Assignemnt1 1.

Contemporary Management Practices

Managers are faced with the challenge of an ever-changing environment, ranging from increasing globalisation, through the technologization of physical processes, to virtual ways of communicating. The response to this has been a gradual shift from rule-based to value-based management styles and practices. In order to obtain an insight into how far this development has proceeded, a structured survey of about 1500 top, middle and line managers from the private and public sectors was carried out. Among other interesting results, the study suggests that 'softer' as well as externaloriented roles in general are gaining increasing importance at the expense of rules and control. Moreover, managers from the private sector seem to be more steeped in traditional 'hard' managerial roles related to the operational level than their public-sector counterparts. Put another way, evidence supports the conclusion that 'modernization' seems to have deeper roots among managers from the public sector compared with managers from the private sector.. Keywords: management practices, public sector managers, private sector managers .
THE HISTORICAL ROOTS OF CONTEMPORARY MANAGEMENT PRACTICES The Premodern Era Organized activities and management have existed for thousands of years, for example, the construction of the Egyptian pyramids and the Great Wall of China. Michelangelo, the genius artist of the Renaissance era, was a manager himself. In order to paint the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel and other great things, he personally selected his workers, trained them, and assigned them to one or more teams, and he kept detailed employment records. In the past several hundred years, especially in the last century, management has undergone systematic investigation, acquired a common body of knowledge, and has become a formal discipline of study. What was Adam Smith's Contribution to the Field of Management? Adam Smith, in The Wealth of Nations (1776), made an argument on the economic advantages that organizations and society would achieve from the division of labor, which is the breakdown of jobs into narrow, repetitive tasks. Smith concluded that division of labor increased productivity by increasing each worker's skill and dexterity, by saving time that is usually lost in changing tasks, and by the creation of labor- saving inventions and machinery. Probably, the most important influence on management was the Industrial Revolution. It began in the late eighteenth century in Great Britain, where machine power was being substituted for human power. Thanks to this movement, there was the development of big organizations. John D. Rockefeller was putting together the Standard Oil monopoly, Andrew Carnegie was gaining control of two- thirds of the steel industry, and other people were creating new businesses that would require formalized management practices.

CLASSICAL CONTRIBUTIONS The roots of modern management lie within a group of practitioners and writers who gave their contributions to management which we call the classical approach. The classical approach is the term used to describe the scientific management theorists and the general administrative theorists. We can divide it into two subcategories: 1. Scientific management theorists: It's the theorists that looked at the field from the perspective of how to improve the productivity of operative personnel. 2. General administrative theorists: They were concerned with the overall organization and how to make it more effective. The year that the modern management theory was born was 1911. This year was the year that Frederick Winslow Taylor published his book Principles of Scientific Management, where he describes the theory of scientific management which is the use of the scientific method to define the one best way for a job to be done. Taylor is known as the father of scientific management. He was a mechanical engineer with a Quaker Puritan background and was appalled at the inefficiency of workers. Employees used different techniques to do the same job. Taylor set out to correct the situation by applying the scientific method to jobs on the shop floor. Taylor wanted to create a mental revolution among the workers and management by defining clear guidelines for improving production efficiency. He defined four principles of management which are: 1. Develop a science for each element of an individual's work, which replaces the old rule of thumb method. 2. Scientifically select and the train, teach, and develop the worker. 3. Heartily cooperate with the workers so as to ensure that all work is done according to the principles of the science that has been developed. 4. Divide work and responsibility almost equally between management and workers. Management takes over all work for which it is better fitted than the workers. Taylor argued that following these principles would benefit both management and workers. Workers would earn more pay, and management more profits. Using scientific management techniques, Taylor was able to define the one best way for doing each job. Then, he could select the right people for the job and train them to do it precisely in this one best way. TO motivate workers, he favored incentive wage plans. Overall, Taylor achieved improvements in productivity of 200 per cent or more. He stated that the role of managers is to plan and control, and that of workers to perform as they were instructed. Who Else, Besides Taylor, Were Mayor Contributors To Scientific Management? Taylor's most prominent disciples were Frank and Lillian Gilbreth. Frank was a construction contractor, while Lillian was a psychologist. They both studied work arrangements to eliminate wasteful hand- and- body motions. They also experimented in the design and use of proper tools and equipment for optimizing work performance.

The Gilbreths also made a classification scheme to label seventeen basic hand motions; for example, search, select, grasp, hold; and they called them therbligs. Another associate of Taylor was an engineer named Henry L. Gantt. He extended some of Taylor's original ideas and added a few of his own. For example, Gantt devised an incentive system that gave workers a nonus for completing their jobs in less time than the allowed standard. He also introduced a bonus for foremen to be paid for each worker who made the standard plus an extra bonus if all the workers under the foreman made it. Gantt is most noted for creating a graphic bar chart that could be used by managers as a scheduling device for planning and controlling work. What did Henry Fayol and Max Weber Contribute to Management Thought? They developed the General Administrative theory. Fayol wrote during the same time as Taylor, but his attention was directed at the activities of all managers, and he wrote from personal experience. He was the managing director if a large French coal- mining firm and was a practitioner. Fayol argued that management was an activity common to all human undertakings in business, in government, and even at home. He stated fourteen principles of management which are fundamental or universal truths that could be applied to management activities in all human endeavors. They are: 1. DIVISION OF WORK. Specialization increases output by making employees more efficient. 2. AUTHORITY. Managers must give orders. Authority gives them the right. But, along with authority, goes responsibility. 3. DISCIPLINE. Employees must obey and respect the rules that govern the organization. Good discipline is the result of effective leadership, a clear understanding between management and workers, and the judicious use of penalties for infractions of the rules. 4. UNITY OF COMMAND. Every employee should receive orders from only one superior. 5. UNITY OF DIRECTION. Each group of organizational activities that have the same objective should be directed by one manager using one plan. 6. SUBORDINATION OF INDIVIDUAL INTERESTS TO THE GENERAL INTEREST. The interests of any employee or group of employees should not take precedence over the interests of the organization as a whole. 7. REMUNERATION. Workers must be paid a fair wage for their services. 8. CENTRALIZATION. It refers to the degree to which subordinates are involved in decision making. Whether decision making is centralized (to management) or decentralized (to subordinates) is a question of proper proportion.

9. SCALAR CHAIN. The line of authority from top management to the lowest ranks. Communication should be included in this chain. 10. ORDER. People and materials should be in the right place at the right time. 11. EQUITY. Managers should be kind and fair to their subordinates. 12. STABILITY OF TENURE OF PERSONNEL. High employee turnover is inefficient. Management should provide orderly personnel planning and ensure that replacements are available to fill vacancies. 13. INITIATIVE. Employees who are allowed to originate and carry out plans will exert high levels of effort. 14. ESPRIT DE CORPS. Promoting team spirit will build harmony and unity within the organization. Max Weber was a German sociologist. He developed a theory of authority structures and described organizational activity on the basis of authority relations. He described an ideal type of organization that he called a bureaucracy which contains: 1. Division of labor. 2. Authority Hierarchy. 3. Formal Selection. 4. Formal Rules and Regulations. 5. Impersonality. 6. Career Orientation. Weber recognized that this ideal bureaucracy didn't exist in reality, but that it represented a selective reconstruction of the real world. What Were the General Administrative Theorist's Contributions to Management Practice? General administrative theorists are writers who developed general theories of what managers do and what constitutes good management practice. For example, the functional view of the manager's job owes its origin to Henry Fayol. They became a frame of reference against which many current concepts have evolved. Weber's bureaucracy was a response to the abuses that he saw going on within organizations. Weber believed that his model could remove the ambiguity , inefficiencies, and patronage that characterized most organizations at that time. Many of the components of his bureaucracy are still inherent in large organizations today. HUMAN RESOURCES APPROACH Managers get things done by working with people. Human resources approach is the study of management that focuses on human behavior.

Who Were Some Early Advocates of the Human Resources Approach? They are five: Robert Owen, Hugo Munsterberg, Mary Parker Follet, Chester Barnard, and Elton Mayo. What Claim to Fame does Robert Owen Hold? Robert Owen was a Scottish businessman who bought his first factory when he was 18. Repulsed by the harsh practices in factories like the employment of children, thirteen- hour workdays, and miserable working conditions made Owen become a reformer. He said that they would buy the best machines but then buy the cheapest labor to run them. Showing concern for employees was both highly profitable for management and would relieve human misery. Owen proposed a utopian workplace. Owen is remembered for his courage and commitment to reducing the suffering of the working class. For What is Hugo Munsterberg Best Known? Munsterberg created the field of industrial psychology. In his text Psychology and Industrial Efficiency, published in 1913, he argued for the scientific study of human behavior to identify general patterns and to explain individual differences. He suggested the use of psychological tests to improve employee selection, the value of learning theory in the development of training methods, and the study of human behavior to understand what techniques are most effective for motivating workers. He saw a link between scientific management and industrial psychology. What Contributions did Mary Parker Follet Make to Management? She was one of the earliest writers to recognize that organizations could be viewed from the perspective of individual and group behavior. Follet was a transitionalist writer but had people- orientated ideas, she was a social philosopher. Her ideas had clear implications for management practice. Follet said that organizations should be based on group ethic rather than on individualism. Managers and workers should review themselves as partners, as part of a common group. Managers should rely on their expertise and knowledge to lead subordinates. Who was Chester Barnard? Barnard was also a transitionalist who proposed ideas that bridged classical and human resources viewpoints. He was a practitioner, he was president of New Jersey Bell Telephone Company. He was influenced by Weber's writings but Barnard saw organizations as social systems as social systems that require human cooperation. He expressed his ideas in his book The Functions of the Executive published in 1938. Barnard believed that organizations were made up of people who have interacting social relationships. A major part of an organization's success depends on obtaining cooperation from its employees. Managers had to examine the external environment and then adjust the organization to maintain a state of equilibrium. If management failed either to ensure a continuous input of materials and supplies or to find markets for its outputs, then the organization's survival would be threatened. What were the Hawthorne Studies?

The most important contribution to the human resources approach to management are the Hawthorne studies which are a series of studies during the 1920's and 1930's that provided new insights into group norms and behaviors. Mayo's conclusions were that behavior and sentiments are closely related, that group influences significantly affect individual behavior, that group standards establish individual worker output, and that money is less a factor in determining output than are group standards, group sentiments, and security. These conclusions led to an emphasis on the human factor in the functioning of organizations and their goals, and to increased paternalism by management. In 1930, Mayo and his colleagues wrote the first published results from the Hawthorne studies. The Hawthorne studies went a long way in changing the dominant view at the time that people were no different than machines. Why was the Human Relations Movement Important to Management History? They are important for its commitment to making management practices more humane. A satisfied worker was believed to be a productive worker. Dale Carneige, Abraham Maslow, and Douglas McGregor were individuals whose views were shaped more by their personal philosophies than by sustantive research evidence. Dale Carnegie's ideas and teachings had an enormous effect on management practice. The theme of his book How to Win Friends and Influence People were the ways to succeed: Make others feel important through a sincere appreciation of their efforts. Make a good first impression. Win people to your way of thinking by letting others do the talking, being sympathetic, and never telling a man he is wrong. Change people by praising good traits and giving the offender the opportunity to save face. Abraham Maslow was a humanistic psychologist who proposed a theoretical hierarchy of five needs: psychological, safety, social, esteem, and self- actualization. He said that each step in the hierarchy must be satisfied before the next can be activated and that once a need was satisfied it no longer motivated behavior. Douglas McGregor is known for his formulation of two sets of assumptions about human nature: Theory X. Its an essentially negative view of people. It assumes they have little ambition, dislike work, want to avoid responsibility, and need to be closely directed to work effectively. Theory Y. Its a positive view. It assumes that people can exercise self- direction, accept responsibility, and consider work to be as natural as rest or play. It captured the true nature of workers and should guide management practice. McGregor's beliefs about human nature have had a strong following among management academics and practitioners. What Was the Common Thread that Linked Advocates of the Human Relations Movement?

It's the unshakable optimism about people's capabilities. The strongly believed in their cause and wouldn't change their view no matter what. Who Were the Behavioral Science Theorists? They are a group of psychologists and sociologists who relied on the scientific method for the study of organizational behavior. They are engaged in the objective research of human behavior in organizations. They attempted to keep their personal beliefs out of their work and hoped to build a science of organizational behavior. THE QUANTITATIVE APPROACH It evolved out of the development of mathematical and statistical solutions to military problems during World War II. After the war, quantitative techniques were moved into the business sector. The quantitative approach to management includes applications of statistics, optimization models, information models, and computer simulations. They have contributed most directly to management decision making, particularly to planning and control decisions. ANALYSIS: HOW TIMES SHAPE MANAGEMENT APPROACHES What Stimulated the Classical Approach? The common thread in the ideas offered by Taylor, the Gilbreths, Fayol, and Weber was increased efficiency. The world that existed in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century was one of high inefficiency. The standardized practices offered by the classicists was a means to achieve that increased productivity. The result: The application of scientific management principles contributed to raising the standard of living of entire countries. What Stimulated the Human Resources Approach? It began in the 1930's. There was a backlash to the overly mechanistic view of employees held by the classicists and the emergence of the Great Depression. The classical view treated organizations and people as machines where the managers were the engineers. The human resources approach offered managers solutions for lessening this alienation and for improving worker productivity. Humanizing the workplace had become congruent with society's concerns at the time. The mayor impetus to the quantitative approaches was World War II. After the war, business executives became open to applying the techniques to their organizational decision making. They proved successful in improving the quality of decisions and increasing profits. By the late 1960's, course work in mathematics, statistics, and operations management had become required components of most business school curricula. The new generation of managers would be knowledgeable in such techniques as probability theory, linear programming, queuing theory, and games theory.

2.

Leadership Styles

http://managementhelp.org/ldrship/ldrship.htm#anchor282848 What is leadership? Leadership is an influence process: The ability to motivate others to do something, believe something or act a certain way. Leadership style is the pattern of behaviors you use when you are trying to influence the behavior of others.

A Definition of Leadership A traditional definition of leadership: Leadership is an interpersonal influence directed toward the achievement of a goal or goals. Three important parts of this definition are the terms interpersonal, influence, and goal. Interpersonal means between persons. Thus, a leader has more than one person (group) to lead. Influence is the power to affect others. Goal is the end one strives to attain. Basically, this traditional definition of leadership says that a leader influences more than one person toward a goal. The definition of leadership as follows. LEADERSHIP is a dynamic relationship based on mutual influence and common purpose between leaders and collaborators in which both are moved to higher levels of motivation and moral development as they affect real, intended change. (Kevin Freiberg and Jackie Freiberg, NUTS! Southwest Airlines' Crazy Recipe for Business and Personal Success, Bard Press, 1996, p. 298) Three important parts of this definition are the terms relationship, mutual, and collaborators. Relationship is the connection between people. Mutual means shared in common. Collaborators cooperate or work together. This definition of leadership says that the leader is influenced by the collaborators while they work together to achieve an important goal.

Leadership style is the manner and approach of providing direction, implementing plans, and motivating people. Kurt Lewin (1939) led a group of researchers to identify different styles of leadership. This early study has been very influential and established three major leadership styles. The three major styles of leadership are (U.S. Army Handbook, 1973):
o o o

Authoritarian or autocratic Participative or democratic Delegative or Free Reign

Although good leaders use all three styles, with one of them normally dominant, bad leaders tend to stick with one style.

Authoritarian (autocratic)
This style is used when leaders tell their employees what they want done and how they want it accompished, without getting the advice of their followers. Some of the appropriate conditions to use it is when you have all the information to solve the problem, you are short on time, and your employees are well motivated. Some people tend to think of this style as a vehicle for yelling, using demeaning language, and leading by threats and abusing their power. This is not the authoritarian style, rather it is an abusive, unprofessional style called bossing people around. It has no place in a leader's repertoire. The authoritarian style should normally only be used on rare occasions. If you have the time and want to gain more commitment and motivation from your employees, then you should use the participative style.
o

Eg: Using an authoritarian style on a new employee who is just learning the job. The leader is

competent and a good coach. The employee is motivated to learn a new skill. The situation is a new environment for the employee.

Participative (democratic)
This style involves the leader including one or more employees in the decision making process (determining what to do and how to do it). However, the leader maintains the final decision making authority. Using this style is not a sign of weakness, rather it is a sign of strength that your employees will respect. Note that a leader is not expected to know everything -- this is why you employ k n o w l e d g e a b l e and s k i l l f u l employees. Using this style is of mutual benefit -- it allows them to become part of the team and allows you to make better decisions.
o

Eg: Using a participative style with a team of workers who know their job. The leader knows the

problem, but does not have all the information. The employees know their jobs and want to become part of the team.

Delegative (free reign)

In this style, the leader allows the employees to make the decisions. However, the leader is still responsible for the decisions that are made. This is used when employees are able to analyze the situation and determine what needs to be done and how to do it. You cannot do everything! You must set priorities and delegate certain tasks. This is not a style to use so that you can blame others when things go wrong, rather this is a style to be used when you fully trust and confidence in the people below you. Do not be afraid to use it, however, use it wisely!

Using a delegative style with a worker who knows more about the job than you. You cannot do

everything! The employee needs to take ownership of her job. Also, the situation might call for you to be at other places, doing other things.
o

A good leader uses all three styles, depending on what forces are involved between the

followers, the leader, and the situation.

o

Using all three: Telling your employees that a procedure is not working correctly and a new

one must be established (authoritarian). Asking for their ideas and input on creating a new procedure (participative). Delegating tasks in order to implement the new procedure (delegative).

Forces
Some examples include: Forces that influence the style to be used included:
o o o o o o o o

How much time is available. Are relationships based on respect and trust or on disrespect? Who has the information - you, your employees, or both? How well your employees are trained and how well you know the task. Internal conflicts. Stress levels. Type of task. Is it structured, unstructured, complicated, or simple? Laws or established procedures such as OSHA or training plans.

Eight Characteristics of Leadership

Many people in the nonprofit/public interest sector have been thrust into leadership positions without appropriate training or experience. The good news is it's not too late to learn; there are many classes that offer tools for effective leadership. Here are eight characteristics Zimmerman Lehman looks for in a leader. 1) VISION - being able to articulate the future in clear simple language: An emphasis on what will be rather than what is. This is a quality almost all management gurus agree is necessary for a good leader.

Our recent election had two very different visions for the future; whether you liked those visions is a different story. "I have a dream" by Martin Luther King, "I don't want a revolution in which I can't dance" by Emma Goldman are two of my favorites. A leader should be able to state concretely what success will look like and how their organization will get there. 2) You must understand what MOTIVATES people. Dolores Huerta and Caesar Chavez have inspired farm workers with their vision of a better life and working conditions. While those of us in the nonprofit world can't often offer high salaries, there are other motivators. Simple but too often ignored motivators include; praise (tell folks they've done a job well - it is hard to overdo this one!), appreciation (a simple "thank you" regularly will earn you respect), and recognition (awards, credit on a report, a letter of commendation). Learning to give positive feedback is crucial! Teambuilding exercises are a great way to build enthusiasm and cooperation. Sometimes, however, we need to motivate by being clear about consequences of inappropriate behavior. 3) One new trait, a current buzz phrase that was just coming on the scene ten years ago, is EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE (EI). Some call this a "gut instinct or an innate sense about what others are feeling." It used to be called empathy or intuition but now google EI and you get over one million hits. "EI" includes identifying, using, understanding and managing emotions. Both Oprah and Madonna can read a crowd like no one else and their EI is part of what makes them both successful. Being able to read people (know what they want or need) is invaluable. Those million hits will tell you that if your are not born with this instinct you can learn it! 4) You must be able to EMPOWER others. Jesse Jackson states that his Citizenship Education Fund "seeks to empower citizens through the effective use of public policy advocacy, issue orientation, and connections between the greater community and the disenfranchised." He does this well. Teach people how to accomplish a task - don't do it for them (even if you can do it faster or better, you don't have the time). Tell people what you expect from them, give them the tools they need to succeed, and then get out of their way. Learn to listen; nothing is more empowering than being heard. 5) You must be TRUSTWORTHY. Jimmy Carter's greatest asset is that his behavior is consistent with his beliefs. Even those who disagree with him respect him enormously. No one will follow a dishonest or unfair leader with enthusiasm. Actions do speak much louder than words! 6) Leaders must be willing to take RISKS. This sounds like a clich but if you do things the way they've always been done - you will always get what you had before! Co-founders of Google, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, regularly take risks and today are reaping the benefits. Leaders should also reward risk-taking in others. 7) A leader should be able to FOCUS & FOLLOW THROUGH. This involves setting priorities and doing what you say you will. Woody Allen, role model or not, once said, "Eighty percent of success in life is just showing up." This is absolutely true. Knowing what to do and then doing it (or delegating it to some one who will make it happen) is a critical leadership trait.

8) And finally, but certainly not last - it helps to have a sense of HUMOR. The ability to laugh at oneself demonstrates a degree of self-knowledge and is the easiest way to bring others along with you. If you've read Amy Tan's books or listened to her speak you know she uses humor to tell a story or make a point. Humor is also a great tension breaker but inappropriate if used to belittle someone.

Positive and Negative Approaches

There is a difference in ways leaders approach their employee. Positive leaders use rewards, such as education, independence, etc. to motivate employees. While negative employers emphasize penalties. While the negative approach has a place in a leader's repertoire of tools, it must be used carefully due to its high cost on the human spirit. Negative leaders act domineering and superior with people. They believe the only way to get things done is through penalties, such as loss of job, days off without pay, reprimand employees in front of others, etc. They believe their authority is increased by frightening everyone into higher lever of productivity. Yet what always happens when this approach is used wrongly is that morale falls; which of course leads to lower productivity. Also note that most leaders do not strictly use one or another, but are somewhere on a continuum ranging from extremely positive to extremely negative. People who continuously work out of the negative are bosses while those who primarily work out of the positive are considered real leaders.

Use of Consideration and Structure

Two other approaches that leaders use are: Consideration (employee orientation) - Leaders are concerned about the human needs of their employees. They build teamwork, help employees with their problems, and provide psychological support.

Structure (task orientation) - Leaders believe that they get results by consistently keeping people busy and urging them to produce. There is evidence that leaders who are considerate in their leadership style are higher performers and are more satisfied with their job (Schriesheim, 1982). Also notice that consideration and structure are independent of each other, thus they should not be viewed on opposite ends of a continuum. For example, a leader who becomes more considerate, does not necessarily mean that she has become less structured. See Blake and Mouton's M a n a g e r i a l G r i d as it is also based on this concept. The five leadership styles of the managerial grid include impoverished, country club, produce or perish, middle-of-the road, and team. The impoverished style is located at the lower left-hand corner of the grid, point (1, 1). It is characterized by low concern for both people and production. The primary objective of the impoverished style is for managers to stay out of trouble. The country club style is located at the upper lefthand corner of the grid, point (1, 9). It is characterized as a high concern for people and a low concern for production. The primary objective of the country club style is to create a secure and comfortable atmosphere and trust that subordinates will respond positively. The produce or perish style is located at the lower righthand corner of the grid, point (9,1). A high concern for production and a low concern for people characterize it. The primary objective of the produce or perish style is to achieve the organization's goals. To accomplish the organization's goals, it is not necessary to consider employees' needs as relevant. The middle-of-the-road style is located at the middle of the grid, point (5, 5). A balance between workers' needs and the organization's productivity goals characterize it. The primary objective of the middle-of-the-road style is to maintain employee morale at a level sufficient to get the organization's work done. The team style is located at the upper right-hand of the grid, point (9, 9). It is characterized by a high concern for people and production. The primary objective of the team style is to establish cohesion and foster a feeling of commitment among workers.

Paternalism
Paternalism has at times been equated with leadership styles. Yet most definitions of leadership normally state or imply that one of the actions within leadership is that of i n f l u e n c i n g . For example, the Army uses the following definition:

Leadership is influencing people -- by providing purpose, direction, and motivation -- while operating to accomplish the mission and improving the organization."
The Army further goes on by defining "influence" as a:

means of getting people to do what you want them to do. It is the means or method to achieve two ends: operating and improving. But theres more to influencing than simply passing along orders. The example you set is just as important as the words you speak. And you set an example -good or bad -- with every action you take and word you utter, on or off duty. Through your words and example, you must communicate purpose, direction, and motivation.
While "paternalism" is defined as (Webster):

a system under which an authority undertakes to supply needs or regulate conduct of those under its control in matters affecting them as individuals as well as in their relationships to authority and to each other.
Thus paternalism supplies needs for those under its protection or control, while leadership gets things done. The first is directed inwards, while the latter is directed outwards.

Leadership is a subject which includes a great deal about changing people's minds, often in fundamental ways. Just think about some of the great leaders of the world and the impact they have had on the lives of other people.
Leadership theories: Theories of how leadership works. o Great Man Theory, Trait Theory, Behavioral Theories, More... Leadership styles: General approaches to leadership. o Charismatic Leadership, Participative Leadership, Situational Leadership, More... Leadership actions: What leaders actually do. o Boyatzis' management competencies, Function and leadership, More...

Charismatic Leadership
Assumptions
Charm and grace are all that is needed to create followers. Self-belief is a fundamental need of leaders. People follow others that they personally admire.

Style
The Charismatic Leader gathers followers through dint of personality and charm, rather than any form of external power or authority.

The searchlight of attention

It is interesting to watch a Charismatic Leader 'working the room' as they move from person to person. They pay much attention to the person they are talking to at any one moment, making that person feel like they are, for that time, the most important person in the world.

Charismatic Leaders pay a great deal of attention in scanning and reading their environment, and are good at picking up the moods and concerns of both individuals and larger audiences. They then will hone their actions and words to suit the situation.

Pulling all of the strings

Charismatic Leaders use a wide range of methods to manage their image and, if they are not naturally charismatic, may practice assiduously at developing their skills. They may engender trust through visible self-sacrifice and taking personal risks in the name of their beliefs. They will show great confidence in their followers. They are very persuasive and make very effective use of body language as well as verbal language. Deliberate charisma is played out in a theatrical sense, where the leader is 'playing to the house' to create a desired effect. They also make effective use of storytelling, including the use of symbolism and metaphor. Many politicians use a charismatic style, as they need to gather a large number of followers. If you want to increase your charisma, studying videos of their speeches and the way they interact with others is a great source of learning. Religious leaders, too, may well use charisma, as do cult leaders.

Leading the team

Charismatic Leaders who are building a group, whether it is a political party, a cult or a business team, will often focus strongly on making the group very clear and distinct, separating it from other groups. They will then build the image of the group, in particular in the minds of their followers, as being far superior to all others. The Charismatic Leader will typically attach themselves firmly to the identify of the group, such that to join the group is to become one with the leader. In doing so, they create an unchallengeable position for themselves.

Alternative views
The description above is purely based on charisma and takes into account varying moral positions. Other descriptions tend to assume a more benevolent approach. Conger & Kanungo (1998) describe five behavioral attributes of Charismatic Leaders that indicate a more transformational viewpoint:
Vision and articulation; Sensitivity to the environment; Sensitivity to member needs; Personal risk taking; Performing unconventional behaviour.

Musser (1987) notes that charismatic leaders seek to instil both commitment to ideological goals and also devotion to themselves. The extent to which either of these two goals is dominant depends on the underlying motivations and needs of the leader.

Discussion
The Charismatic Leader and the Transformational Leader can have many similarities, in that the Transformational Leader may well be charismatic. Their main difference is in their basic focus. Whereas the Transformational Leader has a basic focus of transforming the organization and, quite possibly, their followers, the Charismatic Leader may not want to change anything. Despite their charm and apparent concern, the Charismatic Leader may well be somewhat more concerned with themselves than anyone else. A typical experience with them is that whilst you are talking with them, it is like being bathed in a warm and pleasant glow, in which they are very convincing. Yet afterwards, ask the sunbeam of their attention is moved elsewhere, you may begin to question what they said (or even whether they said anything of significance at all). The values of the Charismatic Leader are highly significant. If they are well-intentioned towards others, they can elevate and transform an entire company. If they are selfish and Machiavellian, they can create cults and effectively rape the minds (and potentially the bodies) of the followers. Their self-belief is so high, they can easily believe that they are infallible, and hence lead their followers into an abyss, even when they have received adequate warning from others. The self-belief can also lead them into psychotic narcissism, where their self-absorption or need for admiration and worship can lead to their followers questioning their leadership. They may also be intolerant of challengers and their irreplaceability (intentional or otherwise) can mean that there are no successors when they leave.

Participative Leadership
Disciplines > Leadership > Leadership styles > Participative Leadership Assumptions | Style | Discussion | See also

Assumptions
Involvement in decision-making improves the understanding of the issues involved by those who must carry out the decisions. People are more committed to actions where they have involved in the relevant decision-making. People are less competitive and more collaborative when they are working on joint goals.

When people make decisions together, the social commitment to one another is greater and thus increases their commitment to the decision. Several people deciding together make better decisions than one person alone.

Style
A Participative Leader, rather than taking autocratic decisions, seeks to involve other people in the process, possibly including subordinates, peers, superiors and other stakeholders. Often, however, as it is within the managers' whim to give or deny control to his or her subordinates, most participative activity is within the immediate team. The question of how much influence others are given thus may vary on the manager's preferences and beliefs, and a whole spectrum of participation is possible, as in the table below.

< Not participative

Highly participative >

Autocratic decision by leader

Leader proposes Team proposes decision, listens to decision, leader has feedback, then final decision decides

Joint decision with team as equals

Full delegation of decision to team

There are many varieties on this spectrum, including stages where the leader sells the idea to the team. Another variant is for the leader to describe the 'what' of objectives or goals and let the team or individuals decide the 'how' of the process by which the 'how' will be achieved (this is often called 'Management by Objectives'). The level of participation may also depend on the type of decision being made. Decisions on how to implement goals may be highly participative, whilst decisions during subordinate performance evaluations are more likely to be taken by the manager.

Discussion
There are many potential benefits of participative leadership, as indicated in the assumptions, above. This approach is also known as consultation, empowerment, joint decision-making, democratic leadership, Management By Objective (MBO) and power-sharing. Participative Leadership can be a sham when managers ask for opinions and then ignore them. This is likely to lead to cynicism and feelings of betrayal.

Situational Leadership

Assumptions
The best action of the leader depends on a range of situational factors.

Style
When a decision is needed, an effective leader does not just fall into a single preferred style, such as using transactional or transformational methods. In practice, as they say, things are not that simple. Factors that affect situational decisions include motivation and capability of followers. This, in turn, is affected by factors within the particular situation. The relationship between followers and the leader may be another factor that affects leader behavior as much as it does follower behavior. The leaders' perception of the follower and the situation will affect what they do rather than the truth of the situation. The leader's perception of themselves and other factors such as stress and mood will also modify the leaders' behavior. Yukl (1989) seeks to combine other approaches and identifies six variables:
Subordinate effort: the motivation and actual effort expended. Subordinate ability and role clarity: followers knowing what to do and how to do it. Organization of the work: the structure of the work and utilization of resources. Cooperation and cohesiveness: of the group in working together. Resources and support: the availability of tools, materials, people, etc. External coordination: the need to collaborate with other groups.

Leaders here work on such factors as external relationships, acquisition of resources, managing demands on the group and managing the structures and culture of the group.

Discussion
Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1958) identified three forces that led to the leader's action: the forces in the situation, the forces in then follower and also forces in the leader. This recognizes that the leader's style is highly variable, and even such distant events as a family argument can lead to the displacement activity of a more aggressive stance in an argument than usual. Maier (1963) noted that leaders not only consider the likelihood of a follower accepting a suggestion, but also the overall importance of getting things done. Thus in critical situations, a leader is more likely to be directive in style simply because of the implications of failure.

Transactional Leadership
Disciplines > Leadership > Leadership styles > Transactional Leadership Assumptions | Style | Discussion | See also

Assumptions
People are motivated by reward and punishment. Social systems work best with a clear chain of command. When people have agreed to do a job, a part of the deal is that they cede all authority to their manager. The prime purpose of a subordinate is to do what their manager tells them to do.

Style
The transactional leader works through creating clear structures whereby it is clear what is required of their subordinates, and the rewards that they get for following orders. Punishments are not always mentioned, but they are also well-understood and formal systems of discipline are usually in place. The early stage of Transactional Leadership is in negotiating the contract whereby the subordinate is given a salary and other benefits, and the company (and by implication the subordinate's manager) gets authority over the subordinate. When the Transactional Leader allocates work to a subordinate, they are considered to be fully responsible for it, whether or not they have the resources or capability to carry it out. When things go wrong, then the subordinate is considered to be personally at fault, and is punished for their failure (just as they are rewarded for succeeding). The transactional leader often uses management by exception, working on the principle that if something is operating to defined (and hence expected) performance then it does not need attention. Exceptions to expectation require praise and reward for exceeding expectation, whilst some kind of corrective action is applied for performance below expectation. Whereas Transformational Leadership has more of a 'selling' style, Transactional Leadership, once the contract is in place, takes a 'telling' style.

Discussion
Transactional leadership is based in contingency, in that reward or punishment is contingent upon performance. Despite much research that highlights its limitations, Transactional Leadership is still a popular approach with many managers. Indeed, in the Leadership vs. Management spectrum, it is very much towards the management end of the scale. The main limitation is the assumption of 'rational man', a person who is largely motivated by money and simple reward, and hence whose behavior is predictable. The underlying psychology is Behaviorism, including the Classical Conditioning of Pavlov and Skinner's Operant Conditioning. These theories are

largely based on controlled laboratory experiments (often with animals) and ignore complex emotional factors and social values. In practice, there is sufficient truth in Behaviorism to sustain Transactional approaches. This is reinforced by the supply-and-demand situation of much employment, coupled with the effects of deeper needs, as in Maslow's Hierarchy. When the demand for a skill outstrips the supply, then Transactional Leadership often is insufficient, and other approaches are more effective.

Transformational Leadership
Disciplines > Leadership > Leadership styles > Transformational Leadership Assumptions | Style | Discussion | See also

Assumptions
People will follow a person who inspires them. A person with vision and passion can achieve great things. The way to get things done is by injecting enthusiasm and energy.

Style
Working for a Transformational Leader can be a wonderful and uplifting experience. They put passion and energy into everything. They care about you and want you to succeed.

Developing the vision

Transformational Leadership starts with the development of a vision, a view of the future that will excite and convert potential followers. This vision may be developed by the leader, by the senior team or may emerge from a broad series of discussions. The important factor is the leader buys into it, hook, line and sinker.

Selling the vision

The next step, which in fact never stops, is to constantly sell the vision. This takes energy and commitment, as few people will immediately buy into a radical vision, and some will join the show much more slowly than others. The Transformational Leader thus takes every opportunity and will use whatever works to convince others to climb on board the bandwagon. In order to create followers, the Transformational Leader has to be very careful in creating trust, and their personal integrity is a critical part of the package that they are selling. In effect, they are selling themselves as well as the vision.

Finding the way forwards

In parallel with the selling activity is seeking the way forward. Some Transformational Leaders know the way, and simply want others to follow them. Others do not have a ready strategy, but will happily lead the exploration of possible routes to the promised land. The route forwards may not be obvious and may not be plotted in details, but with a clear vision, the direction will always be known. Thus finding the way forward can be an ongoing process of course correction, and the Transformational Leader will accept that there will be failures and blind canyons along the way. As long as they feel progress is being made, they will be happy.

Leading the charge

The final stage is to remain up-front and central during the action. Transformational Leaders are always visible and will stand up to be counted rather than hide behind their troops. They show by their attitudes and actions how everyone else should behave. They also make continued efforts to motivate and rally their followers, constantly doing the rounds, listening, soothing and enthusing. It is their unswerving commitment as much as anything else that keeps people going, particularly through the darker times when some may question whether the vision can ever be achieved. If the people do not believe that they can succeed, then their efforts will flag. The Transformational Leader seeks to infect and reinfect their followers with a high level of commitment to the vision. One of the methods the Transformational Leader uses to sustain motivation is in the use of ceremonies, rituals and other cultural symbolism. Small changes get big hurrahs, pumping up their significance as indicators of real progress. Overall, they balance their attention between action that creates progress and the mental state of their followers. Perhaps more than other approaches, they are people-oriented and believe that success comes first and last through deep and sustained commitment.

Discussion
Whilst the Transformational Leader seeks overtly to transform the organization, there is also a tacit promise to followers that they also will be transformed in some way, perhaps to be more like this amazing leader. In some respects, then, the followers are the product of the transformation. Transformational Leaders are often charismatic, but are not as narcissistic as pure Charismatic Leaders, who succeed through a belief in themselves rather than a belief in others. One of the traps of Transformational Leadership is that passion and confidence can easily be mistaken for truth and reality. Whilst it is true that great things have been achieved through enthusiastic leadership, it is also true that many passionate people have led the charge right over the cliff and into a bottomless chasm. Just because someone believes they are right, it does not mean they are right.

Paradoxically, the energy that gets people going can also cause them to give up. Transformational Leaders often have large amounts of enthusiasm which, if relentlessly applied, can wear out their followers. Transformational Leaders also tend to see the big picture, but not the details, where the devil often lurks. If they do not have people to take care of this level of information, then they are usually doomed to fail. Finally, Transformational Leaders, by definition, seek to transform. When the organization does not need transforming and people are happy as they are, then such a leader will be frustrated. Like wartime leaders, however, given the right situation they come into their own and can be personally responsible for saving entire companies.

The Quiet Leader

Disciplines > Leadership > Leadership styles > The Quiet Leader Assumptions | Style | Discussion | See also

Assumptions
The actions of a leader speak louder than his or her words. People are motivated when you give them credit rather than take it yourself. Ego and aggression are neither necessary nor constructive.

Style
The approach of quiet leaders is the antithesis of the classic charismatic (and often transformational) leaders in that they base their success not on ego and force of character but on their thoughts and actions. Although they are strongly task-focused, they are neither bullies nor unnecessarily unkind and may persuade people through rational argument and a form of benevolent Transactional Leadership.

The 'Level 5' leader

In his book Good To Great, Jim Collins, identified five levels of effectiveness people can take in organizations. At level four is the merely effective leader, whilst at level five the leader who combines professional will with personal humility. The 'professional will' indicates how they are far from being timid wilting flowers and will march against any advice if they believe it is the right thing to do. In 'personal humility' they put the well-being of others before their own personal needs, for example giving others credit after successes but taking personal responsibility for failures.

Taoist writings
The quiet leader is not a modern invention and Lao Tzu, who, in the classic Taoist text Tao Te Ching, was discussing the same characteristic around 500 BC:

The very highest is barely known by men, Then comes that which they know and love, Then that which is feared, Then that which is despised. He who does not trust enough will not be trusted. When actions are performed Without unnecessary speech, People say We did it! Here again, the highest level of leadership is virtually invisible.

Discussion
To some extent, the emphasis on the quiet leader is a reaction against the lauding of charismatic leaders in the press. In particular during the heady days of the dot-com boom of the 1990s, some very verbal leaders got much coverage. Meanwhile, the quiet leaders were getting on with the job. Being quiet, of course, is not the secret of the universe, and leaders still need to see the way forwards. Their job can be harder when they are faced with people of a more external character. For people accustomed to an extraverted charismatic style, a quiet style can be very confusing and they may downplay the person, which is usually a mistake. Successful quiet leaders often play the values card to persuade others, showing selfishness and lack of emotional control as being unworthy characteristics. Again there is a trap in this and leadership teams can fall into patterns of behavior where peace and harmony are prized over any form of challenge and conflict.

Servant leadership
Disciplines > Leadership > Leadership styles > Servant leadership Assumptions | Style | Discussion | See also

Assumptions
The leader has responsibility for the followers. Leaders have a responsibility towards society and those who are disadvantaged. People who want to help others best do this by leading them.

Style
The servant leader serves others, rather than others serving the leader. Serving others thus comes by helping them to achieve and improve. There are two criteria of servant leadership:
The people served grow as individuals, becoming 'healthier, wiser, more autonomous and more likely themselves to become servants' (Greenleaf, 1977). The extent to which the leadership benefits those who are least advantaged in society (or at least does not disadvantage them).

Principles of servant leadership defined by the Alliance for Servant Leadership are:
other Transformation as a vehicle for personal and institutional growth. Personal growth as a route to better serve others. Enabling environments that empower and encourage service. Service as a fundamental goals. Trusting relationships as a basic platform for collaboration and service. Creating commitment as a way to collaborative activity. Community building as a way to create environments in which people can trust each and work together. Nurturing the spirit as a way to provide joy and fulfilment in meaningful work.

Spears (2002) lists: listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to growth of people, and building community. An excellent example of a servant leader is Ernest Shackleton, the early 20th century explorer who, after his ship became frozen in the Antarctic life, brought every one of his 27 crew home alive, including an 800 mile journey in open boats across the winter Antarctic seas. It took two years, but Shackleton's sense of responsibility towards his men never wavered.

Discussion
Greenleaf says that true leadership "emerges from those whose primary motivation is a deep desire to help others." Servant leadership is a very moral position, putting the well-being of the followers before other goals. It is easy to dismiss servant leadership as soft and easy, though this is not necessarily so, as individual followers may be expected to make sacrifices for the good of the whole, in the way of the servant leader. The focus on the less privileged in society shows the servant leader as serving not just their followers but also the whole of society.

Servant leadership is a natural model for working in the public sector. It requires more careful interpretation in the private sector lest the needs of the shareholders and customers and the rigors of market competition are lost. A challenge to servant leadership is in the assumption of the leader that the followers want to change. There is also the question of what 'better' is and who decides this. Servant leadership aligns closely with religious morals and has been adopted by several Christian organizations.

Assignment 2 Discuss the role of a manager:

Role of Manager in the Organization
Basically, a manager is a traffic cop. She accepts tasks from superiors and delegates them to her staff. A manager reviews the staff's progress and presents the finished work to the supervisor. He balances the workload among staff members, allocates resources, and estimates the amount of time, money, etc. that will be required to complete tasks. Managers may be asked to project the annual costs for the area they manage and "sign off" on expenditures. Alternatively, this may be handled by an accounting office. The manager is a "middle man (or woman)" who represents the employees' interests to management and management's interests to employees. In a well-run company, everyone the manager works with feels they're being dealt with fairly most of the time. In a poorly-run company, the manager may be expected to be the "hatchet woman (or man)" who has to "get rid of" undesirable employees. I have read that a manager shouldn't be expected to manage more than 6 full-time employees. Additionally, the above is well-stated. In summary, a manager's responsibility is to hold up the wall, the employees responsibility is to build the wall, and to come 360, the manager's responsibility is to ensure the employees are building the wall correctly, using the proper tools, and ensure they have the right wall-builders in place.

Most of the time the mangers in the organization are confused lot about what there role is. They are more concerned about the micro part of there responsibilities & could not concentrate more on the macro aspect of the management responsibility which he has to execute. Broadly we can divide the role of a manager into two parts. One is objective & the other one is subjective. The objective part is basically to run the business in efficient manner. Manager has to ensure that the objective

goals of the organizations are achieved. The day to day business is run smoothly & to remove any obstacle which come on the way. This is what comprises the objective role of a manager & most of the time we find mangers are bogged down with this part only. The most important role of a manager is to identify, nurture & groom employees who would ultimately becomes future business leaders of the organization. Most of the managers forget this role & concentrate on running day to day business & are more concerned with increasing profitability for the organization. There is nothing wrong with the profitability factor but if an organization has to run successfully for maximum numbers of years, it has to churn out leaders all across the organization constantly. In the name of developing leaders most of the managers will take into there shelter few numbers of employee who understand better than other employees what there boss wants. He will provide all the necessary support & back up so they look good & after some time will promote them. Its human tendency to like the people who talks good about you & who praises you but if a manager wants to be a successful for longer duration, he has to understand the success of an organization depends on the shoulder of employees who has diverse skills & competencies. One type of people will not be able to get you success for a long time. He has to develop leaders all across the organization. There is another danger if you are surrounded by the people who only appreciate your work & never criticizes him, gradually they will be turning you to have a false feeling of supremacy. Ultimately you will be trapped into, I am great syndrome, which will slowly reduce your willingness to learn new things & with the passage of time will fade into oblivion. If we want not to happen this we must pay more attention to the macro part of our role as a manager & thats all about identify, groom, and motivate employees from all spectrum of the organization into a future business leader. This can be achieved successfully by keeping aside your personal likings or disliking & judging the employee on his capacity to execute the job efficiently, his keenness & ability to learn new competencies, ability to perform in a team & his assimilation & understanding of organization culture. Its a chain reaction; managers develop people into becoming leader who are directly working under them. They in turn develop people into leaders who are working under them & the process goes down to the lowest level of employee of the organization. How it is being ensured that the process is working? There are two methods by which organization can find out whether the leadership program is being successfully implemented. One the organization should conduct employee survey periodically from outsize agencies & second to have close tab on employees appraisal card. Both these tools will be immensely helpful to the managers to understand in which direction there organization will be heading. In the last it is his will power & sincerity will decide whether he wants to be a manager only, or for a long period to come he wants to be remembered by his peers as a true leader

Roles & Responsibilities of a Manager in an Organization

The three vital determinants of team work are the leader subordinates and the environment. These factors are interdependent. It is the leaders responsibility to make the environment conducive to work. He studies the employees individually and insists interest in them. By encouraging the inquisitive employees and by prohibiting insidious elements, he creates hygienic environment. He inculcates the sense of collectivism in employees to work as a team. The resultant output will then be efficiency. ______________________________________________________________________________ LEADER IS A REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBORDINATES

He is intermediary between the work groups and top management. They are called linking pins by rensis likert. As linking pins they serve to integrate the entire organization and the effectiveness depends on the strength of these linking pins. Leader shows personal consideration for the employees. As representatives they carry the voice of the subordinates to the to management. LEADER IS AN APPROPRIATE COUNSELLOR Quite often people in the work place need counseling to eliminate the emotional disequilibrium that is created sometimes in them. Leader removes barriers and stumbling block to effective performance. For instance, frustration that results from blocked need drive keeps an employee derailed or the working track. It is here the leader comes in, renders wise counsel, releases the employee of the emotional tension and restores equilibrium. USES POWER PROPERLY If a leader is to effectively achieve the goal expected of him, he must have power and authority to act in a way that will stimulate a positive response from the workers. A leader , depending on the situation , exercises different types of power , viz reward power and expert power. Besides the formal basis , the informal basis of power also have a more powerful impact on organizational effectiveness. No leader is effective unless the subordinates obey his orders. There fore, the leader uses appropriate power so that subordinates willingly obey the orders and come forward with commitment. LEADER MANAGES THE TIME WELL Times is precious and vital but often overlooked in management. There are three dimensions of time boss imposed time , system- imposed time and self imposed time . That are prominent in literature. Because the leader has through knowledge of the principle of time management such as preparing time charts, scheduling techniques, etc., he is in a position to utilize the time productively in the organization. STRIVES FOR EFFECTIVENESS Quite frequently the manager are work abolic and too busy with petty things to address to major details of effectiveness. To fill the gap, sometimes leaders throws his concerted efforts to bring effectiveness by encouraging and nurturing team work, by better time management and by the proper use of power. Further, leader provides and adequate reward structure to encourage performance of employees. Leader delegates authority where needed and invites participation where possible to achieve the better result. He also provides the workers with necessary resources. By communicating to workers what is expected of them, leader brings effectiveness to organization. The above functions of the leader are by no means comprehensive but they do suggest as to what leaders do generally. MANAGING AND LEADING Leading and managing are not synonymous. One popular way of distinguishing between managing and leading is brought out by the French terms dux and Rex. Dex is a leader and an activist, innovators and often an inspirational type and rex is a stabilizer or broker of manager. But more realistically, effective management required good leadership. Bennis had once commented, there are many institutions I know are very well managed but very poorly led. This statement crystal clearly demonstrates that the difference between managing, and leading is indeed a lot. Though a layman considers managing as a broad terms including leading function a behaviorist advances the following points to marshall the difference between these two leading and managing. RELEATIONSHIPS Managerial behavior implies the existence of a manager managed relationship. This relationship arises with in organizational context. Where as leadership can occur why where, it does not have to originate in the organization

context. for example , a mob can have a leader but cannot have a manager. Further, is an organization, informal. Group have leader not managers. SOURCES OF INFLUENCE Another potential difference between leader and manager lies in their sources of influence. Authority is attached to the managerial position in the case of a manager: where as a leader may not have authority but can receive power directly from his followers. In other words, managers obtain authority from his followers. In rather pure terms, this is the difference between the formal authority theory and the acceptance theory of authority. SANCTIONS A Manger has command over all allocation and distributions of sanctions. For Example, manager has control over the positive sanctions such as promotion and awards for his task performance and the contribution to organizational objectives. Manager is also in a position to exercises the negative sanctions such as with holding promotions, or mistakes, etc. In a sharp contrast, a leader has altogether different type of sanctions to exercises and grant. He cans gerent or with hold access to satisfying the very purpose of joining the groups social satisfactions and related task rewards. These informal sanctions are relevant to the individual with belongingness or ego needs: where as the organizational sanctions granted or exercised by the managers are geared to the physiological and security needs of individual. ROLE CONTINUANCE Another fundamental difference between managing and leading is the role continuance. A manager may continue in office as long as his performance is satisfactory and acceptable to the organization. In sharp contrast, a leader maintains his position only through the day to day wish to the followers. REASONS FOR FOLLOWING Though in both managing and leading followers become involved, the reasons may be different. People follow managers because their job description, supported by a system of rewards and sanctions, requires them to follow. Where as people follow leader on voluntary basis. Further, it there are no followers, leader no more exists. But, even if there are no followers, a manager may be there.