There is a solid difference between management and leadership. If a leader desires to be effective, a person should be able to understand this dissimilarity, cognise it and be capable of applying it. Both managerial and leadership capabilities and skills are significant, but comprehension of when and how to utilise them is even more critical. A good manager requires leadership capabilities as well as managerial ones due to the fact that both types of skills are highly required for the organisational management. Therefore, the current paper will apply a critical review of literature in order to vividly demonstrate the fact that all good managers need leadership skills, while not all effective leaders require management capabilities.
Management concerns arrangement, organisation and development of tasks that are combined with the appointment of limits in regard to employee performance (Brooks 2009, p. 158). When the person is promoted in the hierarchical structure of a company, the importance of managing become less essential in regard to both a task outlook and an interpersonal employee outlook. This importance does not completely dissipate, but a smaller amount of individual time is dedicated to this aspect of job (Armstrong 2012). That appears due to the fact that managed people require less management with time as they become more tempered and experienced (Armstrong 2012). On the other hand, the skills associated with leadership become increasingly important with the upward movement along the organisational ladder (Armstrong 2012). These capacities are more connected with motivation, stimulation and encouragement of people in addition to achievement of the goals that the team, department or organisation is supposed to obtain (Kumar & Mishra 2011). Therefore, there is a false belief that a person having all skills of a good manager also demonstrates the capabilities of a good leader (or vice versa). The practice demonstrates that the majority of business clients coach and educate good managers (Noon, Blyton & Morrell 2013). In regard to for-profit businesses, majorly people who are able to manage and execute have an ability to get promoted to a managerial position (Kumar & Mishra 2011). On the other hand, leadership skills demand an absolutely discrepant assortment of skills, which frequently are poorly evolved in effective managers (Armstrong 2012).
For instance, person regarded as an excellent manager but a poor leader can be compared with an airplane having merely one engine. This airplane can actually sustain the altitude, but it is unable to move higher (Mullins 2013). Northouse (2010) demonstrates that ‘old school’ leadership style is created around a ‘control or authority model’. This model presupposes that a manager recognises future actions, informs employees of future actions and anticipates all of these actions to be performed. Nevertheless, the psychological reality of leadership demonstrates that employees perform only those actions that they desire to do (Armstrong 2012). Therefore, if employees appear as unmotivated, disappointed and low-spirited, management capabilities will merely make them work as hard as possible in order to elude being admonished or dismissed (Mullins 2013). On the other hand, skilled leaders are interested in motivating people to perform all necessary functions, roles and actions, being able to create ‘followership’ (Armstrong 2012). The mastery of creating followership is grounded on two misleadingly simple principles. The first principle states that employees perform those actions that are stimulated by their emotions and ideas and not the acts, which are prescribed by their leaders (Armstrong 2012). The second principle states that the follower, which does not really presuppose the leader, provides the motivation. Generally speaking, no leader can actually motivate other people or workers, but this leader can impact people to motivate themselves (Armstrong 2012). For this reason, the effective leader appears as an expert in understanding, appealing and stimulating each follower’s requirements in a manner which optimises the performance of an individual and the success of the whole firm.
Mullins (2013) outlines that leadership definitions incorporate three constituents, including impact, group and objective. Firstly, leaders are those people who are capable of impacting the conduct of others (Mullins 2013). Secondly, leaders are supposed to examine the work in the context of a work group, including managers, supervisors and their subordinates (Mullins 2013). Lastly, leadership highlights a group objective that is supposed to be achieved (Mullins 2013). Therefore, it appears that leadership is the process which impacts all group constituents towards the accomplishment of specific group or firm objectives. The facts demonstrate that leaders might impact followers, but followers affect and stimulate leaders to direct them in one particular direction (Armstrong 2012). The previous literature analysis vividly demonstrates that leadership concerns vision, which it incorporates in regard to a strategy or strategical thinking. It presupposes that leadership stands for a particular view of where the firm is supposed to move further and what is crucial for the firm prosperity. Nevertheless, there is a concept which states that leadership appears as a management aspect. Bratton (2015) states that leadership is merely one of numerous facets that a felicitous manager should demonstrate. On the other hand, Northouse (2010) debates that the two notions should be carefully distinguished. The major objective of a manager stands for maximising the organisational production via managerial execution. In addition, leadership is merely a single crucial constituent of the directing role.
Therefore, it is obvious that a manager cannot merely be a leader as a manager requires an official power to be efficient as well (Mullins 2013). Management is crucial in organisation or firm in line with personnel control and evolvement. Nevertheless, the individual who leads the management policy is primarily expected to be an effective leader who is capable of directing the entire business strategy. Managers are supposed to control operation, provide manager plans and supervisions of the firm output, take responsibility and be involved in the design of products and services to the delivery of products or services to the customers (Brooks 2009). Mullins (2013) explains that in order to perform successfully, managers are supposed to demonstrate their capabilities to work in a team and lead it. Therefore, managers are accountable for influencing the intercourse between the work group and the firm itself. Moreover, they are supposed to simultaneously appear as group leaders who are required to institute a level of trust among the work group by assisting them in understanding the conducts which create credence and motivate personnel to earn trust of others in their group (Mullins 2013, p. 319) Therefore, the manager’s function and perspective incorporate forecasting, planning, arrangements, motivation setting, coordination and control. Generally speaking, there are numerous functions and levels of management within any organisation, including internal and external functions.
Internal functions typically incorporate manufacturing, marketing, business development, communication and sales level of management (Mullins 2013). On the other hand, external functions typically presuppose dealing with clients and elucidating between customers and organisational management so that the selected course is followed through goodwill and not enforcement (Boxall & Purcell 2011). Mullins (2013) actually defines specific managerial roles which define the genuine nature of managerial work. This outline demonstrates that managers typically take orders from the top management of the firm (Mullins 2013). Moreover, the managers assume their duties and connect them with the personnel objective, enabling the achievement of the group and organisational objectives (Mullins 2013). Finally, managers have to make decisions, obtain specific feedbacks after making the connection, solve the issues which appear during the process and account regarding the existing setting to the top management (Mullins 2013).
Don't waste your time on boring tasks!
Save your time for something pleasant!
In addition, the main function of a manager is to equilibrate between task and relationship conducts (Brooks 2009). Therefore, task conduct regards the scope to which the manager, being the main leader of a group, equips lines and tendencies for the operations of followers, establishes objectives for them and outlines their roles (Mullins 2013). On the other hand, relationship conduct concerns the scope to which the manager-leader engages in two-way intercourse with followers, being able to listen to them and provide backing and encouragement (Mullins 2010, p. 389) In addition, managers are also required to equilibrate between the individual and the team in regard to the individual members, incorporating such actions as initiative taking, brainstorming, harmonising, challenging, etc. as all of them enhance the firm performance and the level of objective achievement (Mullins 2013, p.353). Nevertheless, Brooks (2009) claims that manager can be successful and effective only if he or she demonstrates efficient leadership nature and features. This accentuates the significance of evolving leadership skills in each executive person and not merely in those at the top-authorities level. In addition, Kumar & Mishra (2011) state that management and leadership concepts should pass through a complicated road of development prior to the above mentioned type of conduct becoming the norm.
On the other hand, Pedler (2010) who contrasts management and leadership outlines that there is no actual definition of leadership, except a generally associated notion with position of authority when some top authorities reveal effective leadership qualities, while others do not. Mullins (2013) suggests that the leadership conduct can be analysed through the path-goal theory of leadership. Therefore, he defines that leadership conduct is defined by two major situational agents, including the individual features of subordinates and the character of the task (Mullins 2013). Due to the fact that social intercourse is a natural pillar of human conduct, the establishment of harmonious work connection and effective teamwork cannot be regarded as an easy task (Boxall & Purcell 2011). In fact, the manager’s major concern regards the ability to create a setting in which work group members effectively cooperate so as to obtain the outcomes expected of them (Mullins 2010). Pedler (2010) demonstrates that this situation requires the development of strong leadership skills in managerial practice.
Pedler (2010) states that leadership is highly important in business as it assists managers in founding a new powerful ethics, which actually favours collective over individual, leadership over personality and demands the ability to affect the ideas and acts of other people. Bertocci (2009) defines that a manager is supposed to have the capability to govern, control, stimulate, inspire and synchronise employees as all these actions combined facilitate performance and direct the overall change. Therefore, managers are constantly developing their individual leadership qualities and those of others in their teams (Bertocci 2009). Consequently, manager has to be a good planner, defender, procurer and inspirer, and all these characteristics turn managers into leaders. For this reason, a good leading manager should be a well-organised person who appears as an effective communicator capable of making persuasions, effectively building the team, working under pressure and incarnating enthusiasm (Bratton 2015).
Generally speaking, the features of leadership regard the humane characteristics, attributes and abilities which formulate a know-how that contributes to leadership (Pedler 2010, p. 97). Nevertheless, the manager not only needs to lead his or her team but also to appear as a leader with full leadership. This particularly concerns business strategies in which the manager has to meet the challenge of the marketplace while recognising alterations in customers’ requirements and wishes (Bratton 2015). The last vividly depicts the actual significance of combination of managerial and leadership capabilities as managers should build and sustain relations with others, being at the same time knowledgeable of how to appropriately reward and punish their team staff (Bratton 2015). The majority of theories regarding leadership and management demonstrate that there are two main conflicts between the two. Consequently, managers have the obligations to sustain the balance of operations; at the same time, leaders are supposed to create new approaches and find new areas to investigate (Noon et al. 2013).
It demonstrates that leaders and managers appear as basically different types of people as the favourable setting to the growth of one might appear as harmful and detrimental to the other (Bratton 2015). Nevertheless, Hansen, Ibarra & Peyer (2010) present criticisms on these two conflicting roles due to the fact that there are some ideals of good managers and good leaders, especially in our era, including Jobs of Apple and Brandson of Virgin who appear as effective managers and leaders at the same time. For example, the CEO ranking of 2010 demonstrated that Steve Jobs appeared on the top. He was known to be the CEO of Apple, simultaneously regarded as effective businessman. Nevertheless, the facts reveal that he started working at the manager level, having developed to CEO level, at the same time appearing as the successful leader (Hansen, Ibarra & Peyer 2010). Steve Jobs was known as approachable and was recognised for the capability to think unconventionally. In addition, he was focused on one single industry (regarded as managerial role), but he dedicated his efforts to the product evolvement instead of a variety of managerial tasks, which allowed Apple to continue the product innovations (Hansen et al. 2010). Generally speaking, evidence that Apple is centralised and focused on Jobs’ personality of leader is abundant. His motivation was inspiring to develop technology and not capital flow. Due to the fact that Jobs was charismatic as a leader and demanding as a manager, his managerial leadership penetrated the whole company and turned it into the market giant of the current time.
Managerial leadership and team management can alter from case to case and from task to task. The current paper vividly demonstrates that effective management and leadership are supposed to go hand in hand as the manager normally appears as an individual who conducts and leads the work team. Mullins acknowledges that teams demonstrate a tendency to reflect the image of their leader. Therefore, when the organisational team performs excellently and effectively, then the external surrounding undoubtedly presumes that the team has a perfectly effective leader with the appropriate leadership role. In addition, the type or level of management and adopted leadership style will obviously impact the connections and intercourse within the group and the firm, becoming primary determinants of group cohesiveness. The effective and successful manager-leader has to equilibrate skills of both roles in order to successfully lead the firm to the future growth and development. The paper shows that despite the fact that there is a debate regarding the role of business leaders, the evidence demonstrates that the capability to lead is a crucial constituent of the managerial function. Cognition of the nature of leadership is significant for ensuring the relevant fit between the requirements of the firm, task and employees. Pungent understanding of all perspectives and employees’ perceptions is crucial for successful managerial leadership. This capability unambiguously provides leaders with a possibility to appropriately select the most relevant course of actions in order to resolve urgent issues, effectively achieve long-range organisational objectives and inspire employees.