Democratic Leadership
The topic is whether democratic leadership is always preferable.
There are a lot of angles you can take, but one big job is
to "unpack" the term 'democratic': what does it really mean? What
does it imply?
Here are some angles:
1. All organizations need good two-way communication to succeed. It
is difficult to envision how can this be achieved in the absence of a
democratic culture.
2. Many organizations require secrecy in order to function properly.
But secrecy seems to be in conflict with democracy, because it limits
information to some decision-makers.
3. All organizations require obedience, yet, the obligation to obey
doesn't seem to fit well in a democratic context. (Or does it?)
4. Democracy requires compromise, yet sometimes an organization
needs "uncompromising leadership" in order to thrive. (Or not?)
5. Organizations thrive on expert decision-making, yet democracy does
not seem to be compatible with this, since everyone is involved in
the decision-making. In other words, often democratic leadership
leads to mediocrity.
Help me think of more angles.