The differences between management and leadership

There is a big difference between management and leadership. In my opinion management is a very huge term; covering many

The differences between management and leadership

Доклад

Менеджмент

Другие доклады по предмету

Менеджмент

Сдать работу со 100% гаранией

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

differences between management and leadership

Content

 

Introduction

1. Leadership and historical approach

1.1 Leadership and emotions

1.2 Developing Leadership skills

2. Management and leadership

2.1 Differences between management and leadership

2.2 Common points

Conclusion

List of used literature

 

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 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planning>, organizing <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizing>, staffing <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staffing>, leading <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership> or directing, and controlling <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_%28management%29> an organization <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organization> (a group of one or more people or entities) or effort for the purpose of accomplishing a goal. Resourcing <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resourcing> encompasses the deployment and manipulation of human resources <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_resources>, financial <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial> resources, technological <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological> resources, and natural resources <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resources>. Because organisations can be viewed as systems <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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.

manager leadership difference leader

1. Leadership and historical approach

 

Sanskrit <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit> literature identifies ten types of leaders. Defining characteristics of the ten types of leaders are explained with examples from history and mythology. Aristocratic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristocracy> thinkers have postulated that leadership depends on one's blue blood or genes <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene>: monarchy <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Right_of_Kings>. Contrariwise, more democratically-inclined theorists have pointed to examples of meritocratic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritocracy> leaders, such as the Napoleonic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleon_Bonaparte> marshals profiting from careers <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Career> open to talent <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skill>. In the autocratic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autocracy>/paternalistic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternalism> strain of thought, traditionalists recall the role of leadership of the Roman pater familias <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pater_familias>. Feminist <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism> thinking, on the other hand, may object to such models as patriarchal <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy> and posit against them emotionally-attuned, responsive, and consensual empathetic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy> guidance, which is sometimes associated with matriarchies <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matriarchy> comparable to the Roman tradition, the views of Confucianism <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism> thought called the whole concept of leadership into question. (Note that the Oxford English Dictionary <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_English_Dictionary> traces the word "leadership" in English only as far back as the 19th century.) One response to this denial of élitism <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89litism> came with Leninism <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leninism>, which demanded an élite group of disciplined cadres <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_revolutionaries> to act as the vanguard <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguard_party> of a socialist revolution, bringing into existence the dictatorship of the proletariat <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletariat>. Other historical views of leadership have addressed the seeming contrasts between secular and religious leadership. The doctrines of Caesaro-papism <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesaro-papism> have recurred and had their detractors over several centuries. Christian thinking on leadership has often emphasized stewardship <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stewardship> of divinely-provided resources - human and material - and their deployment in accordance with a Divine plan.compare servant leadership <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Servant_leadership>. For a more general take on leadership in politics <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics>, compare the concept of the statesman <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statesman>.

 

1.1 Leadership and emotions

 

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

. 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 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_contagion> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leader>. Mood contagion may be one of the psychological mechanisms by which charismatic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic> leaders influence followers.

. The affective tone of the group. Group affective tone <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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.

. Group processes like coordination, effort expenditure, and task strategy <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Task_strategy&action=edit&redlink=1>. 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 leaders mood, her/his behavior is a source for employee positive and negative emotions <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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 workpla

Похожие работы

1 2 3 > >>