The differences between leadership and management

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The differences between leadership and management

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Content

Introduction……………………………………......................................................3

1. Leadership and historical approach……………………………………...……...4

1.1 Leadership and emotions……………………………………………….……...5

1.2 Developing Leadership skills…………………………………………..……...6

2. Management and leadership…………………………………………………….8

2.1 Differences between management and leadership……………………………10

2.2 Common points……………………………………………………………….13

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………..….15

List of used literature…………………………………………………...…………16

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Introduction

Management in all business areas and human organization activity is the act of getting people together to accomplish desired goals and objectives. Management comprises planning, organizing, staffing, leading or directing, and controlling an organization (a group of one or more people or entities) or effort for the purpose of accomplishing a goal. Resourcing encompasses the deployment and manipulation of human resources, financial resources, technological resources, and natural resources. Because organisations can be viewed as systems, management can also be defined as human action, including design, to facilitate the production of useful outcomes from a system. This view opens the opportunity to 'manage' oneself, a pre-requisite to attempting to manage others. Management can also refer to the person or people who perform the act (s) of management. Leadership is stated as the “process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task. ”Definitions more inclusive of followers have also emerged. Leadership remains one of the most relevant aspects of the organizational context. However, defining leadership has been challenging and definitions can vary depending on the situation.

“Leadership is about capacity: the capacity of leaders to listen and observe, to use their expertise as a starting point to encourage dialogue between all levels of decision-making, to establish processes and transparency in decision-making, to articulate their own values and visions clearly but not impose them. Leadership is about setting and not just reacting to agendas, identifying problems, and initiating change that makes for substantial improvement rather than managing change. ” (1) In this work I am going to figure out the common points of management and leadership important aspects of leadership including a description of what leadership is and a description of several popular theories and styles of leadership and management.

 

 

1. Leadership and historical approach

 

Sanskrit literature identifies ten types of leaders. Defining characteristics of the ten types of leaders are explained with examples from history and mythology. Aristocratic thinkers have postulated that leadership depends on one's blue blood or genes: monarchy takes an extreme view of the same idea, and may prop up its assertions against the claims of mere aristocrats by invoking divine sanction: see the divine right of kings. Contrariwise, more democratically-inclined theorists have pointed to examples of meritocratic leaders, such as the Napoleonic marshals profiting from careers open to talent. In the autocratic/paternalistic strain of thought, traditionalists recall the role of leadership of the Roman pater familias. Feminist thinking, on the other hand, may object to such models as patriarchal and posit against them emotionally-attuned, responsive, and consensual empathetic guidance, which is sometimes associated with matriarchies comparable to the Roman tradition, the views of Confucianism on "right living" relate very much to the ideal of the (male) scholar-leader and his benevolent rule, buttressed by a tradition of filial piety. Leadership is a matter of intelligence, trustworthiness, humaneness, courage, and discipline. Reliance on intelligence alone results in rebelliousness. Exercise of humaneness alone results in weakness. Fixation on trust results in folly. Dependence on the strength of courage results in violence. Excessive discipline and sternness in command result in cruelty. When one has all five virtues together, each appropriate to its function, then one can be a leader. - Sun TzuIn the 19th century, the elaboration of anarchist thought called the whole concept of leadership into question. (Note that the Oxford English Dictionary traces the word "leadership" in English only as far back as the 19th century.) One response to this denial of йlitism came with Leninism, which demanded an йlite group of disciplined cadres to act as the vanguard of a socialist revolution, bringing into existence the dictatorship of the proletariat. Other historical views of leadership have addressed the seeming contrasts between secular and religious leadership. The doctrines of Caesaro-papism have recurred and had their detractors over several centuries. Christian thinking on leadership has often emphasized stewardship of divinely-provided resources - human and material - and their deployment in accordance with a Divine plan.compare servant leadership. For a more general take on leadership in politics, compare the concept of the statesman.

 

1.1 Leadership and emotions

 

Leadership can be perceived as a particularly emotion-laden process, with emotions entwined with the social influence process. In an organization, the leaders' mood has some effects on his/her group. (2) These effects can be described in 3 levels:

1. The mood of individual group members. Group members with leaders in a positive mood experience more positive mood than do group members with leaders in a negative mood. The leaders transmit their moods to other group members through the mechanism of emotional contagion. Mood contagion may be one of the psychological mechanisms by which charismatic leaders influence followers.

2. The affective tone of the group. Group affective tone represents the consistent or homogeneous affective reactions within a group. Group affective tone is an aggregate of the moods of the individual members of the group and refers to mood at the group level of analysis. Groups with leaders in a positive mood have a more positive affective tone than do groups with leaders in a negative mood.

3. Group processes like coordination, effort expenditure, and task strategy. Public expressions of mood impact how group members think and act. When people experience and express mood, they send signals to others. Leaders signal their goals, intentions, and attitudes through their expressions of moods. For example, expressions of positive moods by leaders signal that leaders deem progress toward goals to be good. The group members respond to those signals cognitively and behaviorally in ways that are reflected in the group processes. Beyond the leader's mood, her/his behavior is a source for employee positive and negative emotions at work. The leader creates situations and events that lead to emotional response. Certain leader behaviors displayed during interactions with their employees are the sources of these affective events. Leaders shape workplace affective events. Examples - feedback giving, allocating tasks, resource distribution. Since employee behavior and productivity are directly affected by their emotional states, it is imperative to consider employee emotional responses to organizational leaders.

 

1.2 Developing Leadership skills

 

It is never too early to start developing leadership skills. As someone new in the workplace, you may aspire to become the leader of your organization some day. Some people believe leaders are born and not made. (3) It is possible to develop leadership skills. If you accept the fact leaders behave in a certain manner, then it is possible to learn the behaviors of a leader. People follow leaders because they have gained their trust and earned their respect. Learning to be a leader takes a long time. Because of this, it is wise to start developing these skills early. What are the areas you need to work on when developing leadership skills?

1. IntegrityLeaders have high ethics. They are honest. If you are to gain people's trust then it is important to learn this trait early. Some of the actual situations you can practice this behavior is taking responsibility for your own actions. Do not play the blame game when things go wrong. Leaders take personal responsibility for their team's actions and results.

2. Passionate. Leaders are passionate. They are enthusiastic about their work and they even have the ability to rub this energy off on their followers. Do you take on assignments given to you enthusiastically? This is one good behavior to start when developing leadership skills.

3. Сommitment. When developing leadership skills, look at the easiest to start commitment to your work is one of the easiest. Can you truly say you are willing to work hard at the job assigned? Leaders work hard and have a strong discipline in following through with their work.

4. Courageous. If people are to follow you then as a leader you need to be courageous. Leaders are brave when they confront risks and the unknown. The ultimate test of a leader's courage is also the courage to be open. When looking at developing leadership skills, do you have the courage to speak up on things that matter?

5. Goal-Oriented. Leaders are very focused on the objectives that need to be attained. They develop a plan and strategy to achieve the objectives. In addition, they will also need to build commitment from the team and rally them to achieve the organization's goal. When developing leadership skills, start by looking at how goal oriented you are now. Improve upon that behavior.

6. Developing. Developing people whether by training, coaching or teaching them is one of the main traits of a good leader. No one can achieve organization goals alone. The team is needed in order to achieve them. Leaders develop the people to build a stronger team so that the organization is effective. Start by developing your own knowledge when developing leadership skills.

7. Prioritize. Leaders do the most urgent and important things first regardless of their interest in them. For them, whatever that needs to be done should be completed with the best possible effort. How do you fare with this trait? Do you tasks that you are uncomfortable with? Start developing leadership skills in this area by recognizing what are the important tasks to complete.

8. Glory. Leaders understand that at best they will get private credit for their work. Public glory is not expected. They know whatever achievements are the result of joint effort of their units. They share glory and credit with the rest for the work. They know they are only as good as their team. When developing leadership skills, ask yourself this - are you generous enough to share the fruits of your unit's achievements? Developing leadership skills is a long process. Some people are born with such traits. They develop into leaders much faster. Leadership is also a set of behavior as much as a skill. Hence, it is possible to learn leadership skills. Start now and when the opportunity arise you will be ready.

 

2. Management and leadership

 

There is a big difference between management and leadership. In my opinion management is a very huge term; covering many aspects, while leadership may be considered as a part of management. Management refers to the art of directing, controlling, and supervising a group of people or employees with the help of many management tools, which can also include leadership, while leadership can be said as the process of leading a group of certain people. (4)

Management can be properly defined as "the art of managing people and the person is called manger who utilizes human resource, finances, technology, and natural resources to get certain results in the favor of the organization. Leadership is a part of management and it is the inborn capability of the individual which makes him a successful leader. It is very necessary for a leader that his subordinates should be purely his followers, otherwise the leader might not be considered as a good leader.

Many scholars have agreed on this theory that management process includes leading the management, organizing the complete management, planning how to handle the management, controlling all the factors and besides these all the problems faced is a part of management. So in my opinion the difference between management and leadership exist because of the vastness in terminologies. Management is a vast term which covers the term leadership and thus making it a part of management.

In fact a person who wants to be a real manager has to pass through three levels to achieve it's aim. While both managers and leaders play important organizational roles, only a real manager can not only to inspire his team, but to achieve high results.

When people are first appointed to the manager role, they tend to behave like overseers and become task focused. We can call this Level 1. They are just trying to figure it all out. "What are we trying to do here? How do we get it done?" They are basically focused on the work and achieving on-time and on-budget delivery.

Once leaders understand what it takes to be successful in the work, they then begin to realize that they can be more effective if their people are more effective. When that happens, they make the leap to Level 2. They go from being an overseer to a coach, from being task-focused to people-focused.

Level 2 leaders direct their energies toward understanding their people's skills, maximizing their strengths and minimizing their weaknesses. Level 2 leaders focus on communicating the overall picture of what they are trying to accomplish. They delegate, they groom, and they spend a lot of time ensuring that everyone is clear about the goals. They understand that to be successful, their people have to understand the leader's objectives and the key principles for decision-making.

If your people do not understand your principles of operation, they will make decisions based on their own principles - which may or may not match yours!

When you are in the presence of a Level 2 leader, you know it because the difference is like night and day. Level 1 leaders talk about the tasks, the deliverables and the factors related to accomplishing them. Level 2 leaders, however, tend to be focused on people. They realize that they can be more successful if their people are more successful.

But while the difference between Level 1 and Level 2 leaders is significant, the difference between Level 2 and Level 3 leaders is even more so. While Level 1 leaders focus on task, and Level 2 leaders focus on people, Level 3 leaders focus on the future. They are constantly forward focused. We call Level 3 the visionary level.

Level 3 leaders want to know how decisions today will impact the future. They consistently ask themselves, "Where is the business going? How do we align our efforts with the business objectives? What do our customers want? What is coming down the pike that we need to be preparing for today? What do we need to be doing today to better prepare our business for the future?"

No, the three levels are not positions in an organization. They are levels of development for a leader. Tragically, you can have the CEO of an organization operating at Level 1. You can also have someone in a position like receptionist acting at Level 3. For example, while a Level 1 receptionist is just trying to get all the phone calls answered while greeting people who walk through the door, a Level 3 receptionist would be constantly looking for ways to improve how the phone and greeting processes could better support the business. To move from Level 1 to Level 2, you have to understand what it takes to be successful in the job. You don't have to know how to do the job, just what it takes to be successful so you can recruit, coach, groom and evaluate others. Until you are clear on what it takes to be successful, we recommend focusing your energies on Level 1 activities.

Level 2 is called coach. Therefore to have the luxury of focusing your energies on Level 3, you have to have people in place who know what it takes to be successful and who can coach other people. If you do not have people who can coach others, you will be kept at Level 2 because you will be the one coaching. To move from Level 2 to Level 3, you have to have people who know what they are doing, but those people must also know how to develop other people.

The Level 3 model is intended to encourage striving for a higher vision for leadership. However if we only reward people who get things done on time and under budget, our leaders will be encouraged to focus on Level 1. We must have rewards and incentives for building leadership skills in others, anticipating customer needs, and creating and implementing higher visions.

 

2.1 Differences between management and leadership

 

Leading should not be considered the same as managing. Business leaders who do not understand the difference between the functions/roles of leading and managing are quite likely to misinterpret how they should carry out their duties to meet organizational goals. While some managers are high-quality leaders, others only manage resources and don't lead their subordinates. Leadership is one of the four primary activities that are used to influence others. As such, it is a subcategory of the management concept that focuses mainly on behavioral issues and opportunities. Managing is more comprehensive than leading. It involves dealing with resource issues as well as behavioral factors. Generally speaking, not all managers are necessarily leaders, yet the most effective managers, over the long term, are leaders.

One of the most significant differences between managers and leaders is how they exercise control. In the past, managers have exercised their authority through three sources:

Job title - A manager's job title has traditionally been the most critical source of power and respect in organizations. However, things are changing. More and more organizations are removing entire job levels and moving towards a flat hierarchical structure. The trend of switching to flat hierarchical structures in an attempt to create equality among employees has helped in breaking the “boss" and the “worker" barriers.

Functional expertise - Managers can no longer claim to have the best experience in a certain area. Employees at all levels have access to countless educational choices, state of the art technology, online research on any given topic, and job opportunities that allow them to quickly get the required experience to excel at their job. And, while experience does improve one's ability to make good decisions, past experience alone needs to be used with caution, particularly in today's unprecedented economic and social environment.

Access to confidential information. In the past managers could control and restrict the information flow, using it to their advantage. But, technological advances have changed information accessibility and usage.

With changes in how organizational hierarchies, expertise, and information are viewed by employees, the real control has to come through the way leadership is applied in organizations. There is a big difference between how managers and leaders motivate their people, and this sets the tone for other aspects of the leader - follower relationship. (6)

Managers have subordinates, leaders have followers. While managers have subordinates, who mostly do as they are told, leaders surround themselves with followers. Followers are quite different than subordinates:

1. They follow because they want to, not because they have to.

2. They are inspired and motivated by the leader.

3. They respect the leader for who they are, not for their job title.

Finally, leaders are capable of inspiring people through trust, not fear. They walk the talk, and believe in coaching others into becoming future leaders themselves. Nietzsche' famous words, “This is my way, what is yours? ” capture the very essence of leaders' dedication to developing others.

· While a manager supervises people, a leader inspires people.

· While a manager solves problems, a leader eliminates problems.

· While a manager responds to client needs, a leader anticipates client needs.

· While a manager implements vision, a leader creates vision.

· While a manager is reactive, a leader is proactive.

· While a manager tends to focus on today, a leader focuses on tomorrow.

· While a manager communicates policy to people, a leader engages people in policy creation.

While a manager ensures people are doing the job right, a leader ensures people are doing the right job.

Yet, managers do not become leaders overnight. Through our work with organizations of a variety of sizes and in a variety of industries, we have found that leaders develop through three distinct phases.

While it is important to recognize the differences between leadership and management, it is also important to appreciate that the two have complementary strengths, as well.

 

 

Management	Leadership
Process	People
Facts	Feeling
Intellectual	Emotional
Head	Heart
Position power	Persuasion power
Control	Commitment
Problem solving	Possibility
Reactive	Proactive
Doing things right	Doing the right things
Rules	Values
Goals	Vision
Light a fire under people	Stoke to fire within people
Written communication	Verbal comminication
Standartization	Innovation

 

2.2 Common points

 

Managers encounter a variety of leadership situations during the course of their daily activities, each of which may require them to use leadership styles that vary considerably, depending on the situation. In using the contingency model, factors of major concern are leader-member relations, task structure, and the position power of the leader. The leader has to analyze these factors to determine the most appropriate style of response for meeting overall work-unit and organizational goals. Leader-member relations refer to the ongoing degree to which subordinates accept an individual leader or group of leaders. Task structure refers to the degree to which tasks are clearly or poorly defined. Position power is the extent to which a leader or group of leaders has control over the work process, rewards, and punishment.

Taking these factors into consideration, leaders can adjust their style to best match the context of their decision making and leadership. For those leaders who have a breadth of leadership styles, knowing when to change styles gives them the tools to successfully deal with the varying nature of business decision making. For those leaders who have a limited repertoire of leadership styles, they and their superiors can use this information to better match work situations with the styles that a specific leader possesses. (5)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

Over the years the philosophical terminology of "management" and "leadership" have, in the organisational context, been used both as synonyms and with clearly differentiated meanings. Debate is fairly common about whether the use of these terms should be restricted, and generally reflects an awareness of the distinction made by Burns (1978) between "transactional" leadership (characterised by eg emphasis on procedures, contingent reward, management by exception) and "transformational" leadership (characterised by eg charisma, personal relationships, creativity).