Introduction
For more time than is necessary, many have never really drawn the line between leadership and management. When an institution undergoes any change, the most important tool needed to come out of the problem is effective leadership. Bacal ( 2009, para.3) explains that the perception of the subjects or subordinates towards the ability and credibility of the leader determine in a great very how much will be done to get the people out of a sticky situation. During times of drastic change, Bacal explains that subjects will always want to know how well a leader will do compared to their former leader, how much time he will allocate to interact with them and understand them.
He is very different from a manager, who is a facilitator. The manager will fill in after in institution has already established itself. Nevertheless, many managers have to portray some sense of leadership skill in order to keep things running. In this essay, we will look dipper into the differences between these two, in the sense of the word. We will also look into how leadership is more inclined towards practicing strategy development and visioning in organizations. Finally, we will get to outline in brief the difference in purpose between a mission statement, vision statement and strategic goals.
Leadership and Management: the Difference
As we have previewed earlier probably the most outstanding difference between these two is that the manager is an administrator while the leader creates (more or less like an inventor). Murray (2010, para.3) explains that the manager coordinates what is on paper while the leader motivates his subjects towards certain goal he foresees. The manager maintains what has been established while the leader develops what is to be maintained.
In other words, when it comes to management, no additional development is required. The manager is a businessperson, focusing on running a system that will produce some profit. He is not concerned about the subjects under him as much as the leader focuses on who is under him. Another difference comes in when administering rule. A manager takes charge. He will want to be in control and he “runs the business”. The leader on the other hand instills trust in his subjects. He will want the people under him to trust him and reciprocates that trust to them. In terms of their scope, the manger’s view towards the company or the organization is short- term.
He does not see long into the future of the place he is managing. As for the leader, he is the visionary. His perception is long-range. He sees far ahead of any other person under him. The manager wants to know how and when a task is completed. It is different for the leader. He asks the question “what and why”. He wants to know the reason behind a certain action.
Murray further explains that the goals for the two are extremely different. For the manager, “the end justifies the means”. As for the leader, he wants to understand what he will require to get to a certain horizon that he is focusing on. It is okay for the manager if others are doing what he does. As long as it brings back results, he does not mind. The leader cannot maintain the status quo. He is always in search of a better way to get things done.
The leader is like a couch in a football team, strategizing and looking for options that will make his team better. The manager on the other hand is like the football captain. He just wants “the goals”. He is the good soldier who wants to please a higher office. The manager, finally, follows the rules. He is defined by certain boundaries. On the other hand, the leader does “the right thing” (Murray, 2010, para.3). Nevertheless, he is not afraid to venture into new grounds.
Unlike management, leadership as explained by Bush (2002, p.64, para.3) is the tool required in strategy development, more than anything else is. Its role in planning, staffing, directing, evaluating and many other tasks in an organization is enormous. Though a manager will be necessary for the administration of the facets involved, the role of setting up an organization from scratch highly depends on how effective a leader is in that organization. In essence, Bush explains that initiating and maintaining strategic management is entirely the role played by the leader.
Now that it is clear what differences there are between a leader and a manager, it is important to understand the strategies that a leader should adopt in order to achieve what he wants, in the period he would want to. A leader should have his vision stated out, a mission statement, and the strategic goals he wants to hit. What are the differences between these and what are their purposes in developing effective leadership?
Vision statement
This is a well-laid-out “picture” of the future of an organization. It foresees what is ahead and constitutes the backbone of the whole of the organization. Ward (2010, para.1) explains, “It inspires” and gives direction to the company or organization. With a vision statement clearly laid out, its creator or follower cannot stray away from its path. Its purpose exceeds more than just showing where the organization wants to reach, but it gives the boundaries to the extremes the people should go in order to reach the desired mark.
Mission statement
It is more often than not confused with the vision statement, but the mission statement simply gives the reason for the organization’s existence. Unlike the vision statement that answers the question where the mission statement answers the question of why. As Gleeson (2008, para.1) would put, it would make no sense if I would ask someone to join me on a journey and will not give him the reason why he should tag along. This is the purpose of the mission statement, useful, especially where companies which shareholding is involved.
Strategic Goals
Goals are measurements of success: that at a certain time, an organization will want to have achieved, or hit a certain mark. Strategic goals are a result of strategic planning.
The three main forms of the directional strategy adopted by many companies are corporate, business and functional strategy. Corporate strategies will help the company keep up with the rest of the corporate world. Zain (2008, para.3), for example, says that for you to get a hold of the latest in fashion in the textile industry, one has to maintain a level of strategies, compared with the rest of the corporate world that will hold up its retail lines. Business strategies on the other hand help in making sure that clients get value for their worth, and in doing so, maintain their competitive place in the business world. Functional strategies, as Zain puts it, involve human resources, research and statistical work, which have to be in synchrony with the rest of the company in order to achieve the company’s desired expectation.
Conclusion
We cannot overlook strategy. It may be the only downfall that most companies that are not doing well have. Without planning, we plan to fail. It is entirely important to get a vision for an idea that anyone comes up with, write down your mission statement and set up goals and timelines. In doing so, one will have moved a step further in setting up an idea to probably becoming a multi-million dollar “dream come true”.
Reference List
Bacal, R. (2009). The Role of Leadership. The Importance of Leadership In Managing Change. Casselman, Ontario, Canada: Bacal & Associates.
Bush, T., & Bell, L. (2002). The principles and practice of educational management Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publishers.
Gleeson, A. (2008). What is a Mission Statement? Mission Statements. Eugene, Oregon, USA: Palo Alto Software Inc.
Murray, A. (2010). What is the Difference Between Management and Leadership? New York: The Wall Street Journal. Web.
Ward, S. (2010). Vision statement: Small business. New York Times. Web.
Zain, M. (2008). An Overview on Corporate, Business and Functional Planning. The 3 Strategies of a Corporation. Web.