Delegative leadership style is not an effective leadership to be used in a correctional facility as it provides individuals with a lot of freedom. Individuals in such facilities should not be left to make independent decisions because such freedom could cause them to become less productive. Individuals in correctional facilities need to be aware of their roles. This leadership style is not suitable because it does not allow the leader to get involved during the team member’s decision-making process. People in correctional facilities must be monitored closely and seek guidance before making any decisions. Decision-making with consultation could enhance confusion within the facility.
Those in correctional facilities can fail to account for their responsibilities if leaders use laissez Faure management style. The failure is because a leader cannot blame an individual in the group for an issue that could have occurred and caused damage. A leader gets forced to be away from the group hence less monitoring of the inmates. Moreover, inmates need a leader that is always close to motivate them. This aspect proves to be impossible for delegative leadership as the leaders avoid their responsibilities and have zero interest in driving their team members. ( Moss & Ngu, 2006). It is easy for people to abuse delegative leaders. Inmates could take advantage of the fact that they do not get monitored to engage in illegal activities. Because individuals could be left to carry out tasks on their own, it could be difficult for management to implement change when required because every person does their things without guidance. Change can get achieved when a team works under one leader, but the laissez Faure leadership model does not anticipate for teamwork. As much as it makes individuals be in control of their environment, the leadership style is not suitable for those in correctional facilities as it creates silos. People stay in a comfort zone due to little or no supervision at all. Moreover, it proves difficult for all to participate whenever there is a project that requires teamwork. This aspect can result in the division within the correction facility, and individuals compete with each other in a manner that is not healthy. Individuals can come up with their own rules that could go against the set rules for the facility. Once people build up silos, it can be impossible to break them, and this could even lead to rebellion within the facility (Bobo, Kluegel & Smith, 1997). Some individuals in a correctional facility can easily abuse delegative leadership. Abuse could occur when a group of inmates decide to take advantage of the fact that they got left on their own without supervision. Such situations can encourage people to do as they like because they know that no leader would stop them. Moreover, people in correctional facilities require close guidance and supervision, which is impossible in delegative leadership. Such individuals could even leave the facility worse than they were as leaders cannot take up their full responsibilities in helping inmates to reform. In conclusion, Laissez Faure leadership model reduces unity among team members. The leaders get withdrawn from those who look up to them for guidance. Lack of interest in their work can enhance disunity in individuals within the correction facilities over time. The result could be for some team members to be rebellious when expected to carry out regular tasks and projects, making it impossible for them to reform. Rebelliousness leads to a wastage of time and resources as people could leave the facility with little or no reforms at all and end up repeating their previous mistakes. All these factors are reasons as to why the model of leadership is not suitable for correctional facilities.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
References
Moss, S. A., & Ngu, S. (2006). The relationship between personality and leadership preferences. Current research in social psychology , 11 (6), 70-91.
Bobo, L., Kluegel, J. R., & Smith, R. A. (1997). Laissez-faire racism: The crystallization of a kinder, gentler, antiblack ideology. Racial attitudes in the 1990s: Continuity and change , 15 , 23-25.
