Course & topics

Join Our 7452 Happy Students​ Today!

Test

Leadership Vs Management

Introduction

The main difference between leaders and managers is that leaders have people who follow them, while managers have people who work for them.

One of the major discussions in today’s world is centred around the correlation between management and leadership. There are people who talk of two systems as being interchangeable, while many believe the two are inherently different in ways of operating.

A successful manager or business owner needs to be both a strong leader and manager to get their team on board to follow them towards their vision of success. Leadership is about getting people to understand and believe in your vision and to work with you to achieve your goals while managing is more about administering and making sure the day-to-day things are happening as they should.

Definition of Management

Management: The Oxford Dictionary defines management as, “the process of dealing with or controlling things or people”.

The practice of Management is generally linked with words such as directing, controlling, organizing and planning. The objective of management is to ensure that a specific group of people move in harmony towards the established goals. Goals are set out and the processes to achieve them is identified by management. The goal is to achieve these objectives as efficiently as possible.

Lazenby (2016:4) defines a manager as “a person who coordinates and integrates all the work activities of employees in an organisation with the purpose of achieving its vision and goals”.

The Three Levels of Management

To gain a better understanding of what different types of managers do, we need to understand the various levels of management. Generally, there are three levels of management, namely, first-line managers, middle management and top management.

Top managers: these refer to positions such as chairman of the board and CEO. Depending on how large the organisation is, top managers could manage the whole organisation or only parts of it. This level is also known as ‘strategic’, as it is involved in setting the mission and the objectives of the organisation as well as strategic and long-term goals.

Middle managers: these would include positions such as sales managers and branch managers. Robbins & Coulter (2007:6) state that “it includes all levels of management between the first level and the top level of the organisation”. Depending on the organogram of the organisation, it could also include regional managers, divisional heads or project leaders. The role of middle management is to implement the strategy introduced by top management and also to supervise its implementation by the first-line managers. Middle managers develop short-term objectives in order to implement the long-term strategy of top management. They normally report to top management.

First-line managers: these include team leaders and/or supervisors. Their role is to implement the operational plans of middle management. They report to middle management and, unlike the other two levels, they do not supervise other managers, but rather operational employees.

Operational employees: they refer to the employees who do not hold management positions and report to first-line management.

The Four Pillars of Management

Below is a table adapted from Robbins & Coulter (2007) that shows how the functions relate to each other in order to meet the organisation’s goals.

More recently, motivation has also been included as the fifth function of management. According to Romando (2008), motivation can be defined as “a driving force that initiates and directs behaviour”.

Achieving these tasks leads to achieving the organisation’s stated purpose.

Planning:

Planning is the start of the four functions of management. Planning can be seen as the preparation phase to achieve the goals and objectives of an organisation.

Robbins & Coulter (2007:9) define planning as “defining goals, establishing strategies for achieving these goals, and developing plans to integrate and coordinate activities”. Motsepe built up a billion-Rand company through determination and commercial expertise. He had a vision as to what he wanted to achieve.

Organising:

This follows on planning, whereby management designs and develops an organisational system to implement the plans. This is where the human, physical and financial resources are combined to implement the goals set out in the planning phase.

Leading:

Leading is the process of “influencing employees to work toward achieving the objectives”. It deals with the question of how to get employees to work (Lazenby, 2016). Managers must communicate objectives to employees and make sure that they understand them. It is also the manager’s role to motivate staff in order to fulfil the goals of the organisation. Leadership leads to a high level of motivation and commitment among the employees of an organisation.

Controlling:

This function determines whether the plan was implemented the way it was originally planned and assesses whether objectives have been met. Jones, George & Hill (2000:10) define controlling as “evaluating how well an organisation is achieving its goals and taking action to maintain or improve performance…”. At the controlling stage, managers are able to establish whether they have planned, organised and controlled their functions efficiently and effectively in order to reach the organisation’s goals. It is also important for managers to evaluate themselves at this stage in performing the other three functions of management, and to take the necessary corrective action where necessary (Jones, George & Hill, 2000).

Motivating:

Refers to influencing staff in order to reach an organisational goal. Strydom (2008:49) states that motivating people is the process of influencing them so that they cause, channel and sustain certain behaviours that are aimed at reaching the organisational goal. Motivation follows on from leading, as it is the managers’ role, not only to lead their employees, but also to motivate them to carry out both the objectives of the team and those of the organisation. Motsepe believes in building trust relationships in the organisation and that people should be empowered. This would serve as a motivating factor to both employees and management alike.

Managerial Skills

It is important to note that the required personal skills for managers differ between these levels.

Technical skills:

The ability to use the procedures, techniques and knowledge of a specialised field. This refers to skills that are directly related to the job and are usually performed by first-line managers as indicated in the diagram above. In the banking industry, it could refer to the teller supervisor who deals directly with the tellers, and therefore the supervisor would need to have the technical skills in order to manage that position.

Human skills:

The ability to work with, understand and motivate other people as individuals or in groups. This skill would be necessary at all levels of management, as all managers should be able to work with people. This skill would be necessary for first-line management to deal with the staff that perform the technical duties, as well as for top management that deal with lower-level managers.

Conceptual skills:

The ability to coordinate and integrate all of an organisation’s interests and activities. Robbins & Coulter (2007:13) define this as “the ability to think and to conceptualise about abstract and complex situations”. This would be used at top management level, as they are responsible for understanding the organisation and how it fits into its external environment

Characteristics required from a Manager

 

1.Rational

A good manager is able to look at things rationally and apply logical thinking when it comes to solving problems and setting goals. Since the objective is to focus on the effective accomplishment of goals, the manager has to understand the realities he or she is facing. Rational thinking is essential for allocating the resources and setting the objectives for the team.

2.Analytical

Ability to analyze details and find the connections between processes can boost the way a manager operates. Analytical thinking can help identify objectives and the proper use of resources.

  1. Ability to solve problems

 A manager must also be good at solving problems. If the team encounters a problem, the management must be at the core of finding a solution. This requires a cool head, an intelligent mind and quick thinking.

  1. Perseverance

The task of supervising, directing and managing resources is not an easy feat and efficient management puts a lot of pressure on the manager. Therefore, a manager must be able to stand tall under pressure and keep calm even when things go wrong.

A position of management requires a lot of skill from the person. It’s a position where intelligence and persistency are rewarded.

Definition of Leadership

Leadership: The Oxford Dictionary defines leadership as, “the action of leading a group of people or an organization, or the ability to do this”.

Marx, van Rooyen, Bosch & Reynders (2008:380) define leadership or the process of leading as “the ability of an individual to influence other persons to voluntarily contribute to the attainment of the aims of the business”. Leadership is not a position, but a process (Strydom, 2008:98).

The practice of leadership is more interested in how to move a group of people towards a goal. In its essence, leadership is about influencing and motivating the specific group of people. The leader is concerned about supporting the team during the process and empowering the team, rather than simply supervising that everything is done as previously planned.

Machines and processes would be easy to manage as they are predictable and do as they are told. People, on the other hand, are unpredictable; they have different beliefs, capabilities, interests, skills and personal goals. It is for this reason that leadership forms an integral part of an organisation, because it is directly involved with the people within the organisation. Lazenby (2016) contends that the other tasks of management cannot be successfully executed without leadership. The author further maintains that all organisations need leaders to steer them towards a competitive position within a volatile business environment.

The Three Components of Leadership

Lazenby defines the three components of leadership as follows,

  1. The leader: this is the person who ensures that something happens as a result of the interaction between the leader and followers.
  2. The followers: this refers to the employees.
  3. The situation: this refers to the context or circumstances, be it internal or external, where the organisation functions.

These three components can be independent of each other, but within the organisation they can be seen as interactive. The three components can be influenced by a number of factors. The diagram below has been adapted to incorporate this interaction.

  • The leader: the leader includes certain individual factors that he contributes, such as his unique personality, interests and characteristics.
  • The follower: movement will be not only from the leader to the follower, but also from the follower to the leader. This can be seen in organisations as followers having their own expectations, maturity levels and competencies. These factors affect the leadership component.
  • The situation: the environment in which the leader and follower find themselves should also be considered. The context or situation will dictate how the leader and the follower interact with each other.

Characteristics required from a Leader

Leaders generally exert the following characteristics:

Authority:

Refers to the right of a manager to give commands and demand actions from employees.

Power:

Refers to the ability of the manager to influence an employee’s behaviour.

Responsibility:

Is the duty of a manager to achieve organisational goals. Managers are held responsible for their departments or sections.

Delegation:

Is the process of allocating responsibility and authority for achieving organisational goals.

Accountability:

Is the evaluation of how well individuals meet their responsibilities? Managers can delegate many things, including authority and responsibility, but they cannot delegate their accountability.

The requirements of Leaders

On the other hand, leadership is more people-oriented and this means a leader must possess plenty of emotional intelligence. The core characteristics of a leader are:

Charisma

Since a leader needs to inspire the subordinates to follow his or her cause, charisma is an important characteristic. Charisma helps the leader to create a positive environment inspiring other to take action. Since a leader is not supposed to force or intimidate people to perform the required tasks, charismatic skills can enhance the leader’s chances of getting followers involved.

Innovative

A leader must also show plenty of innovative skills. Leadership is about transformation at its essence and change always requires the ability to think outside of the box. A leader needs to be able to look at problems, but also at existing situations, and find out different ways to change things around.

Visionary

Similar to being innovative, a leader must be a visionary. A strong and realistic vision guarantees followers listen to the leader and work hard towards the goal. A leader won’t be able to inspire the subordinates by laying out plans that aren’t challenging, transforming and inspiring. A true leader must have the ability to see beyond the future.

Flexible

Leadership requires plenty of flexibility because you are dealing with people not tasks. Since people are at the core of the approach, the leader must be able to accommodate and respond to situations that might not have been expected. Since persuasion should be part of the leader’s skill set, the leader also needs to be flexible in his or her approach to solving conflict situations.

The position of leadership is a position that requires a lot of technical, but also personal skill. The leader’s ability to influence and empower people is at the core of the position. Nonetheless, a leader also needs to be able to come up with transformative ideas to guarantee followers look up to him or her.

Leadership Vs Management

There are distinct differences between the qualities of a leader and those of a manager. An organisation, however, relies on both managers and leaders. The challenge therefore is for effective managers to become good leaders. Below is a table that shows the differences between management and leadership.

The Ultimate Mission

At the heart of the divergence is the view that management and leadership have on the mission – the ultimate goal.

Management generally has a set mission, which often deals with increasing profitability or productivity. These guide the management’s decision-making and task setting – processes are used based on their effectiveness. When it comes to changing a process or switching roles around, the key consideration is always on the impact the change will have on the efficiency of the mission. For example, management hires people based on their ability to fulfil a specific role. Subordinates and processes are always geared towards ultimate efficiency, which moves the team or the organization towards profitability or productivity.

Since management’s role is to find the most effective processes to achieve the mission, the focus is not on trailing new approaches or experimenting with different things. Once management finds a process that works, then it will stick to it if the process can be proven more effective than another method. Management is not about revolutionizing things around but continuing the safe path towards the objectives. Management sees that it is the processes what make the system work, not the people.

The traditional approach to management shows it to be machine-like. Management oversees a machine, with the processes and subordinates each representing a function or a part of the machine. Therefore, the ultimate mission for management is to ensure each part is working well; as the management knows that if one part fails, the whole mission can fail. But this also creates the worldview that the machine is the most important part, not any individual part. When a part fails, management will replace it or fix it as soon as possible.

The manager can’t risk keeping the machine from running and therefore the focus is on ensuring it’s back running quickly, not whether the part itself is fixed. Consider a subordinate is not performing the role as efficiently as possible. The manager notices it’s causing problems and therefore will take the person aside to check what’s the issue. The manager’s focus is on getting the work done, whether by providing the person with more resources or by getting someone else to perform the role.

On the other hand, leadership’s ultimate mission is about transformation. The objective is to adapt to changing circumstances and to change the organization around. Leadership isn’t interested about status quo but achieving something new – working towards greater success and recognition. The emphasis is not on profit or productivity, but empowerment and innovation. It’s not to say, profit isn’t important, but it’s more of a by-product following success. The vision itself is more about

specific values and approaches to work and the industry. The vision is laid out with the leader’s personal values in mind, with the values resonating with the organization’s values.

As leadership is people-oriented in its approach, the mission is more people-focused as well. The focus is on helping people to adjust to changing circumstances and empower them to perform better. In leadership, the machine – or the processes – is not the key to success, but the people making the machine work. Therefore, leadership sees that the functions of the machine can always be changed according to the abilities of the people. In terms of hiring subordinates, a leader is not necessarily as focused on the technical skills and the ability to perform the tasks, but the person’s approach to work and whether they are willing to work towards the mission.

Leadership is interested in the ideas and values the subordinates can provide for the team, not just their effectiveness in getting things done. Since the mission is focused on transforming and changing things around, leadership is always on the lookout for new ideas. Subordinates are seen to provide value for the team, not just through labour, but also through their ability to think differently.

Different Approaches to achieving objective and taking risk

Management’s approach is driven by the emphasis on results. The focus in on creating a framework consisting of strategies, policies, and processes, which will help the team get close to the objectives fast and without encountering problems. The management spends a lot of time concerned with the framework and honing it to its perfection. Once the objectives are set, management will spend time figuring out the best people and the most efficient methods for achieving these goals.

During the process, the management team will ensure the procedures are followed and problems in the framework are solved swiftly. Management is in a sense about empowering people through the soliciting of employees in their most suitable position. The management team wants people to achieve results efficiently and therefore, a level of consultation with the employees is always part of creating the framework. The important thing to note about it is that the manager doesn’t have to facilitate all the different views.

Due to the emphasis being on results, the management framework is also risk averse. Management is not about testing out new processes or taking a risk with the strategy – the emphasis is on frameworks that are proven and effective. The framework is not experimental, and subordinates are not allowed to step outside of the established processes, especially without consulting with the management. The risk-averse nature stems also from the kind of authority management uses.

Under the managerial system, authority is always in the hands of the manager and the management team. Therefore, the subordinates are not able to make decisions or adjust the framework even slightly without consulting the management first. Since the authority and control are placed in the hands of the management, the system decreases risk even further. The probability of risk goes down because the management is in control of every aspect of the framework.

Leadership tries to achieve objectives through a different framework. The focus is not on established, rigid processes, strategies and policies, but rather on discovery and accomplishment. Instead of focusing on the result, the objectives are about achieving something new (discovering a new technique, empowering subordinates, achieving new sales records).

In effect, leadership looks at everything as a challenge to innovate. Even when something is not a major problem for the organization, leadership is still interested in checking whether it could be done differently or improved in some way. The framework for leaders is not about establishing a set of policies to guide work, but to create a system where ideas are examined and re-evaluated to find out innovations. As mentioned earlier, the framework is built on constant transformation.

Furthermore, leadership emphasizes motivation and commitment, with the employees picked according to how involved they are with the project. The emphasis is not necessarily on the current skillset, but rather on providing personal growth opportunities to each employee. A leader wouldn’t simply ask, “What can you do now?” but focuses on “What could you do if given these tools?”

Since change and innovation are at the hearth of leadership and its approach to achieving objectives, the system is more risk-taking. Leadership doesn’t steer away from risk, but instead embraces it – without some risk-taking, change is harder to achieve successfully. There is an element of conscious risk-taking, as leaders will understand new ideas and innovations can occasionally turn out wrong. But not all risk is purposely sought after. Leadership doesn’t mean taking unnecessary risks or gambling away the sustainability of the organization. Nonetheless, the transformative nature will inherently leave the system with higher risk than management. In a way, leadership also requires more risk taking on the part of the employee.

A leader’s authority is always based on how trustworthy the subordinates find the vision. Whilst management enjoys authority based on the title or the position, leadership is built on mutual trust in the leader’s vision. Subordinates who choose to follow a leader and participate in the new approach are also taking a risk.

To conclude the main differences of the two systems in terms of achieving objectives and taking risks:

Difference in ways subordinates are treated

The final major area of difference between management and leadership relates to their specific approaches to dealing with subordinates. The major divergence in communication is based on how the manager and the leader view the subordinate. Whereas a leader will consider the subordinates as followers and equal members of the team, the manager subscribes to a hierarchy of power. Subordinates under management are employees under the manager; there to perform the tasks as the management tells them, following the guidelines. Management has a strict authority and power structure, with the management on top and the subordinates below. Naturally, the management can, depending on their position in the organization, be beneath a senior management team. Nonetheless, management is always in a position of power over its subordinates.

Having the power and authority concentrated in the hands of the manager influences the approach to communication. Management doesn’t generally involve subordinates in the decision-making or planning process, especially in terms of guaranteeing the subordinates any real effective way to influence the process. Feedback channels are established, but these tend not to focus on things such as ideas on changing the existing framework. If feedback is sought, it focuses on improvements of the existing frameworks or ensuring the subordinates are aware of the tasks, which they must perform. In essence, the management is about communicating instructions, making it a rather one-sided discussion.

On the other hand, under a leadership system, the authority is much more open, with different leadership styles delegating authority among the subordinates to a varying degree. Since subordinates are viewed more equally, the leader doesn’t shy away from feedback or input. In fact, leadership is eager to identify the subordinates who are motivated to put themselves out there and learn while working towards the set objective. The communication structure is a two-way process, where the leader listens to the subordinates and their ideas into account. This doesn’t mean the subordinates necessarily have actual decision-making power or that all the ideas are implemented, but at least leadership provides them more opportunities to voice their opinion. Management is about telling the subordinate “This is what you have to do”; while leadership is about showing the subordinate, “This is what we should do”.

Another essential part of the interaction is the methodology the approaches use in order to motivate the subordinates. Both styles can be understood in the context of Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. The motivational theory presents an idea in which human needs are depicted as layers within a pyramid, with each stage creating a new layer for motivation. The pyramid has three layers: basic needs, psychological needs, and self-fulfillment needs.

The lowest-level needs are physiological needs, and these include food, water, clothing and air. This refers to the basic things that are needed for survival and natural functioning. Within an organisation, these needs could translate into salary, lunchrooms, decent workspace, heating, and lighting, etc.

  • The next level is safety and security needs, which include protection from both physical and emotional harm. This could include job security, pension plans and structure within the organisation.
  • Social needs are next in the hierarchy and concentrate on the need for belonging and affiliation. They include the need for friendships, love and affection. To be accepted by peers and family also forms part of fulfilling this need.
  • Next in the hierarchy is self-esteem needs. This is the need for a positive self-image and self-respect, and also recognition from others. Within the organisation, this need can be satisfied through compliments given, job titles and challenging job tasks.
  • Self-actualisation is at the top of the hierarchy. This need aims at realising one’s potential through growth and development. Within the organisation, it could be decision-making opportunities, with the focus on creativity and innovation.

McClelland’s Theory of Needs:

This theory argues that needs are learned and reinforced (Erasmus et al., 2016). There are three needs to explain motivation, namely: need for achievement, need for power and need for affiliation.

  • Need for achievement (N Ach) – this is the need to excel or be successful at a certain standard.
  • Need for power (N Pow) – this is the need to be influential and make others behave in a way in which they would not have otherwise behaved.
  • Need for affiliation (N Aff) – the desire for warm and close relationships and to be liked and accepted by others.

Smit & Cronje (2003:353) look at how this theory can improve employee performance by placing them in jobs according to their predominant needs. They are as follows:

  • High N Ach: employees are motivated by non-routine, challenging tasks with clear, achievable objectives. These employees should be given challenging tasks and increased responsibility. High achievers work well in independent groups in large organisations. The fact that an employee is a high achiever does not mean he will make a good manager. They are normally interested in how well they do personally and not in influencing others.
  • High N Aff: they are best motivated if they are able to work within a team and if they receive praise and acknowledgement from their managers. They seek approval from the people they interact with, rather than from the job itself.
  • High N Pow: these employees would rather work where they can direct others’ actions. They can also be seen as competitive individuals. It seems as if a high need for power is a prerequisite for being an effective manager, as research has shown that the best managers rank high in their need for power compared to their need for affiliation.

 

End

 

Scroll to Top