Managers are appointed to their position. Their ability to influence is based on the formal authority inherent in that position. That means a manager may not have the ability to influent his subordinates even though he is sitting in the "Manager's Office". This is exactly the problem David is facing with in the case. Without doubt, David is an expert in the field of general accounting principles and regulations. But some crisis, because of his insufficient skills in management, emerged after he had taken the position of Manager, Accounting Operations. The shortcomings of his managerial skills lie in his ill-suited leadership style, improper communication as well as lack of motivation. Here, we take a close look at the issue of his leadership style and flaw in communication. .
According to University of Iowa Studies, there are three different styles of leadership. The autocratic style described a leader who typically tended to centralize authority, dictate work methods, make unilateral decisions, and limit employee participation. The democratic style described a leader who tended to involve employees in decision making, delegate authority, encourage participation in deciding work methods and goals, and use feed back as an opportunity for coaching employees. The laissez-faire style leader generally gave the group complete freedom to make decisions and complete the work in whatever way it saw fit.
In this case, "the safest way to work in the section is to do as one is told and not question directives" definitely demonstrates the leadership style of David------Autocratic Style. Although David seems to give specific areas of responsibility, according to their abilities, he monitors them constantly to make sure that the subordinates are performing to his expectations and totally to his requirements. The lack of confidence and belief in his subordinates made David an autocratic leader who would like to set all regulations and procedures himself, not giving any freedom to the subordinates in practice.