We value the work we do and are proud to cherish our writing experts by not just paying well, but by showing off their masterpieces! Come and take a look at some of the sample writing assignments that you can order at SmartCustomWriting.

Place your order

* Prices start at$15

Total price:

Proceed to order

Participative Leadership

Participative Leadership

The purpose of this paragraph is to analyze Rok’s article “People and skills Ethical context of the participative leadership model: taking people into account” (2009). In this article, Rok states that participative leadership is a leadership that involves employees across levels of the hierarchy in decision-making. Participatory systems allow employees and external strategy, protects organizational responsiveness, and holds the managers accountable. Rok also states that it is possible for employees to participate, and when they do participate they see the whole system as one with equal opportunities for all, as a system that is more fair (2009, p. 468).

Spreitzer claims that Participative Leaders expect from their subordinates to create and implement various decisions. They might seek from employees to participate in making important decisions and to evaluate others’ ideas or points of view. They might show more tolerant behavior to their employees when it comes to differences in the organization, because they know those differences can upgrade and bring better quality to making decisions. (2007, p. 1090). Bainbridge supports Speitzer, claiming that Participative Management style is a style that requires involvement of employees by “creating formal mechanisms through which employee voices can be heard” (1996, p. 25) by the managers that make decisions and, sometimes, by letting employees to state their opinion in the making of decisions. Participatory style might lead to greater job satisfaction, which, combined with the flexible work rules, results in a greater intensity of effort from that workers are willing to invest when dealing with tasks (1996, p. 25). Kahai also claims that a participative leader would encourage his followers to contribute when the problem-solving situation occur, without instructing any directions on how to approach the task that needs to be solved (et al. 2004, p. 72).

Participative Leadership encourages involvement and participation of employees in making decisions related to the work of an organisation. They are more tolerant to opinion-differences and can provide employees with greater job satisfaction.

Directive Leadership

The purpose of this paragraph is to analyze Kahai’s article “Effects of Participative and Directive Leadership in Electronic Groups” (2004). In this article, Kahai states that the directive leaders present themselves as the ones in charge during solving problems and provided, and gave the directions to participants. Directive leadership improves performance by supporting participants to focus on relevant aspects of a problem (2004. p. 94). The structure that directive leader provided was relevant for keeping participants focused on relevant aspects of the tasks when the task was less structured (2004, p. 96).

Andrews has also suggested that directive leaders make decisions, they allocate resources and direct action of their employees in order for them to complete the task (1998, p. 131). This type of leader can be related to traditional notions of a transactional leader (1998, p. 133). Pearce have stated that this type of leadership relies on power of the position (legitimate power). Directive leaders often use directions, give commands and use intimidation as main mechanisms to control subordinate behavior (2003, p. 275). He has, also, claimed that directive leaders initiated activities within the group, organized their activity, defined how the work has to be done, established clear and precise communication, supports achievement of a goal, assigned tasks to employees, suggested some views to the problems, and coordinated activities of subordinates (2003, p. 277).

Directive Leadership excludes employees from decision-making process and determines how the work has to be done. This type of leadership should be preferred when tasks are less structured and when participants need to focus on relevant aspects of a problem.

Entrepreneurial Leadership

The purpose of this paragraph is to analyze Fl?istad’s article “Entrepreneurial Leadership” (1991). In this article, Fl?istad states that the entrepreneurial culture is a creative culture, which care about their employees, and this culture recognizes and supports employee's individual capabilities and talents. Instead of deciding what others must do, the task in this less pyramidal, organisation is under the influence of circumstances. Organisation supports employees' active participation in creative processes, and it allows employees to demonstrate and achieve their maximum (1991, p. 30). The group presents itself with several alternative ideas and solutions between which to decide (1991, p. 31).

Prabhu suggests entrepreneurial leaders might have a mission that is the social change and development of their client group. These leaders are considered to have high levels of emotional energy, which can be seen in the persistence shown by them. They are capable of withstanding social censure, they are sensitive to feelings of others, can develop clear organisational vision, can develop confidence in employees, can think creatively, and they can work for long periods (1999, p. 142,143).  Peters have stated that entrepreneurial leader has an influence on the way employees evaluate job as finally only they are responsible to motivate employees (2005, p. 576). Ng and Thorpe stated that Entrepreneurial Leadership might be helpful to some organizations to grow and survive under family control (2010, p. 457).

Entrepreneurial Leadership is committed welfare of their employees. It recognizes and supports employee's individual capabilities and talents, supports employees' active participation in process of decision-making and encourages employees’ creativity when dealing with tasks.


Andrews, J.P., Field, R.H.G. (1998). Regrounding the concept of leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 19/3, pp. 128–136

Bainbridge, S. M. (1996). Participatory Management within a Theory of the Firm. Available at SSRN:
Fl?istad, G. (1991). Entrepreneurial Leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 12 No. 7, 1991, pp. 28-31,

Gretchen Spreitzer (2007). “Participative Organizational Leadership, Empowerment, and Sustainable Peace”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Volume 28, Issue 8, pages 1077-1095

Kahai,  S.S., Sosik, J.J., Avolio, B.J. (2004). Effects of Participative and Directive Leadership in Electronic Groups. Group & Organization Management  29: 67

Ng, W., Thorpe, R. (2010).Not another study of great leaders Entrepreneurial leadership in a mid-sized family firm for its further growth and development. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 457-476

Pearce, C.L., Sims Jr, H.P., Cox, J.F., Ball, B., Schnell, E., Smith, K.A., Trevino, L. (2003). Transactors, transformers and beyond A multi-method development of a theoretical typology of leadership. Journal of Management Development Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 273-307

Peters, M. (2005). Entrepreneurial skills in leadership and human resource management evaluated by apprentices in small tourism businesses. Education þ Training Vol. 47 No. 8/9, 2005 pp. 575-591

Prabhu, G.N. (1999). Social entrepreneurial leadership. Career Development International 4/3, 140–145

Rok, B. (2009). People and skills Ethical context of the participative leadership model: taking people into account. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Vol. 9 No. 4 2009, pp. 461-47

Place an order