As a consultant specialising in positive leadership and strengths-based, amplifying approaches to getting the best from people, I rarely write about autocratic leadership. However, considering recent political events – including developments at Davos and the unorthodox and unsettling discussions surrounding Greenland – and the visible resurgence of political and business leaders who lead through command, overt power plays, and enforced compliance, it felt both timely and necessary to explore this topic.
Whether driven by uncertainty, rapid change, increased pressure to deliver results, or poor role models in their organization or broader society, some leaders revert to top-down, directive behaviour that fuels fear, silences dissent and stifles initiative. This autocratic leadership style, characterized by unilateral decision-making and control, can be exhausting for teams and limiting for performance.
This drive for control and power can stem from insecurity, early experiences of vulnerability, or highly competitive environments that reinforce dominance as a way to feel safe, valued, or successful. In some cases, it may also be linked to underlying psychological patterns such as narcissistic traits (an excessive need for admiration and validation), sociopathic tendencies (reduced empathy and a focus on personal gain), or an inflated sense of self-importance that distorts how power and entitlement are perceived. These patterns exist on a spectrum and do not always constitute a clinical disorder; however, they can still significantly influence behaviour and organizational outcomes.
It is important to note that a strong need for power is not inherently negative. When balanced by empathy, self-awareness, and values, it can be channelled responsibly in service of others and the organization. However, when unchecked or driven primarily by ego or fear, it often leads to controlling behaviour, reduced trust, low morale, and psychologically unsafe work environments.
What often goes unexamined in this dynamic is the role of followers. Leaders do not operate in a vacuum. Their behaviour is shaped not only by their own motivations but also by how people around them respond. And in many cases, followers can inadvertently give fuel to autocratic leaders, reinforcing their ego, authority, and controlling habits.
Why Followers Reinforce Autocratic Behaviour
Autocratic leaders often thrive on certainty, control, and visibility. In times of ambiguity and pressure, people may default to polite deference, offering rapid compliance and accommodation rather than constructive challenge.
This can show up as:
- Quick compliance with directives, even when they appear unreasonable, risky, or ethically questionable.
- Minimal questioning or challenge, with concerns left unspoken or watered down.
- Excessive praise of the leader and their decisions, sometimes becoming sycophantic rather than considered and balanced.
- Withholding alternative perspectives or bad news to avoid conflict, discomfort, or perceived disloyalty.
In both organizational and political settings, researchers have noted that followers’ role orientation – whether they see their role as compliant or co-creative – influences how much power leaders accumulate and exercise. When followers adopt a passive or highly compliant stance, they reduce actions that might otherwise check a leader’s authority, indirectly reinforcing autocratic behaviour.
Even when leaders are rewarded by followers and stakeholders for decisiveness in short-term situations, such as responding to a crisis, this can teach them that authority yields trust, compliance and recognition. Over time, these dynamic shifts organizational norms toward control rather than collaboration, and followers are partly responsible for that shift.
The Cost of “Feeding the Ego”
Unquestioning compliance might feel easier in the moment, but it can have significant costs to the organization and its stakeholders including:
- Shuts down diverse perspectives: When people don’t speak honestly, the organization loses candid debate. This weakens its capacity for inclusive, creative and critical problem-solving.
- Reinforces ego-driven decisions: Autocratic leaders become accustomed to being right by default rather than through dialogue, reinforcing an identity that places them beyond challenge or question.
- Reduces psychological safety and performance: Fear of repercussions arising from dissent can lead to disengagement, poor performance and turnover.
So What Can Followers Do Instead?
Influence strategies do not require open rebellion, irrational action or irresponsible confrontation. As my previous article on this topic argues, subtle shifts such as asking thoughtful questions, creating coalitions to push back, establishing shared goals, and building trust before offering alternative viewpoints and constructive feedback can help create space for collaboration without triggering defensiveness in a leader.
In other words, it’s not just about resisting autocracy. It’s about leading with influence and constructive challenge – grounding feedback in shared purpose, reinforcing strengths unrelated to control, and modelling collaborative and inclusive leadership ourselves.
Autocratic leaders don’t exist apart from their teams and followers can choose to fuel or check their authority. In doing so, they shape not only individual relationships, but the broader leadership culture of their organization.
What happens when control becomes the safest option in your organization?
Autocratic leadership is rarely about one person. It’s shaped by pressure, fear, and the behaviours that get rewarded over time.
At TalentPredix™, we help organizations surface these dynamics early by making leadership behaviour, influence, and psychological safety visible, not personal or political.
If you want healthier challenge, stronger leadership cultures, and teams that don’t stay silent under pressure, book a demo or get in touch to see how we support that shift.
Author: James Brook
James Brook is the Founder of TalentPredix™ and a leadership, transformation, and strengths-based development expert with over 30 years of global experience. A business psychologist and executive coach, he has helped thousands of leaders and organisations worldwide unlock potential, spark innovation, and build thriving, high-performing workplaces. Previously, James founded Strengthscope®, scaling it into a global strengths assessment brand before exiting in 2018. His earlier career includes senior HR and talent roles at Yahoo!, NatWest, and Novo Nordisk. He holds an MSc in Organisational Psychology, an MBA, and an Advanced Diploma in Executive Coaching.
