The following is a guest paper presented by Rachel Saddler, a student of Dr. Stimson's at Wayland Baptist University.
Rachel Saddler
August 10, 2015
MGMT 5306
Leadership and Management Development
Instructor
Dr. Terry Stimson
Summer Term 2015
Reflective Paper
In today’s business world, leadership is a critical component of a successful business. However, there is much debate over whether managers or leaders are a better fit for business. The business environment is ever-changing, requiring companies to quickly adapt to change. Charismatic leadership is also in high demand to motivate teams in environments where the expectation is to do more with less. These components of business, leaders vs. managers, change management, and charismatic leadership, are vital for understanding and remaining competitive in today’s business environment.
Change Management
Change management is a difficult process for any organization. Many organizations have utilized a change management process based on grief models. This method focused on acknowledging the emotions related to grief and loss. “The concept of mourning the loss of the prior organization and job was quite useful in helping employees move through change.” (Welbourne, 2014). In recent times, change management has evolved in order to match the fast pace of the business world today. One proposed theory to aid in the conversion from grief-based to continuous change-based models is protection-motivation theory. This theory involves the use of increased emotion in communicating the message in order to achieve the buy-in of employees, and increasing the sense of urgency required to complete the change to increase the confidence of employees in successfully completing the change (Welbourne, 2014). Organizations experienced more efficient change when “aggressive and positive marketing” was used for communication (Welbourne, 2014).
Leader vs. Manager
For many years, there has been debate over which is better: managers or leaders. It is often stereotyped that managers are poor leaders, and leaders are poor managers (Tschohl, 2014). However, it is also contested that people can be effectively categorized as one or the other (Yukl, 2013). In fact, the National Council for Continuing Education & Training (NCCET) conducted research to assess leaders and managers, and designed a new model of leadership based on the results (Perrin, 2010). It began with a review and analysis of 80 articles, which led to the development of a leadership model and corresponding survey. This survey was taken by 971 leaders and associates. Researchers identified 42 leadership practices, which were ultimately sorted into six zones of leadership. These zones consist of Reflection, Society, Diversity, Ingenuity, People, and Business (Perrin, 2010). Effective leaders use all six zones as situations dictate. This is summarized by a unique analogy. “If a raisin is a grape with something vital missing -water- so a manager is a leader with many vital things missing.” (Perrin, 2010).
However, Gosling and Mintzberg point out the difficulty managers face on a daily basis (Gosling & Mintzberg, 2003). Managers are constantly pulled in different directions, and ultimately function in an environment of extremes. “Managers are told to be global and local, collaborate and compete, change perpetually but maintain order, make the numbers and nurture people. Managers have to work in this world of contradictions.” (Kibort, 2004). Gosling and Mintzberg identify five manager mindsets necessary for success: Reflective, Analytical, Worldly, Collaborative, and Action. These five mindsets are different perspectives that managers must utilize and interweave to be effective (Gosling & Mintzberg, 2003).
Comparatively, leaders are oftentimes viewed as the “heroes” of an organization (Kibort, 2004). Phillips (2009) connects leadership with trust through consistency and conviction. He maintains that these two concepts as elements of leadership must be genuine, and cannot be falsified. Leaders are constantly judged based on equity and trust, and must consider the perception of others (Phillips, 2009).
Charismatic Leadership
Charismatic leadership is deeply rooted in the leader-follower relationship. Yukl (2013) identifies several influence processes used by charismatic leaders: personal identification, social identification, internalization, self and collective efficacy, and emotional contagion. Charismatic leaders must be able to relate to followers in greater depth in order to provide motivation (Yukl, 2013). However, charismatic leaders can be detrimental if a personalized power orientation exists. Charismatic leader with a socialized power orientation are focused on shared values and commitment to an ideology (Yukl, 2013). Charismatic leadership is powerful when motivating teams, but can be detrimental if the power is misused.
Reflection
In my professional life, I work with both change management and the dichotomy of managers and leaders on a daily basis. Working in retail, change is a constant rather than a variable. It is intriguing to read about the need for change management to evolve, as I have never considered that change management sprung from grief models. I understand how this change management technique could encourage fear of change, and fail to achieve employee buy-in to support the change. Recently I have experienced several unexpected changes, and through what I have learned about change management I can understand how I can better facilitate change in the future.
I work in retail, and recently my job title changed from “Store Manager” to “Store Leader”. However, the job description changed minimally. This has caused me to reflect on the true differences between a manager and a leader, and to analyze my actions as those of a manager or leader. I was able to identify the times that I must exhibit stereotypical manager characteristics, and stereotypical leader characteristics. I concluded that there is a time and a place for both being a manager and a leader. I am inclined to agree with the model presented by the NCCET, as I bounce around between their six zones regularly. However, I do not appreciate the negative connotation that is typically placed on the title of manager, as there is little training in the business world on how to be either a manager or a leader.
As I’ve continued to learn about leaders and managers, I’ve maintained my conclusion that there is a time and a place for both. With my change in job title, as well as the change of the descriptions for my subordinates, I have noticed a shift from task-focus to people-focus. As a Store Leader, I am expected to spend more time leading the culture of my store, and less time tasking. While this sounds great in theory, I am uncertain how this will look in reality, and if I will be able to relinquish control over the minutiae.
The topic of charismatic leaders fascinates me because of my own view of myself as a non-charismatic leader. I have difficulty understanding charismatic leaders, as I stereotype them to be extroverts. My own experiences as an introverted manager previously led me to believe I could not be a charismatic leader. However, as I’ve learned more about charismatic leaders, I’ve realized that it is less about being an outgoing extrovert, and more being perceived as a friendly, competent leader. Charismatic or even transformational leaders seem to be largely identified as such by others. Transformational leaders are typically identified after a transformation has occurred, whereas charismatic leaders are identified by the characteristics followers find attractive. This means that, while I may never be a full-blown extrovert, I can still be a charismatic leader by catering to the perception of my employees (though that could be a slippery slope).
Conclusion
In today’s fast-paced business world, organizations must evaluate and modify their change management techniques to meet the needs of the external environment. In order to accomplish this, organizations must embrace the manager/leader dichotomy and acknowledge the need for both roles within the organization, while recognizing the role of charismatic leadership as well.
References
Gosling, J., & Mintzberg, H. (2003). The five minds of a manager. Harvard Business Review, (11), 54.
Kibort, P. M. (2004). Management vs. leadership. Physician Executive, (6). 32.
Perrin, C. (2010). Leader vs. Manager: what's the distinction?. Catalyst (21519390), 39(2), 6-8.
Phillips, P. (2009). Management vs. leadership: What's the difference? To be a good manager, it is important to understand and implement the qualities it takes to be a good leader. Coatings World, (11). 16.
Tschohl, J. (2014). Effective Leadership vs. Management. Leadership Excellence, 31(11), 48.
Welbourne, T. M. (2014). Change Management Needs a Change. Employment Relations Today (Wiley), 41(2), 17-23. doi:10.1002/ert.21449
Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in organizations. (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Rachel Saddler
August 10, 2015
MGMT 5306
Leadership and Management Development
Instructor
Dr. Terry Stimson
Summer Term 2015
Reflective Paper
In today’s business world, leadership is a critical component of a successful business. However, there is much debate over whether managers or leaders are a better fit for business. The business environment is ever-changing, requiring companies to quickly adapt to change. Charismatic leadership is also in high demand to motivate teams in environments where the expectation is to do more with less. These components of business, leaders vs. managers, change management, and charismatic leadership, are vital for understanding and remaining competitive in today’s business environment.
Change Management
Change management is a difficult process for any organization. Many organizations have utilized a change management process based on grief models. This method focused on acknowledging the emotions related to grief and loss. “The concept of mourning the loss of the prior organization and job was quite useful in helping employees move through change.” (Welbourne, 2014). In recent times, change management has evolved in order to match the fast pace of the business world today. One proposed theory to aid in the conversion from grief-based to continuous change-based models is protection-motivation theory. This theory involves the use of increased emotion in communicating the message in order to achieve the buy-in of employees, and increasing the sense of urgency required to complete the change to increase the confidence of employees in successfully completing the change (Welbourne, 2014). Organizations experienced more efficient change when “aggressive and positive marketing” was used for communication (Welbourne, 2014).
Leader vs. Manager
For many years, there has been debate over which is better: managers or leaders. It is often stereotyped that managers are poor leaders, and leaders are poor managers (Tschohl, 2014). However, it is also contested that people can be effectively categorized as one or the other (Yukl, 2013). In fact, the National Council for Continuing Education & Training (NCCET) conducted research to assess leaders and managers, and designed a new model of leadership based on the results (Perrin, 2010). It began with a review and analysis of 80 articles, which led to the development of a leadership model and corresponding survey. This survey was taken by 971 leaders and associates. Researchers identified 42 leadership practices, which were ultimately sorted into six zones of leadership. These zones consist of Reflection, Society, Diversity, Ingenuity, People, and Business (Perrin, 2010). Effective leaders use all six zones as situations dictate. This is summarized by a unique analogy. “If a raisin is a grape with something vital missing -water- so a manager is a leader with many vital things missing.” (Perrin, 2010).
However, Gosling and Mintzberg point out the difficulty managers face on a daily basis (Gosling & Mintzberg, 2003). Managers are constantly pulled in different directions, and ultimately function in an environment of extremes. “Managers are told to be global and local, collaborate and compete, change perpetually but maintain order, make the numbers and nurture people. Managers have to work in this world of contradictions.” (Kibort, 2004). Gosling and Mintzberg identify five manager mindsets necessary for success: Reflective, Analytical, Worldly, Collaborative, and Action. These five mindsets are different perspectives that managers must utilize and interweave to be effective (Gosling & Mintzberg, 2003).
Comparatively, leaders are oftentimes viewed as the “heroes” of an organization (Kibort, 2004). Phillips (2009) connects leadership with trust through consistency and conviction. He maintains that these two concepts as elements of leadership must be genuine, and cannot be falsified. Leaders are constantly judged based on equity and trust, and must consider the perception of others (Phillips, 2009).
Charismatic Leadership
Charismatic leadership is deeply rooted in the leader-follower relationship. Yukl (2013) identifies several influence processes used by charismatic leaders: personal identification, social identification, internalization, self and collective efficacy, and emotional contagion. Charismatic leaders must be able to relate to followers in greater depth in order to provide motivation (Yukl, 2013). However, charismatic leaders can be detrimental if a personalized power orientation exists. Charismatic leader with a socialized power orientation are focused on shared values and commitment to an ideology (Yukl, 2013). Charismatic leadership is powerful when motivating teams, but can be detrimental if the power is misused.
Reflection
In my professional life, I work with both change management and the dichotomy of managers and leaders on a daily basis. Working in retail, change is a constant rather than a variable. It is intriguing to read about the need for change management to evolve, as I have never considered that change management sprung from grief models. I understand how this change management technique could encourage fear of change, and fail to achieve employee buy-in to support the change. Recently I have experienced several unexpected changes, and through what I have learned about change management I can understand how I can better facilitate change in the future.
I work in retail, and recently my job title changed from “Store Manager” to “Store Leader”. However, the job description changed minimally. This has caused me to reflect on the true differences between a manager and a leader, and to analyze my actions as those of a manager or leader. I was able to identify the times that I must exhibit stereotypical manager characteristics, and stereotypical leader characteristics. I concluded that there is a time and a place for both being a manager and a leader. I am inclined to agree with the model presented by the NCCET, as I bounce around between their six zones regularly. However, I do not appreciate the negative connotation that is typically placed on the title of manager, as there is little training in the business world on how to be either a manager or a leader.
As I’ve continued to learn about leaders and managers, I’ve maintained my conclusion that there is a time and a place for both. With my change in job title, as well as the change of the descriptions for my subordinates, I have noticed a shift from task-focus to people-focus. As a Store Leader, I am expected to spend more time leading the culture of my store, and less time tasking. While this sounds great in theory, I am uncertain how this will look in reality, and if I will be able to relinquish control over the minutiae.
The topic of charismatic leaders fascinates me because of my own view of myself as a non-charismatic leader. I have difficulty understanding charismatic leaders, as I stereotype them to be extroverts. My own experiences as an introverted manager previously led me to believe I could not be a charismatic leader. However, as I’ve learned more about charismatic leaders, I’ve realized that it is less about being an outgoing extrovert, and more being perceived as a friendly, competent leader. Charismatic or even transformational leaders seem to be largely identified as such by others. Transformational leaders are typically identified after a transformation has occurred, whereas charismatic leaders are identified by the characteristics followers find attractive. This means that, while I may never be a full-blown extrovert, I can still be a charismatic leader by catering to the perception of my employees (though that could be a slippery slope).
Conclusion
In today’s fast-paced business world, organizations must evaluate and modify their change management techniques to meet the needs of the external environment. In order to accomplish this, organizations must embrace the manager/leader dichotomy and acknowledge the need for both roles within the organization, while recognizing the role of charismatic leadership as well.
References
Gosling, J., & Mintzberg, H. (2003). The five minds of a manager. Harvard Business Review, (11), 54.
Kibort, P. M. (2004). Management vs. leadership. Physician Executive, (6). 32.
Perrin, C. (2010). Leader vs. Manager: what's the distinction?. Catalyst (21519390), 39(2), 6-8.
Phillips, P. (2009). Management vs. leadership: What's the difference? To be a good manager, it is important to understand and implement the qualities it takes to be a good leader. Coatings World, (11). 16.
Tschohl, J. (2014). Effective Leadership vs. Management. Leadership Excellence, 31(11), 48.
Welbourne, T. M. (2014). Change Management Needs a Change. Employment Relations Today (Wiley), 41(2), 17-23. doi:10.1002/ert.21449
Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in organizations. (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.