I do not think there has been a clear indication that the effectiveness of leadership has a positive correlation with the number of people involved in decision-making. There is a tricky part of this statement. “Effective” may refer to both the effectiveness of how to become a “nice” leader and that of the result of a decision. I would like to start from the latter perspective.

　　I would rather say a fordist working flow creates the most effective outcoming. Decision-maker usually is an outstanding person. He may take other people’s advice but those suggestions mostly would play a role as “patchiness”. The employees or team members, in my opinion, should work as a part of execution what has made and overcome as many trouble as possible. A good sense of obedience and a strong mind of carrying out tasks have been observed as the most effective and efficient way of achieving goals.

　　One of my friends works in a gigantic corporation. His supervisor, who is a successful businessman, barely reveals any ideas before his decisions are made. Not too long after he succeeded fighting his way up to the administrator, he started his unique way of “dictatorship” and his employee were very upset because they didn’t feel they were involved at all. However, almost every time the results of marketing dynamic proved what he insisted were correct, which basically were always the opposite from which his employees suggested. His explanation is very simple: decision depends on information. Due to the restriction of information confidentiality, he certainly couldn’t share too much data he possessed with other team members. In other words, the information of his teammates is considered the subaggregate of his. What they should do is not to waste their time trying to “become part of it”, instead of which to be a maximized-functional machines operating what the order is typed into them.

　　Caring for what people feel is not part of the ultimate triumph. A soldier can never imagine what a general perceives. If he wants to make decision, work harder and become a general first. Democracy never functions well except for creating an illusion. There is reason why Greek democracy gave way to a more autocratic Roman civilization. If one is really an effective leader, no matter how much he is contradicting to his team, the result will prove the truth sometimes stands on the side of minority. (400 words, Ge Xu; 2013/1/12)