A Form of Government
If you still have questions or prefer to get help directly from an agent, please submit a request.
We’ll get back to you as soon as possible.
- Marketing, Advertising, Sales & PR
- Accounting, Taxation, and Reporting
- Professionalism & Career Development
Law, Transactions, & Risk Management
Government, Legal System, Administrative Law, & Constitutional Law Legal Disputes - Civil & Criminal Law Agency Law HR, Employment, Labor, & Discrimination Business Entities, Corporate Governance & Ownership Business Transactions, Antitrust, & Securities Law Real Estate, Personal, & Intellectual Property Commercial Law: Contract, Payments, Security Interests, & Bankruptcy Consumer Protection Insurance & Risk Management Immigration Law Environmental Protection Law Inheritance, Estates, and Trusts
- Business Management & Operations
- Economics, Finance, & Analytics
What is an Autocracy?
A system of government in which one person has the supreme power to make all kinds of decisions and rules.
In modern times such leadership is referred to as dictatorship or absolute monarchism.
How is an Autocracy run?
The term autocracy is divided into two from Greek words and thus has a meaning, with auto referring to by itself while Kratos is the power held by a single leader.
Therefore, autocracy means a leader has no lawful restrictions or control by popular people when he is making use of his political powers.
Decisions made are not subject to change by any external factors but is concentrated on the hands of one person.
The leaders do not report to anyone as no one holds accountable for their decisions.
The autocratic system of government favors the public sector since the government officials tend to put greater resources and administration in the areas they control.
- Autocratic leadership in social dilemmas: A threat to group stability, Van Vugt, M., Jepson, S. F., Hart, C. M., & De Cremer, D. (2004). Journal of experimental social psychology, 40(1), 1-13. This paper looked at small social dilemma groups and how leadership styles have been implemented alongside their impacts. The results in two experimented groups showed that group members preferred democratic leaders to autocratic leaders. This is because they would leave autocratic headed groups and join democratic groups. These people left the groups even though sometimes positive results would be achieved by the autocratic groups. Their decisions were thus influenced by leadership styles and not the outcomes of the leadership style. This made the author conclude that leadership styles are important and autocratic leadership will not help the public as it would result in revolutions and conflicts.
- Affective and motivational consequences of leader self-sacrifice: The moderating effect of autocratic leadership, De Cremer, D. (2006). The Leadership Quarterly, 17(1), 79-93. This research questioned the behavior of autocratic leaders and how they can instill a self-sacrifice skill in them. This skill will then determine the emotive and motivational feedbacks of the people he leads. The results, which were obtained from a laboratory experiment and a scenario experiment show that groups will be comfortable with a leader who exhibits self-sacrifice skills but is not an autocrat. It also shows that such kind of a leader will have more effective results. From the laboratory experiment, it was seen that the emotional reactions are what motivated the group to support and work with the leadership. The study suggests that more research should be done on the great leadership that comes with self-sacrifice. Furthermore, the psychology of leaders, which makes them behave in a certain way should also be studied. and their behaviors
- Gender, leadership style, and subordinate satisfaction: An experiment, Kushell, E., & Newton, R. (1986). Sex Roles, 14(3-4), 203-209. Gender and leadership are topics that should be studied more since women are climbing up the ladder as leaders. The way subordinate staff react to women in management ranks is thus also a matter of research. The research has been conducted by this paper and it shows that women are a rise in management positions. However, this has not affected the satisfaction of subordinate staffs as much as females disliked autocratic leaders that males.
- A meta-analytic review of the productivity and satisfaction of democratic and autocratic leadership, Gastil, J. (1994). Small Group Research, 25(3), 384-410. Research and books have not been able to address and give integrated results of member fulfillment and group efficiency when subjected to a democratic or autocratic type of leadership. This is even as there are so many research books showing the effects of democracy and autocracy in work and business areas. This book has taken the initiative to do so by providing integration with the tool of meta-analysis. However, it does not give clear results due to the difference in the complexity of tasks and study setting. It ends up concluding that a democratic or autocratic system has no much influence on efficiency. In cases where it finds a relationship between democracy and group gratification, the author dismisses it as the influence of task complication. It suggests the manipulation of democracy so as to get clear results.
- Affective and motivational consequences of leader self-sacrifice: The moderating effect of autocratic leadership, De Cremer, D. (2006). The Leadership Quarterly, 17(1), 79-93. This research questioned the behavior of autocratic leaders and how they can instill a self-sacrifice skill in them. This skill will then determine the emotive and motivational feedbacks of the people he leads. The results, which were obtained from a laboratory experiment and a scenario experiment show that groups will be comfortable with a leader who exhibits self-sacrifice skills but is not an autocrat. It also shows that such kind of a leader will have more effective results. From the laboratory experiment, it was seen that the emotional reactions are what motivated the group to support and work with the leadership. The study suggests that more research should be done on the great leadership that comes with self-sacrifice. Furthermore, the psychology of leaders, which makes them behave in a certain way should also be studied. and their behaviors.
- Impact of leadership style on organizational performance: a case study of Nigerian banks, Ojokuku, R. M., Odetayo, T. A., & Sajuyigbe, A. S. (2012). American Journal of Business and Management, 1(4), 202-207. The study was conducted in selected banks in Ibadan Nigeria and is studied how performance in an organization can be influenced by leadership style. It was done in form of an organized questionnaire where sixty (60) respondents were selected using the purposive sampling technique. The researchers made use of Pearson product-moment as the relationship between styles of leadership and performance in the organization was done in a correlated manner. Additionally, they used Regression analysis to identify if performances and workers were affected by the type of leadership. With 23% variance of performance, the study found that organizational performance can be predicted using leadership styles. The leadership styles and organization performance also showed a positive and negative relationship with each other. The study suggested that Banks management should integrate democracy and transformational leadership in order to remain relevant in a setting that is widely competitive.
- Rehabilitation agency leadership style: Impact on subordinates' job satisfaction, Packard, S. H., & Kauppi, D. R. (1999). Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 43(1), 5-11. This study conducted a survey of one hundred and five rehabilitation employees. Its aim was to identify if their job satisfaction and how they regarded their job environment was affected by the type of leadership they had. The study concluded that service delivery is affected by leadership styles.
- Leadership style and incentives, Rotemberg, J. J., & Saloner, G. (1993). Management Science, 39(11), 1299-1318. This is a study that looks into the best leadership style of a firm in relation to its environment. It ensures that it does not give motivations to the subordinates directly by using a model that looks into firms and managers whose contracts are not complete. It found that motivations given to subordinates are affected by the personality of leaders, leadership style, and the organizational cultures of the firm. It also found that shareholders stand to benefit more when they use empathetic leaders. Such leaders ensure there is an innovation by using the participatory style of leading since other people will be free to give their ideas. A firm which is short of innovative ideas is usually headed by an autocratic or selfish leader.
- Leadership styles as predictors of selfreported and observed workplace bullying, Hoel, H., Glas, L., Hetland, J., Cooper, C. L., & Einarsen, S. (2010). British Journal of Management, 21(2), 453-468. Bullying research has ignored the integration between leadership styles and bullying or intimidation. This study looks into instances of bullying at work and how the subordinate rate the behaviors of some of their leaders. The nationwide study was done in Great Britain and involved 5288 respondents. It addressed the psychosocial issues at work and used randomness and representativeness as the sampling process. Non-contingent punishment was the toughest analyst of bullying in terms of apparent exposure while observed bullying was characterized by autocratic leadership. However, all four leadership styles had instances of bullying. It was a surprise that bullying was related to non-conditional punishment and impulsive style of leadership when more people thought bullying only came from autocratic leadership. In the impulsive leadership, leaders give punishment in their own ways regardless of the subordinates performance. Furthermore, self-reported and observed bullying was mostly forecasted by laissex-faire leadership. The study concluded that leadership styles contribute to bullying even though intricate.
- Self-uncertainty and support for autocratic leadership, Rast III, D. E., Hogg, M. A., & Giessner, S. R. (2013). Self and Identity, 12(6), 635-649. This article bases its argument on the social identity theory of leadership and uncertainty-identity theory. The theories imply that autocratic leadership is supported by workers who lack self-certainty and abhorred by those who have more confidence in their work. The author surveyed 215 organizational employees to understand the consequence of self-uncertainty and on what percentage they would rate the autocratic nature of their leader in terms of support. The study confirmed that participants who were self-certain supported the non-autocratic leader over the autocratic. However, the self-uncertain participants were comfortable working with autocratic than the non-autocratic leader. The article also discusses the role uncertainty plays in leadership with the consequences of the uncertainty-identity theory.