From Authoritarian to Laissez-Faire
-
Analyzing all the managerial methods through the years, I have found that the best method is Laissez-Faire. What is Laissez-Faire? It is a very simply management style. You let things run their course with minimal interference. Why is it superior? Well it’s quite simple; all the others have obvious flaws. Within management, three major components of leadership are used: authoritarian, bureaucratic, and Laissez-faire.
Authoritarian leadership is obvious; one person tells everyone else to do. This method is clearly flawed in that it works only insomuch as the leader is competent. I’ve been through enough bosses to know that is not a reasonable assumption. Typically, authoritarian leaders are at best insecure and take their frustrations out on their underlings. This is counterproductive and only breeds a cycle of resentment as they have to replace their employees.
The bureaucratic method is possibly even worse. Instead of having one incompetent leader, you now have a stream of them. This method is amazingly idiotic. You don’t have to produce results or get anything done, you just have to play the game and milk the funds. And what is even worse is that it even overtly wastes the funds. They delegate money to different departments and expect it to be used. This money is then further subdivided and often wasted so that the next delegation is at least the same. They don’t care what is it used for, they just want the appearance. In truth, all of these methods only care for appearance.
Before I continue, allow me to stop. What have I done here? Well, first off, I have used largely emotional arguments, arguments that are easily debunked and likely whoever reads this is thinking counterpoints right now. There is a degree of truth in it, but it is scattered at best and more obviously biased. Also, when rationally considering this topic, you must consider the benefits of each method. The benefit of authoritarian government is it can be efficient, if done right. The downside is it usually abused. The benefit of bureaucratic methods is it is “fair,” at least as America defines it. The problem is it is legalistic and easily abused, just like authoritarian government. The benefit of laissez-faire is it allows competent people to actually work. The problem is it is the easiest system to abuse because it has only the faintest rules.
Of course, there are possibly other systems, but they all have the same core issue, they are all easily abused by those that desire to do so. Furthermore, any system can be made appealing by pointing out the positive parts of it. And the funny thing is they almost all have a positive component. But if you listen to people and try to change the system, you will find nothing really changed but the rules.
People are the core problem. Now look at our history the past hundred or so years and tell me how many times they have tried to change the system. Why? What has it accomplished? Well, what is has accomplished is a hundred years worth of half finished systems that have failed. And now today all I hear about, politically, is how we can change the government to fix it. How do you think we are going to fix something that at least twenty previous generations couldn’t fix? Seriously, instead of trying to implement a hundred more programs and recovery attempts we really should just focus on what we have now and make that work as best we can. Does that not mean we have to change some? Of course it does, but we don’t need more programs and more attempts to radically change the government to something you don’t even know will work.
About The Author
Brandon Landers
We become desolate. It's not enough, it never is, but life will go on until the end.
