The article Issues facing management vs. leadership in public organizations discuss how management and leadership in public organizations influence their functioning and present the key differences between these two concepts. To understand what concept is more appropriate for contemporary organizational management, the differences between management and leadership need to be approached.
Differences between Management and Leadership
While management relies on management principles established by scientific theories and findings to motivate people and assure that the company’s aims and targets are taken into account, leadership is more dependent on the charisma of the leader and his or her performance. The leader’s charisma and pathway can help attract customers and motivate the employees to follow him or her (examples of prominent leaders are Steve Jobs or Elon Musk). Management controls every aspect and change in the business organization as the employees’ efforts need to stay in line with the company’s aims. Public organizations, however, depend on both concepts because they influence each other’s effectiveness.
If the organization grows and the number of employees increases, management has more tasks to solve and more people to govern. However, it is not enough to assure that the company functions efficiently. Here, strong leadership plays its role, as it is able to motivate employees at all levels, from CEOs to secretaries. If management can be described with such words as control, scientific approach, evaluation, and reporting, leadership is based on the performance, experience, charisma, and personal qualities. Although management and leadership seem to be very different, they usually cannot function independently of each other. Nevertheless, the author of the article points out that with the current change in the public sector, strong leadership is needed to lead public organizations.
Which of the Concepts is Appropriate?
Although both concepts are essential for the successful functioning of a company, leadership seems to be more appropriate as it also governs the management in a particular way. However, it is also able to motivate the employees through personal experience or history; management is usually not capable of it. It does not mean that leadership only relies on the charisma and personal traits of the leader. If the role differentiation of a leader is significant, i.e. he or she takes part in planning, distribution of resources, initiating efforts, and other activities, the performance of the group also improves (Pershing & Austin, 2014). At the same time, direct management supervision should be avoided, while the leader’s involvement is encouraged to improve the performance of the group (Pershing & Austin, 2014).
The current economic conditions and crises that tend to occur more often change the structure of organizational management and leadership, especially in public organizations. A strong, likable leader that is able to motivate not only the employees but also those who cooperate with the company can increase the trustfulness of relationships between the customers and the organization. The hectic times we live in, their uncertainty, and rushing fickleness force people to prefer a leader that is stable and capable of handling any crises and, at the same time, is willing to work with the employees on the tasks of any complexity. Nevertheless, it is also important to remember that performance of the groups is shaped by the context; that is why the leader needs to understand this context and be “attuned to many factors at once” (Pershing & Austin, 2014, p. 151). Thus, leadership determines the success of management and groups’ performance.
Reference
Pershing, S. P., & Austin, E. K. (2014). Organization theory and governance for the 21st century. Washington, DC: CQ Press.