The autocratic governance is a classic approach that is useful in political, social, and organizational governance. The governor, who is the leader, has maximum power and control over the decision process. He therefore determines the best venture for the whole organization or nation without the input of the subjects that he or she leads. Moreover, the staff or the followers in the autocracy adhere to the orders of the top leader. Furthermore, they do not require explanations to execute orders. Besides, the autocracy governance has the attributes of punishments structures for the offenders or for those who defy the rule of the top most commanders. Conversely, the governance has sets of commands that have rewards sets for the loyal followers in the subject groups.
The governance of my home region
The governance in my region is a mixture of different governance styles. Because of the laws and regulations that the law enforcers implement in the general public, the bureaucratic governance is present at home. Moreover, the available authority falls under the constitution and thus a bureaucracy. If a case is unclear to the available authority, the authority refers to the level above that translates from my home town to the larger county government.
Conversely, the democratic rule is present in my home town. The civil leadership is open for citizen participation. Moreover, the specific leaders such as the mayor encourage the residents to be part of the decisions process. For example, the mayor urges the residents to be vigilant and help stop crime in the area. Besides, the mayor keeps the residents aware of the proceedings of the town and the problems that are imminent. Hence, the available authority informs the residents about the aspects that affect work. Also, the authority encompasses the residents in the decisions as they announce every step of the solutions.
A Comparison of the key components of governance in the region of my research with the key components of governance in my home region
The North Korea region experiences the totalitarian rule that constitutes the autocracy. Conversely, my home area experiences moderate bureaucracy and democratic governance. However, both areas experience represent fundamental guidelines that guide residents on their daily expectations by the authority. The two governance outlooks follow a structure in rule deployment. Moreover, the autocracy, the bureaucracy, and the democracy governances present set of punishments and rewards. However, the seriousness of the rewards in an autocracy is more than the democracy and bureaucratic approaches.
The governance perspectives have leader figures at the helm of the governance structures. The democratic approach has a democratic leader who represents the needs of the population. Additionally, the bureaucratic outlook has a leader who oversees the successful implementation of the available rules and regulations. Also, the autocracy has a leader who makes the decisions for the population to follow. All the outlooks involve the leadership of people in the quest to serve the best interest to the greater good of the community. The governance styles cannot operate in places that lack human populations.
Strengths and weaknesses in the different arrangements for determining and delivering public goods and services
The autocracy is powerful in the efficient performance and delivery of goods. The workers have tight deadlines to follow or attain punishment in the event of failure to meet them. Because the autocratic leaders rules with fear and threats, the civil servants deliver public goods to cater for the needs of the people. Contrariwise, the autocracy relies on the ability of the ruler to deliver justice to the people. The supreme leader is responsible for the decisions that affect millions of subjects. Therefore, a corrupt leader in autocracy embezzles funds from the government for personal use and does not provide explanations for the misuse. An incompetent autocratic leader does not notice the corrupt practices that the people in office undertake in the delivery of goods to the public. Since an autocratic leader does not consult in decision process, the autocracy governance limits the efficient delivery of public goods.
The bureaucratic leadership provides a construct that allows the specific delivery of goods to the civil population. The governance style is efficient as it delegates duties and creates specialization. However, the governance style provides too many stages that delay the delivery of public goods. Simple decisions take length periods to go through numerous departments for the civil population to benefit. The style limits the delivery of goods as it provides many rigidities to non-governmental stakeholders who assist in the delivery of goods and services. Therefore, the governance style wastes time and resources due to excess participants in the decisions process.
The democratic style is the best in the delivery of goods and services to the public, the public has the constitutional power to elect the leader who presents the best ideology of service. The level of cooperation is efficient and allows the public to have knowledge of the extent of service and product delivery. However, the public can make a wrong selection in the best leader to fulfil the needs of the community. The population can elect an incompetent leader who underperforms in the delivery of services and civil products. Moreover, the governance style allows the population to have freedom that can be detrimental in the implementation of product delivery formats. The leaders face opposition that limits the conduciveness of the product delivery.
- Bentzen, J., Kaarsen, N. and Wingender, A. (2016). IRRIGATION AND AUTOCRACY.
Journal of the European Economic Association.
- Bush, T. (2014). Emotional leadership: A viable alternative to the bureaucratic model?.
Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 42(2), pp.163-164.
- Dragicevic-Sesic, M. (2013). The leadership of Mira Trailovic: An entereneurial spirit in a bureaucratic world. Kultura, (140), pp.100-121.
- Grindle, M. (2016). Good Governance, R.I.P.: A Critique and an Alternative. Governance.
- Hennig, B. (2016). New Ways of Looking at Democracy. Board Leadership, 2016(146), pp.1-3.
- Nur-tegin, K. (2014). Entrenched Autocracy or New Democracy: Which Is Better for Business?. Kyklos, 67(3), pp.398-419.
- Puddington, A. (2014). The Democratic Leadership Gap. Journal of Democracy, 25(2), pp.77-92.
- Rotberg, R. (2014). Good Governance Means Performance and Results. Governance, 27(3), pp.511-518.
- Torday, J., Zuo, L., Huszczuk, A., Poon, C., Del Rio, R., Nicolò, A., Ward, S., Chuang, C., Andrade, D., Schultz, H., Sacchetti, M. and Marcora, S. (2015). Commentaries on Viewpoint: Precedence and autocracy in breathing control. Journal of Applied Physiology, 118(12), pp.1557-1559.