This annotated bibliography evaluates ten scholarly sources related to the authoritative management style and its relative merits as a leadership approach. The paper opens with a brief argument that the authoritative style — characterized by clear direction, communicated vision, and follower autonomy in execution — is arguably the most effective management approach. Each annotation summarizes a source's core argument, assesses the credibility of its authors, and explains its relevance to the broader research question. Sources span multiple industries and national contexts, including healthcare, education, IT, and corporate mergers, and collectively present both the strengths and limitations of authoritative management compared to participative, servant, benevolent, and authoritarian styles.
While there is no single universally appropriate management style, the authoritative style is arguably the best management style. An authoritative manager assertively and enthusiastically communicates the mission and vision of the group or organisation, clearly provides direction, and unambiguously articulates expectations. This ensures precise, timely, and systematic execution of tasks. Though considered an authority, an authoritative leader allows their followers to use their own approaches in accomplishing set goals and assigned tasks.
Zhang, J., Ahammad, M., Tarba, S., Cooper, C., Glaister, K., & Wang, J. (2015). The effect of leadership style on talent retention during merger and acquisition integration: evidence from China. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(7), 1021–1050.
With evidence from mergers and acquisitions (M&As) in Chinese firms, this article argues that authoritative leadership, together with task-focused and relationship-focused leadership, positively affects talent retention as well as post-M&A integration. M&As are crucial corporate-level strategies, and if not properly handled may not generate the desired outcomes. The authors are affiliated with reputable institutions of higher learning in the UK, notably Nottingham Trent University, University of Sheffield, Lancaster University, University of Warwick, and University of Nottingham, which speaks to the credibility of the article. The article is important because it illustrates the significance of authoritative management in generating positive employee and organisational outcomes, demonstrating the appropriateness of the authoritative style and making it an ideal source for the research paper.
Cenkci, A., & Ozcelik, G. (2015). Leadership styles and subordinate work engagement: the moderating impact of leader gender. Global Business & Management Research, 7(4), 8–20.
This article considers the implications of authoritative leadership versus benevolent leadership on employee outcomes. With evidence from 350 employees working in Turkish firms, the article shows that compared to authoritative leadership, benevolent leadership is more positively associated with work engagement and dedication. In other words, because subordinates are insignificantly involved in decision-making, the authoritative style of management may not empower employees or generate feelings of attachment to the organisation. One of the authors is a leadership and management professor at Wright State University (U.S.), while the other is a professor of administrative sciences at Okan University (Turkey), confirming that both authors are adequately knowledgeable in the subject matter. The article is relevant to the research paper because it demonstrates the negative implications authoritative management may have on an organisation, particularly in terms of employee outcomes — making it important to consider both sides of the debate.
"Sources challenging universal applicability of authoritative style"
"Cultural and national influences on management style adoption"
"Full APA reference list for all cited sources"
You’re 23% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.