Sociology

The paper talks about the various styles of management leadership in place in various organizations. All the systems are critically reviewed on their relative strengths and weaknesses.

A major focus of the study is the influence of democratic leadership style on the social care and wellbeing of its followers. Others systems are also reviewed in that manner and relative strengths
and weaknesses are highlighted. The democratic system is found to be a good indicator for the social care of employees but towards the end of the study a paternalistic style of leadership is recommended as the best fit for strategic direction among employees while assuring their social well being at the same time.

What is Social care
Social sciences are a study of the society and the people that makes up that society. A fundamental aspect of social science is the element of social care in that system. Social care has its effects in many areas ranging from the quality of life, justice, work life, personal and family life. The scope of social care here is limited to the impact of social care on the work life and especially (Sale, 2000).

What are Management styles
Management is primarily about planning, organizing, controlling, leading, motivating and staff, what binds this principal task of a manager and the subsequent approach, technique and style that governs each of the managerial activity makes up a management style. It is about how you take decisions and interact with subordinates to meet up organizational goals. Different management styles are exhibited in different organizations each depending on the unique culture and values specific to each organization, the nature of the business, the nature of the workforce and in the end the skills of the leader itself. It is in the larger interest of organizations that leaders should exercise a range of management styles and should deploy them as appropriate (Kevin   HYPERLINK httpwww.amazon.comexecobidossearch-handle-url5FencodingUTF8search-typessindexbooksfield-authorPhilip20Kotler Kotler 2008).

Knowledge of theories relating to management and leadership styles
Autocratic
Advocates of this style are One man Show or  All in All when they take decisions or direct the efforts of their subordinates. The leader himself is the prime decision maker and consequently those decisions will reflect the traits and personality of that leader. This at times gives and impression that a business is stable, confident and stringent in what it does but at the same time the subordinates are not properly groomed in the process. They rely heavily on their leaders and require more supervision subsequently (Anonymous, n.d). The one man show nature of this leadership management style makes the business so directly related to the acts of just one person and every one is at his her disposal, so there is a fair chance of every thing collapsing if that leader falters.

Further to it there are two types of autocratic leaders
The Directive Autocrat who takes decision on all its own and keeps a tight supervision on those under him her.

The Permissive Autocrat who takes decision on all its own but gives subordinates some flexibility and say in doing their tasks (Sale, 2000).

Paternalistic
It is more of a dictatorial form of leadership and management style however decisions being taken are in best interests of the employees at the same time. Such a leader justifies most of its decisions to its employees by discussing with them ensuring that their social and leisure needs are given full consideration. This makes it soothe the effect a pure autocratic management style pose to the workers motivation levels. Communication and chain of command follows a top- down sequence but feedback is encouraged. This style is famous for the emphasis it gives to workers social needs. However the same disadvantage of over reliance on leader on the part of employees makes this style a little in effective as well (Leaderhip-expert.co.uk, n.d.).

Democratic
This style follows the guiding principles of a democratic government system where by the leader allows its employees to take part in decision-making and overall management. At the end of the day only that is decided and implements that the majority supports. Likewise the communication is both directions, flowing freely from Leader to subordinates and vice versa. Advocates of this style are high- tech firms and those involved in providing technical services when the complex nature of the work calls for input from various levels of the organization. On a social front, such styles gives the most say to the employees consequently job satisfaction, employee morale and so on and so forth are most positively found. A major disadvantage however is that when too many people are involved in a decision making process, there is a lot of Halo effect, personal and socio- cultural biases and overall the decision  making process is slowed due to lot of human involvement. Often the best decision is not struck but the most popular one is opted for. So this system too poses some serious threat on the social front as do most the democratic government systems. Further the democratic leaders are also two types i.e. permissive and directive (Sale, 2000).

 Laissez-faire
The system as the name applies gives maximum freedom to the subordinates and the leaders say is minimal at most times. Mainly the employees manage their own tasks, role and areas of work.   The communication in this style is two way back and forth flowing in both the directions equally This style fosters the most effective personal development in employees because they take the sole responsibility of their actions but at the same time minimal leadership hinders the strategic orientation of the company and poor management is witnessed. The staff lacks focus leading the greatest amount of dissatisfaction, overall depleting the company image in the long run. So from the social angle, this style gives so much freedom to the employees that the success of the company is in the direct control of its employees and can lead to destruction (Money-zine.com, n.d.).

Application of the above to the social care sector
Autocratic
Such a style of management has least amount of flexibility in organizational management. People have to go by the rules, dont have much say and have to comply to their leader decision. All this renders this style of management least effective on the social care front of the employees. Employees have least say so they dont feel an integral part of the organizational social environment, They dont have many options and thus have to comply to leader direction so they are always bound to act in a particular way, all making them in valuable least contributing to their social environment thus this style harness the social well being of the employees at most (Stimpson 2002).

Paternalistic
This style gives some flexibility to the employees and is a hybrid between Autocratic and the Democratic leadership style. This therefore makes it a generous system as far as the social well being of employees is concerned (Anonymous, n.d.).

Democratic Style
The democratic style empowers the employees most and it ensures equity and freedom of speech as far as the overall management is concerned. It empowers the employees with responsibility in taking their decisions, investigating their external environment then decide what is most economical and socially acceptable, thus it gives a better chance to employees to interact to their environment and gain recondition as they do decision making. It gives a greater feeling of employee working for their own and group social well being (Sale, 2000). Whatever decisions they take has a major social influence and social conformity all assuring that the most socially acceptable decision was taken eventually giving the decision makers greater sense of belonging. This method also fosters a great deal of knowledge and experience enrichment among the employees, As they take decisions for their overall well being, the entire responsibility lies ahead them, so they research more, interact with intellectuals, brainstorm more each giving a new horizon to their existing knowledge base and there by making them more socially recognizable and equipped (Legacee, n.d).

There is certainly a figure head for all the subordinates who act as their mentor, heshe is most flexible with the way he respects its employees point of view and is more human in his attitude because of the underlying nature of this management style, this arouse a feeling of unity and general consensus and subordinates feel good that their leader is supportive to their point of view and thus their morale is on the ever high. This approach follows an informal methodology of coming up with new ideas and decision making which again makes the employee comfortable in their environment and thus they are most motivated to work. Finally there is a greater element of tolerance among people when they head such a style of management because they are running the show and they have to get the job done. There is a lot of discussion and minimal conflict and in cases of in harmony some one from the crowd seeks resolution again making this style of management a more peaceful thus socially acceptable method of management. Finally the lines of communication are two way, every one has a vote and a point to make if wanted, so people has equal say thus making everyone more socially laudable ( Daft 2008).

Laissez-faire
This system is an extreme form of management style. This offers the highest level of freedom to employees. Such high levels of freedom make this system a little ineffective at times. There are no boundaries, no top level supervision, thereby at many times many unethical incidents are encountered harnessing the social well being of its people. People lack direction, therefore at times miss on important deadlines that hinders the organizational performances and consequently when such non performing employees are fired they face a social disaster. Often due to minimal supervision the communication lines are so informal that people use foul language again harnessing the social well being of the people. However this system gives the employees the best feel in terms of how an actual social system works, it matches their house hold life, employees work as family members all giving the employees a greater sense of social proximity. If well managed this system is a prospective one for the best social care cum management system.

Do you think that there are other styles that are appropriate for social care
It is advisable to use a hybrid of democratic and autocratic style to ensure the best social well being of people. Democratic gives employees equal say while autocratic manhattans direction and mentoring. So employees wont go astray while they are socially free in decision making them most secure socially. Such are the characteristics of Paternalistic approach to management and I would suggest adopting that to ensure the best social well being of employees.

Overall such a hybrid approach manages misconduct among employees, ensures the best level of required supervision with just the right amount of freedom bestowed thus rendering it the most complete package for the social well being of the employees (Scribd n.d.)

Conclusion
The paper talked about the various modes of management and highlighted the democratic style in particular while putting light on the same in respect to the social care it guarantees to its followers. Others systems were critically review with that respect as well and it was suggested that to strike a balance, a hybrid system of leadership should be adopted i.e. the Paternalistic approach.