Authoritative Management Style: Annotated Bibliography

Overview of the Authoritative Management Style

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.

Authoritative Leadership in Corporate and Talent Contexts

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.

Comparing Leadership Styles Across Industries

Gonos, J., & Gallo, P. (2013). Model for leadership style evaluation. Management: Journal of Contemporary Management, 18(2), 157–168.

This article compares the prevalence of four styles of management in firms: exploitative-authoritative, benevolent-authoritative, consultative, and participative. The survey indicates that authoritative management — combining exploitative-authoritative and benevolent-authoritative — was the most common style among the included firms. Though the study may not be representative of all firms, it demonstrates the popularity of the authoritative management style. The authors are management professors at Slovakian universities, meaning they have extensive knowledge of the subject. The relevance of the article stems from its comparison of the authoritative style with other management styles, providing important insights about why the authoritative management style may be the best. This makes the article an ideal source for the research paper.

Sternberg, R. (2013). Leadership styles for academic administrators: what works when? Change, 24–27.

This perspective paper provides a description of four leadership styles and their appropriateness within the context of educational administration: authoritarian, administratively-based authoritative, faculty-based authoritative, and laissez-faire. The general argument is that there is no single style that fits all situations or produces optimal outcomes for all stakeholders, meaning the authoritative style may not be appropriate in some situations despite its advantages. The author is the president of the University of Wyoming and has served as a professor of psychology and education for more than three decades, demonstrating extensive mastery of the subject. The article is relevant to the research because it provides a comprehensive description of various management and leadership styles, including the authoritative style.

Bielous, G. (1994). Why we should become an authoritative manager and not an authoritarian one. Supervision, 55(9), 11–13.

This article provides the key differences between permissive (democratic), authoritarian, and authoritative management styles. The overall argument is that authoritative leadership is the most appropriate style because it provides a middle ground between democratic and authoritarian leadership. An authoritative manager exerts authority while simultaneously giving subordinates some autonomy. At the time the article was authored, the author was a college graduate and a supervisor at a manufacturing company, which may raise some doubts about credibility given the author's somewhat limited academic expertise on the topic. Nonetheless, the article is quite useful: it not only highlights the importance of authoritative leadership but also provides a succinct distinction between authoritarian and authoritative leadership — two terms that are frequently confused.