A633.9.3.RB - Polyarchy Reflections

According to Obolensky, polyarchy has come out of oligarchy and anarchy. Most leadership models have some sort of oligarchy which is leadership is done by a few leaders over many followers. Obolensky (2014) suggest that success depends on the ability of the organization to deal with polyarchy, and to manage the paradox of the existence of polyarchy within oligarchy.

 Oligarchy arises because leaders wish to hold onto their positions of power either for psychological reasons or because the positions provide them with economic rewards and social status that they would otherwise lose were they to return to the ranks of the membership (Michels, 1962: 205). In the other hand, polyarchy puts emphasis in which power is invested in multiple people. I don’t believe that since polyarchy is fast replacing the old oligarchy these models are not redundant. The reason for this is because there is oligarchy present in some of the leadership models in use today.

Through out this leadership course I have learned that there is a balance between polyarchy and oligarchy and the effects it has on the organization strategy and culture. There are positive and negatives of both models. However, accepting that leadership is about leading others and developing your subordinates to be leaders. Complexity and chaos is an ongoing struggle and the understanding of the use of both oligarchy and polyachy is imperative. Oligarchy will continue to be part of the follower development especially when going from level I to level V of the followership framework. Leaders need to work together to meet expectations and develop future leaders.

Michels, R. (1962) Political Parties: A Sociologi- cal Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy. New York: Collier Books.

Obolensky, Nick (2014-11-28). Complex Adaptive Leadership: Embracing Paradox and Uncertainty (p. 4). Ashgate Publishing Ltd. Kindle Edition.