If you think about leaders and how decisions are made, there really are about three distinct

styles with many variations in-between. At one extreme we have the autocratic leader that makes almost a unilateral decision on how to proceed. At the other extreme we have a laissez faire leader that allows the followers or employees to make all the decisions. In the middle of these two extremes, we have democratic leaders which allow for more participation in the decision making process.

In fact, Lewin, Lippitt and White back in 1938 used these three styles as the basis for their leadership model. In the democratic leadership style we see a balance in the decision making process. Employees or followers are allowed to participate in the decisions - their opinion counts just as much as the leader's. Now this might sound like the optimal way to lead, but as we will discuss later, this leadership style has its pros and cons. Democratic Leadership at Work

Daniel Goleman also thought there were enough distinguishing characteristics of democratic leadership to include it as one of his six styles. In his model, the primary behavior of these leaders was to forge consensus through collaboration. And key to this style is communication - seeking the opinions of others and letting your opinion be known.

When the workplace is ready for democratic leaders, the style produces a work environment that employees can feel good about. Workers feel that their opinion counts and because of that feeling they are more committed to achieving the goals and objectives of the group.

But Goleman and others also recognized that not every style is effective in every work environment that's what situational leadership is all about - finding the right style to apply to the situation at hand. So then the logical question is: When is the democratic leadership style effective at work? Pros and Cons of the Democratic Leadership Style

Most of us would like to think that the democratic style could be effectively applied to any group of employees. However, when we start to scratch beneath the surface, the pros and cons of democratic leadership becomes apparent: Pros of the Democratic Leadership Style

Since employees or followers have an equal say in the decision-making process, they are more committed to the desired outcome. The collaborative environment created by this style often results in more thorough solutions to problems.

This creates an ideal environment for collaborative problem solving in addition to decision making. However, this democratic process has its drawbacks. Cons of the Democratic Leadership Style

The democratic leader depends on the knowledge of his followers or employees. If the workforce is inexperienced, this style is not very effective. You simply need a fair amount of experience to make good decisions.

The other drawback of the democratic style is the time it takes for all this collaborative effort. When you ask people for their opinions it takes time for them to explain what they think and for others to understand what they are saying. If the business need is urgent, the democratic leader needs to switch styles.

So to summarize, the pros and cons of this style are pretty much in alignment - strength also becomes weakness. You get more input, but it takes time. People can share their knowledge, but they have to understand the process first. So the democratic leadership style is most effective when you have a workplace that has experienced employees and you can afford to spend the time necessary to develop a thorough solution. Examples of Democratic Leaders

We're going to finish up by giving you an example of a democratic leader at work. If your thinking President John F. Kennedy is a famous democratic leader, you'd be partially correct. You're right in saying President Kennedy was a Democrat and certainly he will be remembered as a great leader. But President Kennedy was actually a very good example of a charismatic leader - not a democratic one.

Interestingly one of the best examples of a democratic leader is also a political figure - Dwight D. Eisenhower (a Republican no less!). As a military leader Eisenhower was faced with the difficult task of getting the Alliance forces to agree on a common strategy. Eisenhower worked hard to make sure everyone worked together to come to a common understanding. This was one of his greatest

achievements. It was here that the democratic leadership style and collaborative efforts of Eisenhower shone through and with a victory of the Alliance forces to help back up the correctness of the approach.

William J. Clinton
During the administration of William Jefferson Clinton, the U.S. enjoyed more peace and economic well being than at any time in its history. He was the first Democratic president since Franklin D. Roosevelt to win a second term. He could point to the lowest unemployment rate in modern times, the lowest inflation in 30 years, the highest home ownership in the country's history, dropping crime rates in many places, and reduced welfare rolls. He proposed the first balanced budget in decades and achieved a budget surplus. As part of a plan to celebrate the millennium in 2000, Clinton called for a great national initiative to end racial discrimination. After the failure in his second year of a huge program of health care reform, Clinton shifted emphasis, declaring "the era of big government is over." He sought legislation to upgrade education, to protect jobs of parents who must care for sick children, to restrict handgun sales, and to strengthen environmental rules. President Clinton was born William Jefferson Blythe III on August 19, 1946, in Hope, Arkansas, three months after his father died in a traffic accident. When he was four years old, his mother wed Roger Clinton, of Hot Springs, Arkansas. In high school, he took the family name. He excelled as a student and as a saxophone player and once considered becoming a professional musician. As a delegate to Boys Nation while in high school, he met President John Kennedy in the White House Rose Garden. The encounter led him to enter a life of public service. Clinton was graduated from Georgetown University and in 1968 won a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford University. He received a law degree from Yale University in 1973, and entered politics in Arkansas. He was defeated in his campaign for Congress in Arkansas's Third District in 1974. The next year he married Hillary Rodham, a graduate of Wellesley College and Yale Law School. In 1980, Chelsea, their only child, was born. Clinton was elected Arkansas Attorney General in 1976, and won the governorship in 1978. After losing a bid for a second term, he regained the office four years later, and served until he defeated incumbent George Bush and third party candidate Ross Perot in the 1992 presidential race. Clinton and his running mate, Tennessee's Senator Albert Gore Jr., then 44, represented a new generation in American political leadership. For the first time in 12 years both the White House and Congress were held by the same party. But that political edge was brief; the Republicans won both houses of Congress in 1994.

In 1998, as a result of issues surrounding personal indiscretions with a young woman White House intern, Clinton was the second U.S. president to be impeached by the House of Representatives. He was tried in the Senate and found not guilty of the charges brought against him. He apologized to the nation for his actions and continued to have unprecedented popular approval ratings for his job as president. In the world, he successfully dispatched peace keeping forces to war-torn Bosnia and bombed Iraq when Saddam Hussein stopped United Nations inspections for evidence of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. He became a global proponent for an expanded NATO, more open international trade, and a worldwide campaign against drug trafficking. He drew huge crowds when he traveled through South America, Europe, Russia, Africa, and China, advocating U.S. style freedom.