absolutely clear what people are voting on. Typical resolutions have several parts: 1. Heading:
o

o o

The first line should be a brief descriptive title for the resolution, i.e. Academic Eligibility, Post-tenure Review, or Approval Process for New Degree Program Proposals. The second line should be the name of the originating commission(s). The third line should be a resolution designation number from the commission, such as CFA Resolution 2006-07A (B, C, etc. as they are considered and passed by the commission), or some other numbering scheme that clearly identifies the year of consideration and the specific resolution. It is also helpful to include the following lines in the heading, with dates added as completed: Approved by the Commission on ________: (date) First reading by University Council: (date) Approved by University Council: (date) Approved by the President: (date) Approved by the Board of Visitors: (date) (include only when BOV approval required) Effective date: (date; immediately; whatever is appropriate

2. WHEREAS statements:
o

The WHEREAS statements are where you describe the problem or issue, the history or context for the policy if important, which bodies were involved in reviewing and

advising on this policy proposal, and the general nature of the policy solution being proposed and why it solves the problem. When these are well written, there is a kind of rolling logic to the statements. In some cases, the statements might be organized in chronological order. While you should make sure you cover the topic well enough for an uninitiated reader to follow, typically a resolution should be one page or less, total. A very simple issue might require one or two WHEREAS statements. A more involved issue might require five or six WHEREAS statements, each a brief paragraph of several sentences.

3. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED statement:

o

This is the punchline. It is the action being taken. You should state EXACTLY what is to be voted upon. If the item is very brief, then it can be incorporated in this section of the resolution. If you are revising existing language, it is often very helpful to include the old version so that the reader can compare the two. If the new or revised policy statement is long, then this section might say: That the attached policy on (subject) be adopted effective (date). Then attach the complete policy statement clearly identified at the top. It is VERY important to state exactly how the new or revised policy will go into effect. For example, policies affecting faculty employment are incorporated in the Faculty Handbook and a reference should be made to a specific section of the Handbook that would be revised. Student-related policies are often appropriate for the University Polices for Student Life. Other policies may be issued as Presidents Policy Memoranda and/or given a policy number and included among general university policies. Administrative staff to the commissions should be able to advise resolution writers about where new policy will be incorporated and how this should be stated for the resolution. The commission needs to give some thought to this as they are drafting language for new policy statements. Usually, it is not sufficient to simply wave a wand and state that university documents should be revised accordingly. You need to be specific about what should be revised and exactly

what language is being proposed for the revision. The reason for this is obvious once you start the task-- it often brings up issues that need more discussion and resolution if the policy is really going to be implemented. Include an effective date for the policy (effective immediately? some subsequent term?)