Although managers need leadership qualities in order to effectively complete their tasks, it is imperative to understand the difference between a manager and a leader. Management is a function in which directives are carried out and executed during the day to day activities of the business, while leaders innovate, and bring forth ideas envisioned that many would discount as possibilities. A leader must understand their role and the effect they have on others.
Failure to understand the extinct a leader has on his/her organization and the operations f the company may cause turbulence and discontent in their subordinates. When this understanding is breached, resistance, mistrust, and defiance receive an open invitation. It is easier to maintain trust and a fortuitous relationship between a leader and his/her followers than it is to earn it back. Introduction With the rise of the knowledge worker, “one does not ‘manage’ people,” Mr.. Trucker wrote. “The task is to lead people.
Don’t waste your time!
Order your assignment!
And the goal is to make productive the specific strengths and knowledge of every individual” (Murray, A. , date unknown). Employees contributing on decisions made will improve their efficiency due o their knowledge of their field, their execution, and their informed abilities to complete the tasks. In order to nurture the innovations and knowledge employees have, allowing them to assist in the decision making process will not only improve the culture of the organization, but also improve efficiency, boost employee morale, and make decisions base on those affected by them, the employee.
The question is, how do you create employee empowerment, when management resists on the idea? How should the leader deal with the situation? In order to offer a resolution to the issue at hand, the leader must understand is role as a leader. A leader is any person who influences individuals and groups within an organization, helps them in establishing goals, and guides them toward achieving their goals (Invading, p. 4). As the leader, he has the authority to implement a new strategy that will best suite the needs of the business and assist the organization in meeting their objectives.
He must establish his role when giving directives to management which will limit some of the resistance he is receiving. The leader should use management involvement to understand the reason for resistance, educate the managers on the pros and cons of his cession, and use his influence to explain the rationale behind the need for change. Lack of education, information, and explanation behind decisions made may cause negative reactions and increase resistance when individuals fail to understand the rationale behind the decision made.
In order to make an effective decision that is embraced, it is beneficial to justify the decision and create an open door policy in which managers can express their concerns versus being resistant and non-conforming. If it is in the best interest of the company to change the atmosphere to a team-based organization, this should be expressed o management to persuade them to be more supportive so the execution may diligent and effective. How are leading and managing different? Management is a function that must be exercised in any business, leadership is a relinquishment’s leader and led that can energize an organization (Macomb, M. 2000). Although both “modes” are necessary and complimentary, they are different in their own respect. Leaders are prone to be more visionary and strategic as versus managers who address issues tactfully and primarily focuses completion of day-to-day activities. Warren Bennie quoted a leader innovates, motivates, and has long-rang perspectives while managers administer, maintain, and has a short-range view. Managers also provide depth, understanding, and purpose of the tasks expected of their employees. They give directives and definition behind the decisions made.
However, managers are not fully in tuned with the affects on the employees of the decisions and changes that they make. Many managers are able to keep the flow of work at a constant and may refrain from taking the risks that a leader is willing to take. Leaders may become managers but not all managers are able to be leaders. Leaders are the individuals who go beyond the status quo, their views are different, and they are less conservative and willing to take the necessary risks to achieve a goal. These key factors separate leaders from managers.
Leaders are able to lead because people have belief in their capabilities and it inspires individuals to stretch themselves beyond their limits. Leaders are capable of selecting talent, coaching, motivating, and building trust (Macomb, M. , 2000). Is the CEO trying to lead or manage this change initiative? The CEO is managing the change initiative as opposed to leading it. Leaders are individuals who are visionaries and see the horizon and the long term effects of the decisions made. He has leadership qualities as managers should have, however, management’s trust in his decisions is lacking.
Leaders are noble for building relationships and motivating individuals to follow their lead, however, he is experiencing resistance due to the lack of trust and belief his subordinates have in his capabilities. In Organizing Genius(Addison-Wesley, 1997) Bennie and Patricia Ward Epidermal point out that leaders of great teams pick talent on the basis of excellence and ability to work with others. Macomb, M, 2000). A leader has the ability to recognize and select employees that typically gravitate towards them with the same visions and goals as the leader.
This is the relationship established that leaders should naturally be able to build. The CEO is managing the project versus leading the implementation through motivation and coaching, instead, he made a plan with no true means of execution or rationale behind the new initiative. What arguments can he use to persuade his managers? What can he do to help his managers change their style? The CEO should become more transparent and become more involved in the recess versus watching from afar and only offering input where there are inaccuracies.
As the management style changes, the CEO should exchange information regarding the status of the business and market and how it is applicable to the changes made within the firm. Expressing and sharing how the business has improved due to employee involvement and input, managers will become less resistant as seeing the affects of the decisions made has been overall beneficial for all parties involved. What are the implications of his actions and decisions? What would you recommend to the CEO given your analysis of his approach thus far? Based on this analysis, the CEO should become more involved in the decision he makes.