This essay was inspired by an article by Wagner (2005) titled "Would you want Machiavelli as your CEO?" In this essay, the following styles of leadership are contrasted:

• Machiavellian (autocratic): The leader's sole purpose is to gain and maintain sole power of the organization by any necessary means. 
• Taoist (empowering): Based on Lau-tzu's ideas that a leader should lead by example and with humility, in many ways taking a laissez-faire approach to leadership.

As Wagner (2005) indicates, the way to view Machiavellian (autocratic) leadership in relation to the Taoist (empowering) style is to think of these as polar ends of a continuum. From this perspective, some company types and business conditions will react well to leadership that is toward the autocratic end of the continuum. This is especially true in crisis situations, when decisions must be made fast and strong direction is needed. To use a sports analogy, in the final seconds of a basketball game autocratic leadership is necessary to plan a game-winning play during a 30 second timeout. In light of the recent financial crisis, some businesses will surely benefit from a shift toward autocratic leadership. Other factors that may merit autocratic leadership include cultural expectations, employee capabilities, the nature of the product, and the number of employees. That said, empowering leadership styles and other eclectic styles may accomplish similar results.

Equating Machiavellian leadership with autocratic leadership is problematic. Wagner indicates the Machiavellian philosophy is entirely self-serving for the leader and justifies vindictive, heartless, and other immoral behavior. While this style is autocratic, it doesn't follow that autocratic leadership must be Machiavellian. A person can be autocratic, yet focused on the good of the company and its people and stakeholders. For example, Sun Tzu's Art of War emphasizes strict discipline and other autocratic traits, yet without the negative characteristics that Machiavelli espoused.

The use of coercion and the self-serving nature described in Machiavelli's The Prince are inherently destructive. The antics used by a Machiavellian leader will garner distrust among subordinates, peers, and superiors. This leadership will likely infringe upon human rights issues that are a concern worldwide.

From the perspective of French and Raven's sources of power ("Power [philosophy]," 2009), Machiavellian leadership builds on tenuous sources like coercion and legitimate power. This is ironic, since the Machiavelli's driving goal is to gain personal power, yet the means he uses to achieve this power are weak compared to the empowering model of Lau-tzu. Lao-tzu's method develops strong referent power, which severs as a much stronger power for persuasion of people. As Wagner indicates, autocratic leadership is now obsolete.

Modern day examples of Machiavelli (autocratic) include:

• Perhaps one of the best somewhat-modern day examples of Machiavelli power is Hitler. That did not work so well.
• This style has been portrayed quite a bit in movies such as Scarface, American Gangster, and The Last King of Scotland. Some of these accounts are fictional, but some based on true stories. The end result is usually bad for the leader.
• Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe and Saddam Hussein are examples of recent military leaders. There are many military examples of this leadership style.
• Martha Stewart is perhaps a modern day example in business leadership.

Modern day examples of Lao-tzu (empowering) include:

• Universities & hospitals. Generally, leadership of professionals like doctors and university professors is not very controlling.
• Google and Nokia: These are examples of flat management systems, that have a high number of knowledgeable workers.
• The popular "Servant Leadership" ideas by Robert Greenleaf ("Servant Leadership," 2009) is Taoist in nature.

Emphatically, I can say I prefer to work for a Taoist leader. In this regard, I am not much different than any of my colleague university professors. The Taoist approach to leadership is very compatible with management of "professional employees" such as doctors, scientists, lawyers, and university professors. In businesses with highly qualified and knowledgeable employees, it is important to lead by example and develop a relationship of support for employees, to allow for the workers to go about solving their problems based on their own expertise. I found much support for this approach in my dissertation research on managerial control by university department chairs (Sather, 2004).

As a leader myself, I prefer Lao-tzu as a default management style. However, from experience I have found that this approach is too idealistic. To lead by example and empower others, then trust them to be intrinsically motivated to perform high quality work, often does not come to fruition. Perhaps this is due to people's (those in my realm) expectation of and reliance on extrinsic motivation. Because of this, I too often revert to Machiavelli characteristics when things move too slowly, become inefficient, or are of poor quality. My approach seems to be consistent with recommendations on leadership,  that a effective leaders should apply a diversity of styles along the autocratic-empowering continuum, based on the situation.

Reference List

Power (philosophy). (2009, July 24). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 17:51, July 24, 2009, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_(philosophy)#Five_bases_of_power

Sather, B. A. (2004). Managerial control of faculty by physical education department chairpersons. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas Woman’s University, Denton, TX. Retrieved July 29, 2008 from http://www.eou.edu/~bsather/research/managerial_control_of_faculty-sathe...

Servant leadership. (2009, August 5). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 02:43, August 5, 2009, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Servant_leadership&oldid=30613...

Wagner, C. K. (2005). Would you want Machiavelli as your CEO? The implications of autocratic versus empowering leadership styles to innovation. In C. W. Weick (Ed.). Out of context: A creative approach to strategic management (pp. 75-85). Mason, OH: Thomson/South-Western.