In class, we talked about "Laissez$-$faire" leadership. What conclusion did we come to$?$

A$.$

Given a choice, "Laissez$-$faire" leadership is better than "Authoritarian Leadership" but not as effective as "Democratic Leadership." Rather than bark orders and tell people what to do$,$ allowing employees to work together to come to consensus is more effective. That said, There is no substitute for letting employees work on their own without the constant intervention of a "boss."

B$.$

"Laissez$-$faire" leadership is effective leadership. By essentially staying out of the way and allowing employees to fail and learn from their failures, this is the best form of leadership possible. Much like parenting, there is no substitute for allowing children to learn from their mistakes.

C$.$

"Laissez$-$faire" leadership is not effective leadership. By essentially staying out of the way and allowing employees to fail and learn from their failures, a leader isn't providing any guidance on the front end to support their employees. $"$No leadership" isn't "good leadership."

D$.$

Given a choice, "Laissez$-$faire" leadership is better than "Authoritarian Leadership" because rather than bark orders and tell people what to do$,$ it is better to lead from a distance.