Autocratic Leaders Can Cause Big Problems

Cathie Leimbach • July 23, 2020

This is a subtitle for your new post

Some leaders are staunch autocrats. They believe that being responsible for team or company performance requires them to control where, when, and how employees do their work.


Others are servant leaders. They leverage their employees’ strengths. They assign tasks that fit with each employees’ natural preferences. They are clear on what the employees are expected to accomplish and encourage their staff to find the best way for them to achieve these results.


Unfortunately, I have experience using both of these leadership styles. Servant leadership is a win/win/win while autocratic leadership can be a lose/lose/lose for the leader, the team members, and the organization. Interpersonal rapport, personal satisfaction, and bottom line results are all stronger with servant leadership. 


Servant leaders help employees to feel appreciated and valued, which increases employee engagement, retention, and productivity, resulting in a good bottom line for the organization. Yet, few managers are not servant leaders. 51% of managers think they are showing appreciation to their staff, only 17% of the workforce feels appreciated and valued. 65% of employees have left an organization to escape from a bad boss and the toxic workplace the leader created.


Our economy and our quality of life are both suffering because the majority of managers are ineffective. Only 35% get any training on how to lead people, and only 10% display effective people management skills during their first 10 years in a people leadership position. Many use an autocratic leadership style which frequently backfires.


Autocratic leaders often give employees step by step instructions on when and how to do their work, rather than clearly defining the results they should achieve and giving them flexibility with how to get there. Employees become frustrated with their boss’s micromanagement. (My children have balked when I have used the autocratic style when assigning chores they have done before.) Employees (or spouses and children) may discover ways to do their work that are more efficient and more fun. They may have a more alert mind and more energy in the morning, so want to do their hardest or least-liked work early in the day. Autocratic managers squelch such innovation and insist on following a standard process.


By denying their staff the opportunity to change for the better, autocratic leaders hinder the organization’s future success. 


Research shows that when individuals have a sense of control over how they live and work, they have more self-motivation and better mental health. When they don’t have much autonomy, they feel stifled and frustrated. They experience little job satisfaction resulting in less motivation, higher absenteeism, poorer health, and reduced productivity. 


Autocratic managers tend to cause more problems than they solve. How long will organizations and society put up with the economic and human toll of ineffective people management practices?


Management skills that empower, encourage, and engage the workforce can be learned. When will you and your organization make it a priority to invest in equipping managers to develop healthy, high performing individuals and teams?


There are few investments that yield a higher ROI than equipping leaders to support their team members for success. When will you invest in sharpening the people leadership skills in your organization?



To learn more about affordable ways to equip your leaders to serve the needs of your employees and increase productivity, contact Cathie Leimbach at cathie@agonleadership.com or 440-320-3113. 



Why Engagement Isn’t About Perks

By Cathie Leimbach • February 10, 2026
When engagement drops, many organizations reach for perks—rewards, programs, or incentives. These can create a short lift, but they rarely solve the real issue. Engagement starts with expectations. Most people want to do good work. What gets in the way isn’t motivation—it’s uncertainty. When priorities shift, roles feel unclear, or success means different things to different leaders, people disengage quietly. Leaders often don’t realize they’re contributing to this. Vague direction, inconsistent follow-through, or assuming “they already know” leaves teams guessing. Over time, guessing turns into frustration—and frustration turns into disengagement. Strong engagement cultures focus on leadership basics: Clear priorities Shared definitions of success Aligned expectations Consistent reinforcement When expectations are clear, people move with confidence. They take ownership, collaborate better, and stay engaged because they know where they’re headed. Perks can support engagement—but only after clarity is in place. 👉 Read our full article on Why Engagement Starts With Expectations to turn clarity into a real advantage.

How Could You Create a 5-10% Productivity Shift? 

By Cathie Leimbach • February 3, 2026
When it comes to improvement at work, the focus is often on big changes. But frequently, it’s small shifts that quietly create big results. Productivity rarely improves without strong leadership practices. So, what if better leadership increased productivity by just 5-10%? That could mean: Less rework Faster decisions More follow-through Less firefighting More output — without more people That’s not wishful thinking. When leadership improves, absenteeism and turnover drop. Work flows more smoothly. Results, and the bottom line, improve.  When leaders get clearer, communicate better, and follow through more consistently, friction fades. People know what matters. Decisions move faster. Energy shifts from fixing problems to getting real work done. Organizations that invest in leadership development often see: Higher output Lower turnover Better use of talent Stronger momentum The real shift happens when leaders stop asking, “ Should we invest in leadership ?” and start asking, “ What is it costing us not to ?” 👉 Join our 60-minute Leadership Conversation to see what a 10–15% shift could mean for your organization.