Leadership vs. Management - Shannon Meaney-Ryer



Leadership vs. ManagementSubmitted by: Shannon MeaneyEdited by: Clare HanmanLIBR 282 Literature SynthesisDecember 11, 2011Instructor: Dr. Ken HaycockSan Jose State University, School of Information and Library ScienceExecutive SummaryLeaders manage and managers lead, but the two activities are not synonymous. Management functions can potentially provide leadership; leadership activities can contribute to managing. Nevertheless, some managers do not lead, and some leaders do not manage. CITATION Ber90 \l 1033 (Stogdill, 1974) A good manager focuses on doing things right, is efficient and a good leader focuses on doing the right things, has vision and innovation CITATION Ben03 \l 1033 (Bennis & Goldsmith, Learning to Lead, 2003). Although, the words are sometimes interchanged and often times not differentiated there are distinct differences between the two roles in organizations.Webster’s dictionary refers to “Management”, conducting or supervising of something and “Leadership”, the power or ability to lead other people. A leader is a person who plays a strategic role in an organization in decision making, setting a direction, and developing and communicating a vision, A manager is a person with critical roles and responsibilities on a tactical level helping the organization succeed in achieving its vision. What is the difference between a manager and a leader? Why is there a difference? Are they synonymous with one another? Are they both necessary? This paper will answer those questions and introduce the reader to multiple definitions, characteristics, history, theories that are the basis of differences and similarities between leadership and management. IntroductionWhen you are in a supervisory role within an organization do you ever stop and think, am I a manager or a leader? Leadership and management are considered by many to be synonymous functions currently used in organizations .But are they? This paper will examine that issue by reviewing literature that defines leadership and management theories, presents historical significance and outlines the differences and similarities of both these terms. What are Leadership and Management?According to Bennis, the leader’s job is to inspire and motivate and a manager’s job is to plan, organize and coordinate CITATION Ben03 \l 1033 (Bennis & Goldsmith, Learning to Lead, 2003), Steven Covey, author of the 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, believes that you lead people and you manage things CITATION Ste04 \l 1033 (Covey, 2004) and John Knotter of the Harvard Business School believes that management is about coping with complexity while leading is coping with change CITATION San09 \l 1033 (Allman S. , 2009). Gardner identified managers as those individuals who hold a directive post in an organization, a person who organizes functions, allocates resources, and makes the best use of people. He also noted that every time he encountered an effective manager that the manager possessed a lot of leadership abilities but the focus was different CITATION JWG90 \l 1033 (Gardner, 1990).With the emergence of complex organizations, leaders introduce the big ideas. They create and implement the big picture and its operations then hand it over to a manager to maintain its efficiency and processes, bringing order and consistency. Both are vital to for a successful workplace CITATION Jam06 \l 1033 (Kotterman, 2006). LeadershipLeadership is the function of knowing, yourself, having vision that is well communicated, building trust among colleagues, and taking effective action to realize their own leadership potential CITATION Her07 \l 1033 (Hernon & Rossiter, 2007). Leadership influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal. Vision, direction and focus, clear goals, a team spirit, are leadership skills that successfully align people towards that common goal. Leadership is the single biggest factor that drives change and organizational improvement. A leader has a clear idea of what they want to do professionally and personally and the strength to persist in the face of setbacks and failures CITATION Ben09 \l 1033 (Bennis, On Becoming A Leader, 2009). A common description of leadership types include; Autocratic, one who makes all the decisions, tells employees what to do, and micro manages their employees, Democratic, one who encourages employee participation, works with employees to determine what to do, and does not micro manage, and Laissez-Faire, one who allows employees to make decisions and decide what to do. Historical Perspective of Leadership TheoriesGreat Man Theory 1840The Great Man theory assumes that great leaders are born not made. They are destined at birth to be good leaders. Certain intrinsic qualities exist in some people that result in them being great leaders. Historian Thomas Carlyle (1888) had a major influence on this theory of leadership, at one point stating that, "The history of the world is but the biography of great men." According to Carlyle, effective leaders are those gifted with divine inspiration and the right characteristics CITATION Car88 \l 1033 (Carlyle, 1888).Trait Theory 1930’s -1940’sTrait Theory is based on the belief that certain people possess mental, physical, or social traits that result in them being great leaders. These traits can be those one is born with or obtain throughout life. Trait theories often identify particular personality or behavioral characteristics shared by leaders. Although over 4000 personality traits have been identified CITATION All36 \l 1033 (Allport & Odbert, 1936) common traits found in recognized leaders were used as indicators of successful leaders. Stogdill (1974) identified the following critical traits of leaders; adaptable, alert, ambitious assertive, cooperative, decisive, dependable, dominant, energetic, persistent, self-confident, tolerant of stress, willing to assume responsibility. There was not total consensus among researchers on critical traits CITATION Ber90 \l 1033 (Stogdill, 1974). Behavioral Theories 1940’s-1950Eventually trait theory was sidelined when it became apparent that what leaders actually did had significant impact on their ability to lead successfully. Behavioral Theories are base on the belief that leaders are made not born. In contrast to Trait Theories, Behavioral Theorists believe it is the behavior of leaders that make them great leaders. These behaviors are considered definable and learnable.Early experiments on types of leadership style based on how leaders behaved, was researched by Kurt Lewin (1939). He identified three types of leadership, particularly around decision-making. The three styles Lewin described are:Autocratic Leadership: In the autocratic style, the leader takes decisions without consulting with others. The decision is made without any form of consultation. In Lewin's experiments, he found that this caused the most level of discontent.Democratic Leadership: In the democratic style, the leader involves the people in the decision-making, although the process for the final decision may vary from the leader having the final say to them facilitating consensus in the group.Laissez-Faire: The laissez-faire style is to minimize the leader's involvement in decision-making, and hence allowing people to make their own decisions, although they may still be responsible for the outcome CITATION Lew39 \l 1033 (Lewin, Llippit, & White, 1939).In Lewin’s experiments, he discovered that the most effective style was Democratic. Excessive autocratic styles led to revolution, while under a Laissez-faire approach, people were not coherent in their work and did not put in the energy that they did when being actively led. The three approaches to decision making were generalized to apply to over all leadership styles and were highly influential for years CITATION Cha11 \l 1033 (Changing Minds , 2011).?Other studies were carried out to identify successful leadership behaviors, including studies at Ohio State University and Michigan University. The first looked at the dimensions of consideration (friendship, trust, respect, warmth) and Initiating structure (roles, relationships, communication) and their relationshipto leadership. The conclusion of the Michigan studies was that an employee-oriented and general, instead of close, supervision yielded better results. The Ohio State study revealed that leadership behaviors related to both employee orientation (human relations) and production orientation (getting the work done) correlated to leadership effectiveness CITATION Fle62 \l 1033 (Fleishman & Harris, 1962). Robert Blake and Jane Mouton (1964) developed another theory called the Leadership Grid, focusing on production/relationship orientations uncovered in the Ohio State and Michigan University studies.? They went a little further by creating a grid based on Leaders’ concern for people (relationships) and production (tasks).? It suggests there is a best way to lead people the 9,9 way, refer to Figure. 11191260495300Figure 1?? CITATION Bla64 \l 1033 (Blake & Mouton, 1964)The ModelImpoverished: This leadership style features low production and low concern for people. This means that not much work is getting done and the workers are not provided with an environment that is motivating or rewarding.Country Club Style: This leadership style features high concern for people and low concern for production. While the work environment may be enjoyable, production suffers as a result of the lack of leadership.Authoritarian: This leadership style features high concern for production and low concern for people. In this work environment, the needs of the employees are always secondary to the bottom line. These managers are autocratic, with strict work rules, and they prefer to use punishment to control their employees.Middle-of-the-Road: This leadership style features medium production and medium concern for people. Leaders who use this style are often satisfied with average production and might even believe this is the most that can be expected.Team Leader: This type of leadership style features high production and high concern for people. Team style managers ensure employees understand and contribute to the direction of the company. This is an environment where people’s needs are met and production goals are reached CITATION Min11 \l 1033 (Mind Tools LTD, 2011).Contingency Theories 1960’s-1980These theories are based on the belief that a leader’s effectiveness depends on how well the leader’s style fits the context of the work situation. The theory was developed by studying the styles of leaders in situations and whether they were effective (primarily in military organizations). Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1958) identified three forces that led to the leader's action: the forces in the situation, the forces in the follower and also forces in the leader. This recognizes that the leader's style is highly variable. The Path-Goal Theory of Leadership was developed to describe the way that leaders encourage and support their followers in achieving the goals they have been set by making the path that they should take clear and easy.In particular, leaders:Clarify the path so subordinates know which way to go.Remove roadblocks that are stopping them going there.Increasing the rewards along the route. CITATION Tan58 \l 1033 (Tannenbaum & Schmitt, How to choose a leadership pattern, 1958)Leaders can take a strong or limited approach in these. In clarifying the path, they may be directive or give vague hints. In removing roadblocks, they may scour the path or help the follower move the bigger blocks. In increasing rewards, they may give occasional encouragement or pave the way with gold. This variation in approach will depend on the situation, including the follower's capability and motivation, as well as the difficulty of the job and other contextual factors CITATION Cha11 \l 1033 (Changing Minds , 2011).Fred Fiedler’s situational contingency theory holds that group effectiveness depends on an appropriate match between a leader’s style (essentially a trait measure) and the demands of the situation. Fiedler considers situational control, the extent to which a leader can determine what his or her group is going to do, to be the primary contingency factor in determining the effectiveness of leader behavior. Many scholars assumed that there was one best style of leadership. Fiedler’s contingency model postulates that the leader’s effectiveness is based on “situational contingency”, which is a result of interaction of two factors: leadership style and situational favorableness (later called situational control). Fiedler’s leadership style of the leader was fixed and measured by what he calls the least preferred co-worker (LPC) scale. This is an instrument for measuring an individual’s leadership orientation. The calculation on the scale determined if the leader takes a human relations orientation or a task orientation in leading individuals or groups CITATION Vec08 \l 1033 (Vector Study, 2008).In Hersey and Blanchard’s (1988) Situational Leadership Model four different leadership styles could be drawn upon to successfully deal with the “readiness” (willingness, ability, and confidence) of the individuals or groups they lead, see Figure 2.Figure 21913890365125Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Model CITATION Her88 \l 1033 (Hersey & Blanchard, 1988)Transformational Leadership Theories 1970’s-The term Transformational Leadership was first coined by Downton (1973), however, its emergence did not really come about until James Burn's classic, and Leadership (1978) was published. Burns (1978) noted that the majority of leadership models and practices were based on transactional processes that focused on exchanges between the leader and follow, such as promotions for excellent work or punishment for being late. Burns defined transformational leadership as a process where leaders and followers engage in a mutual process of “raising one another to higher levels of morality and motivation.”Transformational leaders raise the bar by appealing to higher ideals and values of followers. In doing so, they may model the values themselves and use charismatic methods to attract people to the values and to the leader.Burns' view is that transformational leadership is more effective than transactional leadership, where the appeal is to more selfish concerns. An appeal to social values thus encourages people to collaborate, rather than working as individuals (and potentially competitively with one another). He also views transformational leadership as an ongoing process rather than the discrete exchanges of the transactional approach CITATION Bur78 \l 1033 (Burns, 1978). Bernard Bass (1997) has four interrelated components that he views as essential for leaders to move followers into the transformational style. First is idealized influence. He maintains that genuine trust must be built between leaders and followers. “If the leadership is truly transformational, its charisma or idealized influence is characterized by high moral and ethical standards.” Trust for both leader and follower is built on a solid moral and ethical foundation. The second component is inspirational motivation. Its [transformational leadership’s] inspirational motivation provides followers with challenges and meaning for engaging in shared goals and undertakings. The leader’s appeal to what is right and needs to be done provides the impetus for all to move forward. Next, is intellectual stimulation, intellectual stimulation helps followers to question assumptions and to generate more creative solutions to problems. The leader’s vision provides the framework for followers to see how they connect to the leader, the organization, each other, and the goal. Once they have this big picture view and are allowed freedom from convention they can creatively overcome any obstacles in the way of the mission. Lastly, is individual consideration, individual consideration treats each follower as an individual and provides coaching, mentoring and growth opportunities. This approach not only educates the next generation of leaders, but also fulfills the individuals need for self-actualization, self-fulfillment, and self-worth. It also naturally propels followers to further achievement and growth CITATION Bas97 \l 1033 (Bass, 1997). Transformational Leadership fits into the higher levels of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, as it requires a high level of self-esteem and self-actualization to successfully be an authentic transformational leader.Historical Perspective of Management TheoriesManagement TheoriesRobert Owen (1771-1858) and Charles Babbage (1792-1871) were considered early pioneers in management theory development. Owens studied the welfare of workers and other human resource issues while Babbage’s work centered on creating efficiencies of production. However, the first popularly accepted theory of management was the Scientific Management Theory of Frederick Taylor. Taylor (1856-1917) consistently sought to overthrow management “by rule of thumb” and replace it with actual timed observations leading to “the one best” practice. Taylor’s legacy was the concept of breaking a complex task down into a number of subtasks, and optimizing the performance of the subtasks; hence his stop- watch measured time trials. CITATION Olu04 \l 1033 (Olum, 2004). Classical Organizational TheoryThe works of Max Weber’s (1864-1920) bureaucratic theory and Henri Fayol’s (1841-1925) administrative theory form the basis of this theory. Max Weber stressed that rational bureaucracies must be managed in accordance with carefully developed rules and principles that can be learned and applied. Only with such rules and principles can the activities of hundreds of managers at different levels in the organization be predicted and coordinated. He felt that if we cannot predict what others will do, then we cannot count on them. These rules and principles included (1) functional specialization (2) clear lines of hierarchical authority, (3) expert training of managers, and (4) decision making based on rules and tactics developed to guarantee consistent and effective pursuit of organizational goals. Weber’s bureaucracy guidelines influenced organizational behavior for a long period CITATION Bor02 \l 1033 (Borgatti, 2002).Henri Fayol’s work focused on the personal duties of managers. He developed 14 principles of management that he considered to be universal truths of management. Many of his principles are still followed today. He was the first to identify specific management functions of planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling CITATION Mau \l 1033 (Cutaja, 2010). Behavioral TheoriesAt the turn of the 20th Century it was thought that Scientific Management and Classical Organizational Theory approaches were not being successful because they did not account for employee motivation and behavior. As a result the Behavior Management approached emerged in importance. The behavioral management theory is often called the human relations movement because it addresses the human dimension of work. Behavioral theorists believed that a better understanding of human behavior at work, such as motivation, conflict, expectations, and group dynamics, improved productivity. There were several important studies that contributed to the development of the Behavioral Theories.Elton Mayo conducted the Hawthorne Studies (1927-1932) at a Chicago Western Electric plant to find the best conditions for worker productivity, an activity consistent with the Scientific Management approach popular at the time. To his surprise the studied workers increased productivity when a number of different often-conflicting conditions were presented. It was concluded that the worker perception of someone caring about them and their working conditions in itself lead to higher productivity. Several follow up studies in which workers were given special privileges and freedoms also significantly increased productivity. It was beginning to become apparent that the behaviors of managers toward workers to improve worker satisfaction and needs could improve productivity CITATION Ant101 \l 1033 (Anteby & Khurana, 2010). Abraham Maslow (1908-1970) conducted a number of studies on human motivation. Maslow studied people who were “self actualized” that is they were doing all they were capable of. In 1954 he presented his “Hierarchy of Needs Pyramid” that represented a progression of levels of needs that if satisfied would lead to self-actualization. Managers attempted to motivate employees by providing conditions and support to help workers meet those needs CITATION Mcl07 \l 1033 (Mcleod, 2007). In1966, Frederick Herzberg, a popular manage consultant and researcher, presented lists of factors that he concluded related to motivation of workers n the workplace. The first list (cited on p.139) he called “Hygiene Factors” or “Dissatisfies”. The factors on this list included working conditions, policies and administrative practices, salary and benefits, supervision status, job security, co-workers, and personal life. The second list (cited on p.74 and 147) called “Motivators” or “Satisfiers” included recognition, achievement, advancement, growth, responsibility, and job challenge.Herzberg stated that all the Hygiene or Dissatisfies factors had to be in place before workers could be motivated. Managers could then do “job enriching” actions on the Motivator’s or Satisfiers list. This information had a profound effect on managers in how they structured the work, how they dealt with workers and even how they structured their own work. Managers had to give up some control over completion of tasks to workers. Workers were given more freedom, asked for input, and sincerely recognized for their accomplishments CITATION Her66 \l 1033 (Herberg, 1966).Douglas McGregor’s (1906-1964), Human Side of Enterprise (1960) had a significant effect on management behavior. Based on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs he developed two theories he called Theory X and Theory Y. The first was based on Maslow’s lower-order needs while the second was based on Maslow’s higher order needs. He suggested that management could use either set of needs to motivate employees, but better results would be gained by the use of Theory Y, rather than Theory X. These two opposing perceptions theorized how people view human behavior at work and organizational life:Theory x (‘authoritarian management’ style)The average person dislikes work and will avoid it he/she can. Therefore most people must be forced with the threat of punishment to work towards organizational objectives. The average person prefers to be directed; to avoid responsibility; is relatively unambitious, and wants security above all else.Theory y (‘participative management’ style)Effort in work is as natural as work and play. People will apply self-control and self-direction in the pursuit of organizational objectives, without external control or the threat of punishment. Commitment to objectives is a function of rewards associated with their achievement. People usually accept and often seek responsibility. The capacity to use a high degree of imagination, ingenuity and creativity in solving organizational problems is widely, not narrowly, distributed in the population. In industry the intellectual potential of the average person is only partly utilized CITATION Ala10 \l 1033 (Alan Chapman Review, 2010). As a group those contributing to the development of the Behavioral Theory felt that people worked for their inner satisfaction rather than rather than external rewards. This had a profound effect on how managers worked with employee and how they structured the workplace.Contemporary Management TheoriesA number of theories have driven management behavior from the recent decade to today. W.H. Waddell (1992) describes the current, conventional management model as having been developed by Alfred Sloan for General Motors early in this century. The model, he points out, manages by the numbers "because every relevant aspect of the operation flow[s] to and from the accounting system… . . . what we call the 'economic model of the firm,' which is based on the principles of maximizing shareholder value." They contend that everything in the conventional management model flows out of one primary objective, maximizing shareholder wealth CITATION Stu01 \l 1033 (Stupak & Leitner, 2001). Some call this “Quantitative Management”. This management theory Griffin (2006) cautions cannot fully explain or predict the behavior of the people in the organizations and may come at a cost by raising mathematical sophistication at the expense of other managerial skills CITATION Ric07 \l 1033 (Griffin, Fundamentals of Management, 2006).One management theory that has had a significant impact on U.S. businesses and other organizations during the past few decades is Quality Management.Edwards Deming is considered the founder of Quality Management and is regarded by the Japanese as the key figure in their post war economic miracle. CITATION Olu04 \l 1033 (Olum, 2004)Quality Management, referred to also as Total Quality Management or TQM, has garnered an enthusiastic group of adherents away from competing management methodologies. Total Quality Management is the organization-wide management of quality. Management consists of planning, organizing, directing, control, and assurance. Total quality is called total because it consists of two qualities: quality of return to satisfy the needs of the shareholders, and quality of products. The key to this system is the formation of collaborative problem solving teams of workers that constantly gather data on outputs and suggest changes in work processes to improve quality.Leadership and Management DifferencesAlthough there are many differences between Leadership and Management there are three core differences that standout from the rest.Leadership is synthesis and Management analysis. Every synthesis is built upon the results of a preceding analysis, and every analysis requires a subsequent synthesis in order to verify and correct its results see Figure 4. Figure 4 Synthesis and Analyze cycle2) Leadership has long-term impact; management has short –term goals. Leader’s decisions impact the future of an organization; they bring vision, motivating the organization towards its strategic goals. Manager’s role is to maintain the day-to-day operations and supervising staff, task driven, and measuring performance. 3) Leaders have clearly different roles, responsibilities, and functions from those of managers. The competencies required to do each role well are quite different. CITATION Pra10 \l 1033 (Practical Mangement, 2010) . Rowe (2001) found that organizations with strong management but weak or no leadership will stifle creativity and innovation and be very bureaucratic. Conversely, an organization with strong leadership and weak or nonexistent management can become involved in change for the sake of change, change that is misdirected or meaningless and has a negative effect on the organization. Kotter (1998) argues that organizations are over managed and underled. However, strong leadership with weak management is no better and may be worse. He suggests that organizations need strong leadership and strong management. Managers are needed to handle complexity by instituting planning and budgeting, organizing and staffing, and controlling and problem solving. Leaders are needed to handle change through setting a direction, aligning people, and motivating and inspiring people. He argues that organizations need people who can do both—they need leader-managers. Figure 5Kotter Leader Manager Theory-66675212090Figure 5 CITATION Joh11 \l 1033 (Kotter, 2011)Conclusion Good Leadership and good management are different and both are essential for an organization to thrive. Leadership is similar to, and different from, management. They both involve influencing people. They both require working with people. Both are concerned with the achievement of common goals. Leaders are focused on the “big picture” issues like vision, direction, and strategies. Leadership is strategic in nature. Manager’s focus on tactical activities and often times has a more directive and controlling approach. They ensure work gets done, focus on day to day tasks, and manage the activities of others. Leadership is a human process and management is a process of resource allocation, both have their place and managers must also perform as leaders. All first-class managers turn out to have quite a lot of leadership ability.Leadership scholars take different views on their differences. Bennis and Nanus define management as accomplishing activities and mastering routines, to lead means to influence others and create visions for change. Leadership is a multidirectional influences relationships; management an authoritative relationship.Bennis and Nanus (1985) expressed the differences between managers and leaders very clearly in their often quoted phrase: “Managers are people who do things right and leaders are people who do the right thing” (cited on p. 221). Implicit in this statement is that organizations need people who do the right thing and who do the “right things right” CITATION Ben85 \l 1033 (Bennis & Nanus, Leaders: The strategies for taking charge, 1985). Although the literature states there are differences between managing and leading, it is also evident that organizations need both managers and leaders to be successful. This paper began by asking several questions. Upon conducting a literature review of leadership and management, I conclude that leadership and management are two distinctly different functions in organizations but have some similarities. Both are necessary and if both are effective the organization has a dramatically better chance of achieving it goals. References BIBLIOGRAPHY \l 1033 Alan Chapman Review. (2010). douglas mcgregor - theory x y. Retrieved 2011 28-November from Businessballs: , S. (2009). Leadership vs. Management. Successful Meetings , 12.Allport, G., & Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait-names: A psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs, , 211.Anteby, M., & Khurana, R. (2010). Harvard Business School and the HawthorneExperiements (1924- 1933). Retrieved 2011 29-November from The Human Relations Movement: , P. (2010). Fiedler's Contingency Theory of Leadership. Retrieved November 2011, 29, from St. Francis University: , B. (1997, “The Ethics of Transformational Leadership.” 1997.). The ethics of transformational leadership. In Kellogg Leadership Studies Project, Transformational Leadership Working Papers Transformational Leadership Working Papers, The James MacGregor Burns Academy of Leadership, .Bennis, W. (2009). On Becoming A Leader. Philadelphia: Perseus Books.Bennis, W., & Goldsmith, J. (2003). Learning to Lead. New York: Basic Books.Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. New York: Harper & Row .Bernard M. Bass, R. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill's handbook of leadership: theory, research, and managerial applications. New York: New York Free PRess.Blake, R. R., & Mouton, J. S. (1964). The Managerial Grid. Huston: Gulf.Borgatti, S. (2002 April). Bureaucracy. Retrieved 2011 29-November from Analytictech : , J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper and Row.Carlyle, T. (1888). On Heroes, Hero-Worship and the Heroic in History. New York: Fredrick A. Stokes & Brothe.Changing Minds . (2011). Retrieved November 29, 2011, from Participative Leadership: , M. (1997). An Integrative Theory of Leadership. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Covey, S. (2004). The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. New York City: Free Press.Cutaja, M. (2010 July). Henri Foyol's Principles of Management. Retrieved 2011 29-November from Business Manaement@ suite 101: , E. A., & Harris, E. F. (1962). Patterns of leadership. Personnell Psychology , 95-101.Gardner, J. (1990). On Leadership. New York City: The Free Press.Ghiselli, E. E. (1963). Management Talent. American Psychologist , 631-41.Griffin, R. W. (2006). Fundamentals of Management. Boston.Griffin, R. W. (2006). Fundamentals of Management. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Herberg, A. (1966). Work and the Nature of Man. Cleveland: World Publishing Company.Hernon, P., & Rossiter, N. (2007). Making a difference: Leadership and academic libraries. Westport: Libraries Unlimited.Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1988). Management and Organizational Behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Kotter, J. P. (2011). Kotter International. Retrieved November 2011-25 from Management vs. Leadership: , J. (2006). Leadership versus management: What's the difference? The Journal of Quality and Participation , 13.Lewin, K., Llippit, R., & White, R. K. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology , 271-301.Maier, N. (1963). Problem-solving discussions and conferences. New York City: McGraw-Hill.Mcleod, S. (2007). Hierarchy of Needs. Retrieved 2011 29-November from Simply Psychology: Mind Tools LTD. (2011). Blake Mouton Managerial Grid. Retrieved November 28, 2011, from Mind Tools: , Y. (2004). The modern management theories and pracitces. 15th East African Central Banking Course (pp. 1-24). Kenya: Kenya School of Monetary Studies.Practical Mangement. (2010). Leadership vs. Mangement. Retrieved November 28, 2011, from Practical Management: , K. (2009). Leadership vs. Management. Retrieved November 29, 2011, from University of Kentucky: , G., & Guerrero, ,. L. (2011). Cases in Leadership . Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: theory, research, and managerial applications. New York: New York Free PRess.Stupak, R., & Leitner, P. (2001). The handbook of public quality management . New York: Marcel Dekker.Tannenbaum, A. a. (1958). How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard Business Review , 95-100.Tannenbaum, A. a., & Schmitt, W. H. (1958). How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard Business Review , 95-100.Vector Study. (2008). Retrieved November 30, 2011, from Fiedler's Contingecy Model: ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download