Management and Leadership Select an organization with which you are familiar.

Prepare a 1,750- to 2,100-word paper in which you address the following as it relates to that organization: Differentiate between management and leadership.

Managers have subordinates

By definition, managers have subordinates - unless their title is honorary and given as a mark of seniority, in which case the title is a misnomer and their power over others is other than formal authority. Authoritarian, transactional style Managers have a position of authority vested in them by the company, and their subordinates work for them and largely do as they are told. Management style is transactional, in that the manager tells the subordinate what to do, and the subordinate does this not because they are a blind robot, but because they have been promised a reward (at minimum their salary) for doing so. Work focus Managers are paid to get things done (they are subordinates too), often within tight constraints of time and money. They thus naturally pass on this work focus to their subordinates. Seek comfort An interesting research finding about managers is that they tend to come from stable home backgrounds and led relatively normal and comfortable lives. This leads them to be relatively risk-averse and they will seek to avoid conflict where possible. In terms of people, they generally like to run a 'happy ship'.

Leaders have followers

Leaders do not have subordinates - at least not when they are leading. Many organizational leaders do have subordinates, but only because they are also managers. But when they want to lead, they have to give up formal authoritarian control, because to lead is to have followers, and following is always a voluntary activity. Charismatic, transformational style Telling people what to do does not inspire them to follow you. You have to appeal to them, showing how following them will lead to their hearts' desire. They must want to follow you enough to stop what they are doing and perhaps walk into danger and situations that they would not normally consider risking. Leaders with a stronger charisma find it easier to attract people to their cause. As a part of their persuasion they typically promise transformational benefits, such that their followers will not just receive extrinsic rewards but will somehow become better people. People focus Although many leaders have a charismatic style to some extent, this does not require a loud personality. They are always good with people, and quiet styles that give credit to others (and takes blame on themselves) are very effective at creating the loyalty that great leaders engender. Although leaders are good with people, this does not mean they are friendly with them. In order to keep the mystique of leadership, they often retain a degree of separation and aloofness. This does not mean that leaders do not pay attention to tasks - in fact they are often very achievement-focused. What they do realize, however, is the importance of enthusing others to work towards their vision.

Seek risk In the same study that showed managers as risk-averse, leaders appeared as riskseeking, although they are not blind thrill-seekers. When pursuing their vision, they consider it natural to encounter problems and hurdles that must be overcome along the way. They are thus comfortable with risk and will see routes that others avoid as potential opportunities for advantage and will happily break rules in order to get things done. A surprising number of these leaders had some form of handicap in their lives which they had to overcome. Some had traumatic childhoods, some had problems such as dyslexia, others were shorter than average. This perhaps taught them the independence of mind that is needed to go out on a limb and not worry about what others are thinking about you.

Leadership is setting a new direction or vision for a group that they follow, ie: a leader is the spearhead for that new direction Management controls or directs people/resources in a group according to principles or values that have already been established. Leadership is about setting a new direction for a group; management is about directing and controlling according to established principles. However, someone can be a symbolic leader if they emerge as the spearhead of a direction the group sets for itself.
According to the current wisdom, managers are principally administratorsthey write business plans, set budgets and monitor progress. Leaders on the other hand, get organizations and people to change. That's true, as far as it goes, but there is a more useful distinction between management and leadership: Management is a function that must be exercised in any business, leadership is a relationship between leader and led that can energize an organization.
Of course, the management function can include problem solving and facilitating meetings as well as the traditional bureaucratic tasks. However, it is not necessary for the same person in a group to exercise all these tasks. Different people can take on parts of the management function. Someone on a team can do the planning. Another person can do the budgeting. A third team member can monitor quality. Members of a team can take turns facilitating meetings. The team as a whole can share responsibility for meeting performance targets. In other words, you don't need managers to produce good management. I have seen a number of cases in which teams have been able to determine for themselves which management tasks they wish to perform as a group, which ones individual team members wish to take on, and which they will delegate to a manager. If you gave this choice to members of a technical staff, they might decide they wanted a manager to take care of the bureaucratic stuff so they could remain free to do more interesting work like science! Typically, technical staff does not like to evaluate or discipline colleagues. They would rather hire a manager to do that kind of dirty work. However, at the GE/Durham plant that assembles engines for the Boeing 777, there are 170 employees and only one manager, according to Fast Company (Oct. 1999). There are nine teams, each with only one directive: the day their next engine must be loaded. Teams decide who does which work; they schedule training, vacations and overtime; and they deal with teammates' issues of productivity or lack of work ethic. But this is seldom a problem. Although there are no incentives other than promotion on the basis of skills, technicians are motivated by the work itself, the drive for perfection and pride in supplying one fo the highest-thrust engines in the industry. Teams also send members to a work council that deals with issues such as supplier problems, computer systems and human resource issues, and the like.

And what is the managers job? Listening, informing, focusing the teams on costs (during the past 5 years, costs were cut 10 percent per year), and representing the factory to the customer and within GE. Perceptions of Management

The Dilbert comic strip reminds us that in an age where the young may know more than their elders, technical staff may view managers as people who don't understand technology and who make life difficult for them with demands that make little sense. Perhaps technical teams with Dilbertian managers would be fed up enough to take over the management function.
The manager in the Dilbert strip is a leader only in the sense that members of the technical staff are forced to follow his directions. Of course, ideally a manager is also a leader that people want to follow. In that case, there can be a relationship that strengthens a group and focuses it on meaningful work. People follow a leader either out of fear or for a mix of positive reasons such as hope of success, trust in the leader, excitement about a project or mission, or the opportunity to stretch oneself to the limit. In this regard, Russell L. Ackoff conceives of a transformational leader as creating an aesthetic vision which inspires people with an ideal of what can be achieved. Warren Bennis describes leaders who make people feel they are the best and can achieve whatever they can imagine. Leaders can also be dangerous, however, especially charismatic Pied Pipers who seduce people into disastrous adventures. Sometimes it can be hard to tell the difference between a Steve Jobs who promises that the team can be insanely great and a demagogue who turns out to be greatly insane. Good Leaders

We need to recognize that there are two kinds of leaders: strategic and operational. The first priority of a strategic leader is to envisage the companys future and to invest the resources necessary to create it. Operational leaders have the job of implementing the vision.
However, there are four things that both strategic and operational leaders can do to make teams and organizations successful. They are: selecting talent, motivating people, coaching, and building trust. In Organizing Genius (Addison-Wesley, 1997) Bennis and Patricia Ward Biederman point out that leaders of great teams pick talent on the basis of excellence and ability to work with others. Good leaders are not afraid to hire people who know more than they do. Jack Welch has said that his biggest accomplishment has been finding great people. In Why Work? (Second edition, Miles River Press, 1995), I suggest thinking about motivation in terms of four Rs: responsibilities, rewards, relationships, and reasons. A leader should design responsibilities that engage a persons competence and values. Responsibilities are motivating when they stretch people and are meaningful to them. Responsibilities can engage such intrinsic motivations as exercising ones abilities, creating something new, helping others and providing value to customers. Which of these meanings is most motivating depends on an individual's personality. The combination of intrinsic motivation with extrinsic rewards and recognition can produce highly motivated people. Of course, incentives, rewards and recognition should reinforce the kind of behavior needed for the team's success. If you want people to cooperate, you need to reward and recognize successful cooperation. A good leader also strengthens motivation and develops competence through coaching. In particular, he or she knows how to keep people focussed, recognizing that unless technical staff keep their eyes on priority goals, they will tend to drift into paths that are attractive to them, but not essential for the business.

Good leaders also fire up people by convincing them that their job is vital for the business to succeed. On one hand, people quickly turn off when they feel their work is unnecessary. On the other, they feel motivated even doing simple repetitive work when it is meaningful, like stuffing envelopes for a cause they deeply support. Developing Trust

Finally, good leaders develop trust by walking the talk, doing what they preach. Unfortunately, it is not always possible to keep promises in todays unpredictable business environment. The market changes, new competitors upset plans, technological breakthroughs force rethinking strategy. It is not surprising that organizational surveys typically show a large gap in trust for todays leaders.
In this turbulent climate, leaders can increase trust by promoting transparency and involvement. Transparency means clarifying reasons for decisions, and being open about compensation policy, business results and market information. Professional knowledge workers want to know what the leader knows about what is coming down the road. They also want a say in decisions they are expected to implement. They want to be sure their views are heard and taken into account. Even when they are disappointed by the decisions, knowing they have been heard increases trust, especially when the reasons are explained. To summarize, companies need good management and great leaders, and efficient function and energizing relationships. Bureaucracies are typically overmanaged and underled, resulting in bored, unmotivated employees. Start-ups are often intensely led and undermanaged, so that enthusiasm leads to unplanned problems, overspending and missed deadlines. There are many different ways to exercise the management function and people are willing to follow different leadership styles. Although there are many good examples of management and leadership, there is no one best way. You can get good ideas from observing successful companies, but you need to design your own management function by involving teammembers, and developing your own way of inspiring people to follow you.

Describe the roles and responsibilities that organizational managers and leaders play in creating and maintaining a healthy organizational culture.

The ability to implement strategies in an organization is one of the most skillful managerial requirements and knowledge that we need in critical aspects to run an organization. The core aspects of strategies are to sustain a competitive advantage on other organizations. Organizations must acquire and utilize technique to optimize their core competencies, to strengthen their organizational capability. On this strategies, managers are at all-time should be involved in implementing the set strategies. Strategic implementation entails the transformation of an organization strategies plan into action and ultimately into a result, preferably high performance results. The strategies of an organization are required to increase its capacity to compete on the basis of its intellectual competencies, which must be strategically aligned with the objectives the organizational has on its goal achievement. A leader and manager must evaluate organizational capabilities and intellectual capital and synthesize and integrate models o establish a framework for application of duties to the employees so as to create a good healthy working condition. This will motivate all the employees in the capacity of the work each performs. Leaders and managers must not be challenged by implement the organizational strategies, by this workers will have to adjust to environmental change which should be on the organization strategy. An organization should focus on determining approaches as to attain objectives while leaders and managers give the capability for a sustainable growth. Leaders and managers must overcome obstacles if they hope to implement a new strategy successfully. (Arbinger Institute, 2002). Leaders and managers in an organization can use some factors to create a healthy organizational culture, such factors are social factors, physical setting, technology, organizing arrangements and individual behavior. Leaders and managers are required to have increased resources, perceptive knowledge, superior talent and enhanced capabilities to continue facilitating processes toward attaining

the ultimate objectives, discovering and commercializing safety of the organization. These multiple activities require managers and leaders who have the significant of strategies implementation and core competencies and organizational capabilities that create values to changes of the organization. The management is responsible for establishing systems and procedures which facilitate effective and smooth running of an organization. They set up controlling systems and procedures which are used to ensure that the organization is controlled and disciplined. Management ensures that the organization that the rules set up is adhered to for the organization to function optimally. The management process includes heading and leading the management, organizing the management and planning how to handle the management. The leadership of a company mainly involves establishing direct and creating a vision for the company. It involves modeling the vision, forming teams, influencing them and aligning people to achieve the set goals. Leadership bears the responsibility of inspiring people and producing meaningful changes in the company. Leadership is therefore responsible for positioning people and organizations for useful change. Therefore it ensures that the company does the right, in its strategies. Leadership requires are sound understanding in order to create goals and vision of the company and work towards achieving them. Good leadership entails the ability to articulate a vision, align the people's talents and efforts of the company's direction and keeping them focused on the set vision by motivating and inspiring them. Evaluate the effect of globalization and management across borders.

Managing Globalization: Crossing borders? Then expect culture clashes - Business - International Herald Tribune
Daniel Altman

One of the great engines of globalization is the expansion of companies across borders through mergers, acquisitions, joint ventures and subsidiaries. You might have expected these link-ups to result in a sort of standardized corporate culture, an all-encompassing lingua franca of the global worker. But clashes of culture are persisting, and even multiplying. "It's pretty much a mixed salad," said Lynn Paine, a professor of business administration at Harvard University. "What I see is a growing convergence around what you might call some kind of minimum standards, but around that there's still a lot of variety in the corporate and national culture." There is no set formula for exporting a style of management from one country to another, Paine said. Every case is different. Often the problem has to do with how hierarchies are traditionally structured. "One American company had a very egalitarian culture, a very flat structure - no more than four or five levels in the organization in the U.S.," she said. "Going into China, and trying to replicate the same egalitarian organization, it just wouldn't take. Groups of people would organize themselves into hierarchies almost spontaneously."

The gaps are so wide, Paine said, that what seems egalitarian in one country may appear authoritarian in the next. "What people from that background think is empowerment going from 20 layers to 12 - is not empowerment in other countries, like in the U.S." In addition to management structure, methods for motivating employees can also be very different. "The Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian countries tend to be more individualistic, whereas the Asian and Latin American cultures tend to be more group-oriented," she said. Putting an emphasis on individual performance, therefore, can be a mistake in a place where the team is viewed as paramount. Day-to-day interactions can also be sources of cross-cultural friction. Melissa Petri, a numerical analyst from the Philippines, works on semiconductors at the European headquarters of Fuji Electric, a Japanese company, in Frankfurt. In the past several years, she has had bosses from France, Germany, Japan and Spain. Everyone speaks English, but differences in culture have led a few of her colleagues to threaten to leave the company, she said. "We're having problems now, because most of my colleagues are German, and we got used to it before with a German boss," she said. "Recently we changed to a Spanish boss, and it's very different. The way he runs things, the Germans don't think it's how it should be done." She said that her German boss was very direct, whereas her Spanish boss might say one thing to smooth over an argument but end up doing something else. The conflicts can extend into the tools of the workplace, too. Some tools, like Microsoft's Windows software, are popular in companies all over the world. But for more specific applications, there can be differences. "What we actually work on is an in- house system that's Japanese," Petri said. "But we have a manager of the administration department who's German. He's been working for the past year on SAP, and he believes that works better." SAP is a business software maker based in Germany. Japan makes an interesting case study, because its government is explicitly trying to bring Western-style management to domestic companies as part of a drive for more foreign investment. Yet it doesn't seem to be working, said Hiroshi Ono, an associate professor at the European Institute of Japanese Studies of the Stockholm School of Economics. "There's an expectation that along with this capital there'll be some kind of a spillover effect," he said. "The capital flows are coming, but the management flows are not."

Indeed, Ono said, Japan's big companies seem to be splitting up into two groups. One takes Nissan and Sony, which have recruited foreign chief executives, as a model. The other, which includes traditional giants like Mitsubishi and Sumitomo, sticks to tried- and-true Japanese management. While Japanese people remain leery of hostile takeovers from abroad, they are becoming more willing to accept a foreign boss. "New graduates, for example, are more willing to work for foreign companies than before," Ono said. "You see elites from the University of Tokyo going to work for Morgan Stanley." The problem now, he added, is Japan's relatively low level of English proficiency. "Even within Asia, the English is really bad," he said. For companies in developing countries, Paine said, the pressure to adhere to Western norms can be especially strong. The greatest difficulties sometimes come in matters of corporate ethics. For example, a company hoping for investment from the West might install a code of ethics that prohibits conflicts of interest in supply contracts. But in many countries, Paine said, doing business with companies owned by family members is standard practice. Nondiscrimination policies in the workplace can also be problematic, Paine said, with statements often going further than actions. But that should not always lead to challenging companies' intentions. "In some cases, it's not actually lip service," she said. "It's a genuine aspiration, but there are a lot of impediments and barriers to achieving it." Thanks to the globalization of companies, however, some cases can be more straightforward than they first appear. This month, BASF, the German chemicals giant, bought Engelhard, a metals and materials specialist based in New Jersey. "Each company has its own corporate culture, but in our case both companies are global enterprises, working throughout the world," said Ted Lowen, an Engelhard spokesman. "Engelhard has a major operation in Germany, in Hannover," he said. "We're not a little local Jersey company by any means."
Recommend at least two strategies that organizational managers and leaders can use to create and maintain a healthy organizational culture. Support your recommendations with the concepts discussed in class and in the text, as well as your personal experiences.