Difference between Managing and Management, Leading and Leadership - Coursework Example

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MАNАGING АND MАNАGЕMЕNT АND LЕАDING АND LЕАDЕRSHIР. (Student’s Name) Foundation Course- Tutor: (Instructor’s Name) Institution’s Name Department Date Introduction. The world has significantly developed in all sectors, Political, economical, and social cultural growth is evident in the 21st century. With these salient developments, it is prudent to have in place adequate control. In any instance that the individuals bestowed the mandate to take care of certain duties fail, disastrous results are inevitable. This is because of the fact that, the individuals bearing this mandate have to ensure their responsibilities conform to the predominant requirements. For instance, resource allocation is an essential role in the new modernized era (Ivancevich & Matteson 2010). Bearing in mind countries are on the verge of expanding in all sectors and population growth is evident, resources continue to diminish. This affirms that there is a dire need to ensure that all stakeholders mandated with duties in an organization carry out their roles diligently. Literature Review. To avert confusion, improper results attainment, and ill tendencies, humanity developed a hierarchical framework. This framework dictates that in any institution, organization or forum, there has to be a leader paving the way for the multitudes. It is worth to note that, a leader refers to a person dominating the political spectrum. In business, managers lead organizations and have the mandate to make a decision according to the dynamic circumstances. In the business arena, the hierarchical framework starts from the managerial level and flows down to the subordinates. The management is composed of three levels (Harvey 2009). There is the top management who bear the crucial decision-making role in the organizations. The top management team ensures that organizations make the best decisions possible that would befit the company in the next five years into the future. The middle level management is the second level responsible for implementing the strategic plans. The middle level management concerns with annual strategies. This implies that the middle level management adopts the five-year strategic plans and subdivides them by five. The low-level managers come in third with the responsibility of instituting operational efficiency. From the low-level managers, the hierarchy proceeds to other employees and the subordinates. Scholars of modern day assert that management is a crucial concept that requires adequate skill and concentration. This is because in the organizational setting the management teams have the responsibility of formulating objectives. Organizational objectives remain a critical part of organizations as this underpins the intentions, goals, and aims of the organization. In essence, this is the focal point forming an organization. The management has a strict mandate to breakdown the five-year policies into annual achievable goals commensurate to the employee’s abilities (Fernandez & Rainey, 2006). To harness achievement this formidable task requires zeal and endurance. The management is yet again with the implementation process during the operations of an organization. Employees have to work hand in hand with the management team curtailing any limitation and fostering to achieve worthy and sustainable results. The concept of managements is deeply entangled in organizations well being. This is because an organization will only perform according to the effort indoctrinated by the management. This is to imply that, a hardworking management team will reap positive results. An organization that lacks adequate management abilities might not flourish. As evidenced by the hierarchical arrangement, organizations heavily rely on the management team. The management has the central role of resource allocation (Kane, R, 2000) ,The intensity and magnitude of this duty in itself is overwhelming. In the instance that an organization does not allocate resources effectively, imbalances are inevitable and in turn, detrimental consequences will replicate into poor performance. The management has a mortal role of motivating the entire fraternity. This is because many at times employees or other stakeholders lack the zeal or passion to achieve objectives. Where this is the case, organizational heads in the management team have the responsibility of motivating stakeholders. Motivation resonates to lower staff turnover, improved performance, and efficient operations. In this ever changing and dynamic business environment, management remains a focal responsibility. Each organization operates in an industry where other companies produce similar products. This implies that the companies present in an industry struggle to share resources as well as the available market. For prosperity and continuity, each organization in the industry seeks to adopt workable antics that will propagate business growth and development. Competition in the business realm is taking a paradigm shift in this generation. This is because the business environment is dynamic than ever warranting modern inventions. It is the responsibility of the management to ensure that the organization combat competitors threats efficiently producing a neutralizing act. In the event this is not done a reduced market share for products depicts reduced performance. It is the each company’s goal to outdo competitors and thrive in the existence of substitute commodities. The management yet again plays a central role in ensuring that a company has its affairs in place to combat competitors in the industry. Technological advancements in the modern day play a consequential role in the management platform. This is because of the fact that, with the inculcation of technology, the business fraternity has changed immensely. The production docket has sought to reduce expenses by mechanizing operation and lying-off employees (Kane-Urrabazo 2006). The intention underpinning these actions is to reduce overall expenses while enhancing efficiency and productivity. Technological advancement traverses the entire organization operations with the indoctrination of computer-based applications. With these developments, management teams have the responsibility of planning how to change and conform to the developments. The responsibility surpasses planning to finance deals that will ensure acquisition of the expensive gadgets. The role of management in an organization is overwhelming and expansive. Management is the coordination of people’s activities and efforts in an organization setting to achieve desired results. Management deals with centralizing efforts working towards desired goals. Scholars in the past affirmed that it is imperative for institutions to enact a worthy management team through a formidable structure to ensure results attainment. Managerial tasks and duties evolve by the day. Currently, the management has the responsibility to ensure that organizations conform to modern practices and antics that will lead to better performance. Management is a function that requires utter execution to ensure that an organization lives up to expectations achieving set goals and objectives. Managing is an entirely different concept as it relates to the actual implementation of discussed attributes. Managing entails exercising control over subjects and ensuring that every organizational aspect is in place. This implies that managing relates to practical implementation of managerial antics amidst the prevalent challenges. While managing an organization, there are numerous challenges emanating in due course (Hersey & Blanchard 2011). For instance, managing encompasses inculcating change in the process and operations of an organization. During the change process, vehement challenges like resisting change is a predominant problem that undermines the efficiency of the process. While managing, it is vital that the process incorporates drawbacks inherent in the system. The difference between management and managing is evident. Having outlined management characteristics in length, it prudent to indicate that, there is a momentous difference between the two terminologies. Both management and managing have a sound resemblance as they relate to organizations. Having indoctrinated hierarchy structures in organizational leaderships, both terminologies are used interchangeably. This is because of the fact that, management encompasses the leadership fraternity who decide on how to achieve stipulated objectives. While undertaking their duty diligently, it is only prudent to state that the organizational heads are managing (Hampton, Summer & Webber 2008). This implies that this is the practical aspect of management. For an organization to be efficient, effective, and productive, both of the two terms have to work hand in hand. The management has to manage the organization diligently with astute zeal seeking to achieve desired objectives. Though different, these two terminologies interact significantly. For success and endeared performance, a hardworking management is not the only essential prerequisite as it has to undertake its managing responsibility efficiently. In the event that these two aspects are evident in the workplace, an organization's performance surpasses competitor’s abilities and meets the client’s expectations. In terms of ranking, managing is crucial than management. This is because of the fact that, managing is the controlling, coordinating, and directing bit that ensures all aspects of an organization are in place. In essence, managing is the mandate of any stakeholder as it does not confine to the management. With managing, delegation of authority is a viable option instituted in the absence of a management team. This implies that is a managerial partner is absent or incapable of performing duties diligently authority is transferable. Managing is hence a collective responsibility of the entire organization (Schein, 2011). Each stakeholder in the organizational setting has to be responsible in the delegated task seeking to ensure that diligence is core. As evidenced, management is a body of individuals who respect hierarchical structures. As opposed to this doctrine, managing is the undertaking of duties assigned irrespective of the placing on the hierarchical structure. Evidently, for an organization to perform and subdue competition from rivals, managing all aspects remains consequential. Managing significantly differs with management. Grammatically, managing is a doing verb indicating that there is a goal pursued. On the contrary, management refers to a body of personnel confined to the prevalent hierarchical structure mandated with the responsibility of coordinating organizational affairs (Tsui, et al 2008). An organization can thrive without the management personnel. However, without the managing initiative endowed by all stakeholders present, reduced performance remains inevitable. This affirms that, managing is fundamental to the performance of any institution or organizational setting surpassing management. This is because, managing relates to delegated authority, which ensures resource allocation, productivity, and operational efficiency. These characteristics are fundamental to enhanced performance in the organizational setting if performance and better results remain the principal objective. It is worth to note that, these two terminologies though distinct have an inseparable bond. They relate to coordination, controlling and unification of personnel efforts in the work place. Both managing and management though different have an imperative place in the leadership and performance of an organization. Leading and Leadership Leadership is theoretically the application of skills involved in controlling and managing the employees in the organization. Leading on the other hand, involves the ability of an individual to apply the leadership concepts or theories in managing or controlling employees or activities in the organization (Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H, 2011), Therefore, we would point out that leading goes more with the actions taken on the ground while managing the employees and activities of the organization, while leadership goes more with the qualities that one displays so that it suits a certain type of leadership. The concepts are provided theoretically for efficient management of the organization. It is therefore the personality of the leader that determines whether he can lead efficiently by applying the concepts of leadership or simply does not have the skills needed so as to apply the concepts to managing employees in the company. Many individuals have a belief that leadership is the most powerful and first option before leading. However, leadership has a different kind of meaning which is equally important to leading. This is because the two go together and are inseparable, though different. In a more simple way, leading will give a direction by influencing employees to follow the right direction in the effort to try to achieve the goal of the organization. It could be oneself, another employee in the organization, a group or the community of the organization. The way the individual applies the leadership concepts in the organization determines whether he will succeed or fail. This is a matter of someone’s actual practice in managing and implementing the organizational policies, rules and goals (Kirk, 2004). the direction in an organization is determined by the people and influence is depended on different factors such as communication concept applied by the leader, clarity of the message communicated, definition of the objectives, delegation of tasks and duties, timeline and priorities that are set up and follow up measures put in place. When leadership requires that a leader applies a strong vision and communication strategies, one can fail to put such strategies in practice and hence be unable to show proper or required leading style Patterson (2003). Indicated that good leading requires that an individual designs a vision that will guide the employees in the organization. Therefore, it is essential to know the mission of the organization which will help the leader be able to develop the vision in leading. Hence, this brings out the difference in the two concepts in that in leadership, the theories gives outline and leading deals with the ability of the individual to apply the concept in a practical manner. If the leader is able to communicate the vision of the company to the groups he is leading, then the groups can be able to understand and form their own objectives to achieve the vision. In regards to Harvey, J, (2009), a good leader is supposed to communicate the goals of the organization in a manner that is clear so that the employees can be able to understand, if that is done then leading becomes efficient. In leadership of an organization, creation of goals is vital so as to steer the progress of the business but the goals will need a skillful leader who is leading the organization to direct the employees towards achieving the goals. This requires active participation of everyone in the organization while at the same time reflecting on the overall business vision; different circumstances can arise in the organization hence it may require the leading personnel to apply different leadership style to suit the current situation so that there is no misdirection of the goals. The goals set should be more specific and focused to avoid vagueness. For instance, if there is extreme expenditure on transportation cost, then the goal of the organization should be to reduce costs involved in transportation Laud, J. (2007). If such goal is set then the leadership skills applied is more appropriate. The leadership concepts therefore require skills for them to be applied in the organization. According to Smith (2005). In order to lead efficiently, the objectives that are set should be defined skillfully. If the objectives are definable then it becomes easier to measure the progress of the work being done towards achieving the goals or vision of the company. The set objectives are therefore a tool that aids in leadership of the organization. In leading, the individual is required to analyze the performance of the objectives so as to notice where there is sluggishness or where there is a problem in meeting the objective requirements. Objectives are used by leaders to turn the vision of the organization into a reality. Therefore, when setting organizational objectives for a task, the leader is required to be defined in a measurable precise manner. Flan, (2005), the leader should give the objective a time limit in which the objective should be attained. In order to attain this, there should be full participation of all the teams in the organization. Leadership requires that there should be delegation of duties and tasks. This is essential because the objectives can only be achieved if tasks are specified to various employees or departments within the organization. This requires skills in leadership; where the leader should be able to determine the team members with the right skills set or experience. When that it’s accomplished well then it can be said that the individual has the desired skills in leading. This is so because he or she displays the actual concepts described in leadership theories and applies them at the right environment or context. Once the tasks are accomplished in giving assignments to employees the leader uses the leadership skills leant to come up with the most important tasks to be finished first. Daft (2006). Leading will involve skillful screening of the tasks that are detrimental to the attainment of the organization vision. This requires personal judgment or the ability to project in the near future of the company. Even though the leadership concepts may require a certain task to be undertaken before another, certain circumstances may call for a change (Jennings, 2008), flexibility of the leader will enable him or her to change the priority of the tasks depending on the needs of the organization. Hence leading comes in as a personal factor in management of an organization. Time is an important factor in attaining the goals of an organization. Therefore there is need for efficient maximization of the available time to complete the assigned tasks. This will affect the relevance of a task that is completed within the stipulated time (Kane, 2000), ability to manage individual to attain their objective within the time given will depend on the individual’s ability to manage the people. Some leadership styles may not apply on some people hence there is need for the leader’s individual personality to be able to handle such employees. Hence the two concepts are different. According to Harvey, J, (2009), a leader could apply a certain leadership style to a context where it is not appropriate hence the undertaken action may not bring out the desired results. On another hand, the leader might not use their own personal skills in resolving issues but follow what is described in leadership styles which could equally lead to failure of attainment of the organizations goals and objectives. Following up the activity that has been completed is important in leadership since the leader has to evaluate the desired results against the actual results. A good leader will be able to carry out the follow up and see whether the team responsible achieved the desired results and if they failed then the team should explain or give an account for their performance. The leader could be in a position to point out their mistake and strive to look for corrective measures (Laud, 2007), this will ensure that there is growth in the organization. Hence, leading goes hand in hand with responsibility while leadership only describes what is ought to be done. Some leaders may know that it is required of them to carry follow up activity of the completed tasks. But because of irresponsibility they may only take the results provided by the employee without further investigation on the progress of the work. An effective leading is one that has skills in organizing, planning and coordinating activities of the organization. Leadership only deals with the capability of managing employees in the organization. Hence it requires that one apply different skills at different situations. (Kirk 2004) denotes that one could be a poor planner but knows how to manage the employees effectively; such an individual will be considered a poor leader for failing to plan for the activities of the firm. In regards to Howard, (2011).leading requires that people are controlled from different departments at different time hence this calls for high level of competency in coordinating so as the activities are done by the employees at the right time. And it requires one to effectively employ all the leadership types which are mostly obtained by training or from further studying. Leadership begins with the individual leader; if the leader incorporates all elements required in managing people then we refer to it as effective leadership and this starts from an individual department to the entire organization. Therefore leading the employees will also involve aspects such as motivating of the employees, training and evaluation. Leading an organization requires an individual to improve the performance of the entire organization with strategies that are practical and proven to give immediate or long-term results. This is achieved if the leaders demonstrate authenticity, courage and purpose in creating an organizational environment where employees thrive as they also try to achieve the company’s vision and mission. Conclusion In conclusion, leading in an organization entails the individual using his personal approaches towards managing the people and not just the theoretical framework explained in leadership. The individual way of leading people establishes the kind of leadership style a leader uses in the organization. However, there are various circumstances in the organization that requires different forms of leadership style. Therefore it cannot be said that a certain leader or organization uses a specific form of leadership but rather the strategies that are employed on certain circumstances gives the form of leadership. Since there are various types of employees, different leaders in the organization handle the employees in different manner. Leading will therefore be determined by an individual’s skills in employee management to handle various types of employees. Effective leading will involve letting the employee thrive in an organization as they pursue the goals or the objectives of the business. Bibliography Daft, L. (2006). The leadership experience, Ohio: Mason, Flan, C (2005).Eight Forces for Leaders of Change, Journal of Organizational Management 26 (3) 24-27 Fernandez, S., & Rainey, H, (2006).Managing Successful Organizational Change in the Public Sector. Public Administration Review, 66(2), 168-176. Hampton, D. R., summer, C. E., & Webber, R, (2008), Organizational behavior and the practice of management. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman. Harvey, J, (2009), The Abilene Paradox: The Management Of Agreement. Organizational Dynamics, 3(1), 63-80. Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H, (2011) Management of organizational behavior: utilizing human resources (4th Ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Ivancevich, J. M., & Matteson, M, (2010), Organizational behavior and management (2nd ed.). Homewood, IL: BPI/Irwin. Kane-Urrabazo, C, (2006), Management's Role In Shaping Organizational Culture. Journal of Nursing Management, 14(3), 188-194. Legutko, C, (2012), Organizational management. Lanham, Md.: AltaMira Press. (1973). Part IV- The Hierarchy Of The Organization. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 1(1), 73-73. Schein, E. H, (2011), Organizational culture and leadership (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Tsui, A. S., Schoonhoven, C. B., Meyer, M. W., Lau, C., & Milkovich, G, (2008), Organization And Management In The Midst Of Societal Transformation: The People?s Republic Of China. Organization Science, 15(2), 133-144. Howard, M (2011). Great Leadership starts with leading self. Professional development Journal, 12 (3) 21-25 Jennings, G. (2008). Styles of Leadership in organization, Organizational Management Journal, 3 (13) 28-31 Kane, R. (2000).Transformational leadership effects at different level of employees. Business Review, 13 (2) 121-125 Kirk, R. (2004). Transformational Leadership; Empowerment and Dependency, London: McGraw Hill Laud, J. (2007). Leadership and Organizational Development, Journal of Management, 14 (8) 67-71 Stoll, L. (2009). Creative Leadership Teams for Organizational Development, Journal of International Leadership, 11 (8) 123-126 Smith, M (2005). Expanding the Organizational Leadership Assessment, Journal of International Leadership, 18 (7) 133-137 Patterson, F. (2003). Transformational versus Servant Leadership: A Difference in Leader Focus. Paper Presentation Virginia Beach, VA. Read More