Right from our childhood, we start to listen to the word “get organized”, “how messy your room is – you don’t have semblance of being an organized soul” and many such reprimands and advices. Then when we grow up, after living a messy life ourselves, we start to see around us everything in a mess and we long for people to organize the mess. In fact no one likes mess around him, but it is the lethargy that prevents him from getting organized. Those who do, live a much cleaner, happy and balanced life.
And why we need to be organized? Why should there be a balance in our life? One can clearly see the need when comparing people who are organized and those who are not. Organized people have a set pattern, scheduled events and time for their families – living a balanced life. That is to day they have “organized” their family and business life in such a harmony and synchrony that they feel happy and contended. Being organized means prioritization of everything based on effective time management. In simple words, "a place for everything and everything is in its place." When everything around you is in its place, you will have less time in finding the right thing at the right time. This would make you smarter, efficient and productive.
Our next post will deliberate on tips how to get organized.
The appraisal of one’s performance spread over a stipulated period of time is necessary for personal growth, development and ensure continued efficiency level in order to obtain optimum and desired output. Normally, performance appraisal is taken as a negative sign by everyone down the chain for it means hawks following everyone all the time on every corner. But everyone should also understand that the investors have huge resources, both monetary and material, at stake and anyone performing below a given standard can have a negative effect on the entire system.
The performance management therefore includes planning work, setting goals, and review performances, development of individual skills through training and advanced courses. And this goes without saying that everything should be followed by rewards, especially monetary benefits, for those faring well than others.
To start with, the planning should be elaborate and in details with short and mid term goals. Besides, the workers’ interests and expectations after a hard days work should also be given due weightage as normally such aspects are left unattended, which cause dissatisfaction in employees.
The performance management must also cater for reward and punishment system embodied in the planning stage. Rewards all those who fare better, but there be ways and means elaborated for those who remain far from reaching the finish line by not putting their heart and soul. That is to say that clear battle lines are drawn right from the outset, so that everyone is aware of the consequences.
Regular appraisal of one’s work performance must be communicated periodically rather than waiting for the year to end and explode the bombshell of one’s inefficiency. If done periodically, a person has the time and chance to improve and better one’s behaviour. It may be remembered that a person is not all nonsense the year round – so don’t criticize only. While apprising an individual of his weaknesses, also first tell him his good points or strengths. This will elevate his nerves to listen to the bad news, which may help him to make amends utilizing his pluses.
All along, the main aim of performance management should be the personal growth of an individual. While on job training provides adequate know how, small cadres or courses may be offered in periods of low activity to improve oneself. Sometimes it is useful to appoint mentors from within with the weak guys so that they are coached and watched closely.
And last of all, rewards are the best ways to motivate and to keep the present level of motivation intact. Rewards in the form of monetary benefits are always force multiplier. But for some a verbal praise or a fillip on the shoulder in the everyone also works well, though short lived. The psyche of the workers and team should always be kept in mind – all people cannot be made to work more or be more efficient just by raising their pay and making them donkeys. A balance has to strike between monetary and verbal rewards and praises.
And finally the catch point is always focus on an individual’s positive points in front of everyone followed by real and tangible rewards and politely informing him of his weak ones in person so that he is not embarrassed. Such approach would also make him realize his mistakes objectively and he would respect the person more for not embarrassing him in public.
Leadership and motivation are synonymous to one another. In organizations, where managers behave like managers, they have workers to work with. Whatever they say by virtue of their authority vested in them by the organization, the workers are bound to obey. This approach as has been discussed in one of my earlier posts “Difference between Managers and Leaders.”
The difference amply highlights that a leader is not someone designated as such, it is something which is God gifted and resides inside a manager, whom we call good manager. Such people effect the motivation of their colleagues and workers according to their “style” of leadership. Remember, all leaders are not able to lead effectively. It is just a handful of people who can do that.
So there is a strong correlation between the leadership style and the motivation. Let us see how these two correlate and what are the corresponding effects on productivity and efficiency of an organization.
When a leader really trusts his team mates, he exerts minimum or no supervision at all, after giving them general guidelines and guidance. This has a corresponding positive effect on the team, who become self motivated and this self motivation in turns triggers their creativity to come up with different approaches to solve a problem freely. In such a case, not only the workers will work more diligently, but would also try to come up with different solutions to increase the productivity.
On the contrary, a manager-leader who has less faith in his subordinates or knows much more than the team, may not delegate responsibilities and may keep the entire control to himself (the authoritarian style). Such managers get the things done little by act of motivation and more by the carrot and stick technique. Coercion, pressurizing, manipulating and harassing. In such an eventuality, the motivation slips to its lowest degrees and workers work out of fear of losing jobs and cuts in salaries.
-->
Then there is a mid stream style – using plus points of both styles listed above. The motivation in this case would be Goal motivated (based on opportunities), Reward motivated (materialistic approach) and Recognition motivated (social status). The level of motivation of the team or the co-workers would in this case would largely depend on the personality type of the leader and efficiency would depend on leader's skill and / or the work environment he creates. Normally this style is the best suited as it is not always possible to be following a draconian style or letting everyone free on their own.
But remember, no style could be taken as a model – each style has it own pros and cons on the level of motivation and thus cannot be sustained over a period of time suiting all situations. Rather, a manager cum leader has to continuously adjusting his style vis-Ã -vis the situation at hand and the kind of team he has.
Getting into business discussions is an every day’s job of the managers, be with a client, a colleague, a co-worker or a senior manager/CEO. While it is always advisable not to get into a heated discussion or engage into an argument, this cannot be avoided most of the times. So what to do – throw in the towel, get into a heated discussion or walk off. Well nothing specific can be suggested as the event itself would suggest the best course of action.
But remember, all business discussions, or even non-business too, are not to win the War on Terror and so unleashing your every weapon till the debate of the argument is won over. Rather all discussions or arguments are basically to clarify one’s own queries or putting across organization’s view point to the satisfaction of the customer with a view to seek their approval or willingness to arrive at a business deal. It must be remembered that in case of the discussion getting to much heated or there are chances that limits of decency may be crossed, it is much better to disengage politely.
Remember, in a discussion, listen as intently as possible to the other side as only then one can build a befitting response. And also remember, the one who speaks more, gives out more weaknesses or points on which the other can build one’s response and counter arguments. Normally, the one who speaks more is taken to be the winner, but generally a quiet thinker and good listener is the ultimate winner.
Now what to do in case one gets into a battle of words? Here are some measures to win over or disengage gracefully.
First and foremost tip is DON’T GET INTO AN ARGUMENTATION. That is the best approach. One should listen to the other, and if it is thought that one doesn't have much substance to convince the other or the person is getting into an argument for the sake of it, the best would be to disengage before its gets too rough for you. There may be another day and another time.
OK, you are in it, so what to do? Remember, everyone loves winning. So start off with letting the other to win by agreeing to points that suit you and your organization. That would be a good start. Agreeing in principle would make the other fell better and provide you a good kick start.
The third tip is LISTENING to the person whom you are talking to. Listening means listening with full concentration and all ears open and eyes as well as gestures along with words also matter. The more you let the other speak, more argumentive responses you will be able to think of.
-->
Remember, in an argument, one has to keep the interest of his organization supreme. And it is easier to negotiate on the interests, which are always flexible to an extent. But not positions. Don’t struck up on positions as one cannot negotiate on the position.
The fifth tip is to put one self in the shoes of the opponent – see why he wants to stick to his ground? What are his compulsions and interests? And how he be helped or facilitated by your offers. If a person is listened to in a friendly manner, he is likely to give in more rather than taking. And that is only possible if you know what he is thinking.
The sixth tip is to always clarify your doubts with regard to your queries. And make sure you word the questions in such a manner that the opponent is left with no choice to agree to you. Always ask open ended questions that give an opportunity to the other to freely express his feelings rather than putting across closed end questions that leave no choice for him and such questions often intimidate a person and resultantly an end to the discussion without any decision.
And the last tip (with me, as the tips can be many) is that in an argument, always intelligently admit your mistakes. This would help you point an additional point on your opponent and he will take it as a sign of your competence, maturity and good manners. And it is more than likely to scale down the otherwise rising tempo of the discussion.
The word communication described in the Webster's Dictionary means "sending, giving, or exchanging information and ideas." This can be done by the word of mouth, motions of any kind/method or visual presentations. No matter which means is used, its purpose needs to be effectively fulfilled. Many people though very eloquent and fluent in their speech fail to bring home the point they are trying to put across simply because of poor communication skills. Therefore communication skills revolve around listening effectively (it is only then you can understand others view point and respond befittingly), speaking fluently and clearly, writing well and reading in the language/s the target audience is familiar with.
Francis Jock in one his articles on communication skills writes, “In the dynamic business world of today, employer communication skills can make the difference between business success and business failure.” And how so very true. The business world is all about the communication skills of managers, workers and the consumers. The more effectively one side puts across one’s point of view or requirement, more easily it is understood and translated into actions required at each end.
Thus in corporate and business world, every single individual should be well equipped with the necessary skills to communicate effectively. Although, as one climbs up the ladder, one has to advance one’s communication skills accordingly to be able to undertake and discharge one’s obligations more effectively. The management gurus are of the opinion that being a good communicator is half the battle won. Therefore, as managers, it is of utmost importance to polish one’s communication skills and this should take precedence over everything as without understanding others view point of view, one cannot express one’s response effectively and forcefully to be accepted.
Communication skills include lip reading, finger-spelling, sign language beside fluent speaking and expressing oneself. One should try to speak fluently and try to make sure people can hear him when one speaks. It should also be ensured that while communicating proper grammar and language is used. The target audience should be talked to in the language they “easily” understand. While communicating, one shouldn’t rush with the words. Rushed words normally shroud the following words and the speech becomes blurred and un-understandable. Therefore listen carefully and speak slowly so the other person can decipher what is being said.
Business is all about the market, profit and the people. And it is the hard task of a manager to ensure high profit from the market by getting people under him to work efficiently to reach the goalpost set by him or his management. It is people on both side of the fence – workers/team mates on one side and buyers on the other side. A manager has thus have to fight both on and off the fence. While he can only understand the buyers, he has a hard task managing and leading the people under him for the realization of his goals. Thus the need for effective management of human resources or simply the HRM.
Before we proceed further, it may be clarified here that HRM and HRD (Human Resource Development) are two different things, often confused by many. While the HRM is a major management activity, HRD is a profession and deals with the development of available human resources to suit to perform specific functions in an organization. We will talk of HRD separately in later posts.
Coming back to HRM, the function includes a long list of actions and activities, some of which include deciding the staffing needs, and how to make the staff available (whether to use independent contractors or hire employees to fill these needs). And once the HR is available, it planning and allocating of resources for the task in hand. This would then demand providing direction, vision, and goals and developing an environment in which employees choose motivation and contribution.
Once the HR is put to work, challenge the workers to keep the momentum by removing obstacles that impede the employee's progress. And while all this is being done, the manager himself has to set examples in work ethics, treatment of people, and empowerment worthy of being emulated by others.
While the manager is managing the HR for his and the organization’s benefit by increasing production and profits, the HRM also demands of him to keep interests of the HR he is utilizing and directing, in mind. He should see to the employees are equally benefited out of the profit and compensated in case of low profits due to market trends.
Along with the HRM function, a manager has also to ensure proper HRD so that workers are offered opportunities for both formal and informal development by coaching successful contribution and performance development. So while HRM is a function of the manager, HRD by him ensures availability of highly trained workers to aid him in allocation to suit to different specialist tasks.
Many people ask why we talk of leaders in management affairs as those in charge of affairs in business are called managers and not leaders. They are right in a manner that officially there are no leaders – everyone in one capacity or the other is a manager in the hierarchy of an organization.
But if we look back, the genesis of management and the notion managers is not very old. The concept of management was born in the 19th century and was subsequently developed and its various theories evolved based on the military’s concept of command and control. Management is nothing, thus, planning, organizing, co-coordinating and implementing of policies (called strategy and tactic in the armies) of the “top management”. And we want to sum up all these functions in one word, we can call it “administration”, and so do all studies of business are in fact called “business administration.”
Now here comes the “manager.” He/she is the person, who has been given certain “powers” by the organization to perform managerial functions. So going by this analogy, a manager wields his/her authority by the powers of the managerial system through which team mates, colleagues, workers yield to the directions of the manager to carryout the tasks assigned to them. Here please note that so far we are concentrating on the working on the entire team based on the “authority” every individual has in the hierarchy of the organization.
Then we need leaders? There is no mention of leaders in the management tree of any organization. So who are these people? Are they some unseen forces, secretly paid by the organization or what? The answer lies still in the militaries. While all “commanders” have authority to command their troops, not all of them are remembered in the history. There must have been millions and millions of commanders in the past, but the world history lists only a few and still remembers them with awe.
In fact here come in those secret hidden thing we call “leadership.” It is something that pulls others towards a person – an aura or charisma that makes people look towards a person with confidence that whatever that person says or does, will be done, no matter how incongruous, with no questions asked. Commanders with or without leadership qualities are paid alike, but those with leadership qualities rise high, earn good name and become immortal for time immemorial. And so do the managers with leadership qualities.
In an organization, only those managers rise or are respected who can influence workers by virtue of their character, drive, enthusiasm, communication skills and motivational skills. These extra qualities make a successful manager. A manager who leads and not directs. A person who wields authority by his personal drive and character that inspires people to follow, to be loyal, andto producerather than the powers written in the green book of the organization. Those managers that do not have specific leadership qualities and talents either remain unproductive or have to work much harder to produce results for the organization.
So be a manager to lead not to command. That’s in nutshell the difference between a manager with or without leadership qualities.
In part of Leadership Style in my earlier post, I talked of three basic and most referred to leadership styles. But those three styles are too restrictive as human beings are very vibrant and cannot restrict these three rigid style only. Therefore by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton in the early the 1960s came up with their famous “Managerial Grid” or Leadership Grid, which is more dynamic, elaborative and suites various moods, conditions and business environment.
Here it may again be stressed that like earlier three styles, these styles are also not static or restrictive. One can adopt as many number of styles to suit a given situation at different times within a same process or can even combine two or more simultaneously.
The model plots task on one axis and people on the other and then draws a relationship of a leader with the two as we shall see now. Before going over the model, following may be understood for better comprehension of the grid system:-
Concern for People - This is the degree to which a leader considers the needs of team members, their interests, and areas of personal development when deciding how best to accomplish a task
Concern for Production - This is the degree to which a leader emphasizes concrete objectives, organizational efficiency and high productivity when deciding how best to accomplish a task.
Based on the two concerns, Blake and Mouton slide either or both on the axis to find a suitable style for a leader. And have come up with the Five following styles:-
Country Club Leadership (High People - Low Production). In this style, the leader is more concerned about the needs and feelings of his team, rather than the production. Although making one’s team happy and satisfied should be the leader’s concern, but this generally has its adverse effects on the targeted goals and the reduction which would either be not met or with little success.
Produce or Perish Leadership (High Production - Low People). This model can be related with the Authoritarian or Compliance type of Leaders. And as the name suggests, the prime target is the production and the goals, which must be met at all costs. And quite obviously, ruthlessness would have no room for the welfare of the workers. This type of leader is very autocratic, has strict work rules, policies, and procedures, and views punishment as the most effective means to motivate employees.
Impoverished Leadership (Low Production - Low People). This is the case of inefficient leaders who are not concerned either with the production nor the needs of the workers. And such “leaders” soon perish and leaders with more dynamic personalities and style replace them.
-->
Middle-of-the-Road Leadership (Medium Production - Medium People). These are the people who tend to balance out both concerns, i.e. of the employees and the employer. Leaders who use this style settle for average performance and often believe that this is the most anyone can expect.
Team Leadership (High Production - High People). This is the most likeable model, both for the workers as well as the employers. These leaders stress production needs and the needs of the people equally highly. The premise here is that employees are involved in understanding organizational purpose and determining production needs. When employees are committed to, and have a stake in the organization's success, their needs and production needs coincide. This creates a team environment based on trust and respect, which leads to high satisfaction and motivation and, as a result, high production.
And as said before, like all other styles and theories, the managerial Grid also does not entirely address the complexity of finding, selecting and adopting a particular leadership style. However, it does provide a tool to critically analyze one’s performance and thereby improve one’s leadership skills.
But the theories and styles do not end here – the research moves on to find more dynamic styles that would ensure more productivity and also address the concerns of the team mates / workers.
We do realize that a manager without leadership qualities is hollow from inside. Lack of leadership qualities rob men and those at the helm of affairs of the energy, vision and the drive to lead people out of quagmire of business snags and stumbling blocks and lead them to the path of success, productivity and efficiency. Those who have the leadership qualities are basically humans and have their own way of doing things and in their own style. Style in which they have been groomed or nurtured or matured. It is not necessary that each leader with his own unique style will always be a winner since the style application according to the circumstances may sometime even lead to distress, even though a leader may be applying his abilities positively in his own right.
The style of a leader thus pays a significant role in the success or otherwise of his efforts to win over a situation or take his team to success. This post therefore talks of leadership styles and after its review, the reader can judge for himself which style should be followed to be successful. There would be occasions that an amalgamation of style s may provide the best answer to a situation.
Generally, there are three basic styles of leadership: autocratic, democratic and delegative. But to elaborate these, few more styles have also been added to the list to be more specific, which will be covered in our subsequent post.
Autocratic Leadership: As the name implies, autocratic leaders are in charge and simply tell their employees what they want done and how they want it accomplished, without getting the advice of their followers. It is usually considered as an extreme form of leadership style wherein the leader is the reigning king and subjects are to obey and not reason why , even if these would be in the team's or organization’s interest. Obviously, normally a much liked style as the team’s output does not benefit from the creativity and experience of all team members, so many of the benefits of teamwork are lost. Therefore this style may be used very sparingly and with extreme caution like when there is no time, and the leader has all the information to solve the problem and the workers understand the limitation (being highly motivated). Even for some routine and unskilled jobs, this style could apply, where the advantages of control outweigh the disadvantages.
-->
Democratic Leadership: Well democracy is democracy – the more the say – the more the rated decision. But it isn't the way democratic assemblies work where more thumbs means unanimity. Here, the democratic leadership is based on working together in a way that the leader includes one or more team-mates in the decision making process, and NOT everyone, while retaining the power to take the final decision with himself. This kind of leadership actually display a trust of the leader in his team-mates and draws respect and better teamwork and is usually done when leader may not have all the knowledge and would like to involve those with the requisite know-how. Like for instance the plant supervisor who can better advise on the working of the plant rather than the leader himself who may not be technically sound. Delegative Leadership: This style suits best in bigger projects which involves various segments working independently and at the end all outputs merging together for the final output. Like for instance a food processing process in which packing is made somewhere else, and food is processed somewhere else and preservative mechanism working independently. But when coming together, all are packed at one place. So different sub-leaders working independently for an ultimate common goal. In this case the project leader is one, responsible for the whole project and has his responsibility as a whole. But at the same time, if anything goes wrong, the project leader is to be held responsible. If he at that time start the blame game, then that’s not delegative leadership. This works well when the entire team is highly professional, well trained, motivated, spirited, productive and extremely loyal to the leader. And need less to mention that no single style can be a perfect model for it cannot encompass every situation nor we can have leaders to suit different situations. A good leader has to transform himself according to the situation and wear a style suiting to the situation. That is to say that an amalgamation of traits of all three styles is the best suited approach. That’s good leadership.
The dilemma many a manager face in planning, organizing, implementing and controlling their assignment is their feeling as if they are not “in charge” of the things and remain worried about it more than the actual things. As a result, the lose concentration, focus and are unable to realize their goals. This happens when one is not “in charge”. While the solution is very simple, it needs a resolve and commitment on the part of the managers. Let us see how.
Be a Leader: Although by appointment and designation one is a manager, one needs to be a leader first. It will only be then your teammates and co-workers would gather around you and “follow” you for better or worse. Look around and see for yourself why certain managers are more successful – they are revered for their leadership qualities. Their colleagues and subordinates feel attracted to them and give in their willing response in whatever they are called to do. But at the same time remember you don’t have to announce that you are a leader, you have to prove it to others by your deeds, actions and even through your body language. Don’t appear pulled down, looking for crutches or the management for answers to your problems – be “in charge” and look like one. That’s the first step and that’s something that would make the difference.
Be a Communicator: Unless a leader is a good communicator, he cannot assemble people to listen to him. If he cannot communicate – he cannot motivate. So sharpen your communication skills. Practice communicating by solving a problem through different techniques so that if one technique doesn't accrue desired results, you have a few other options up your sleeve. Let there be two way communication, both vertical and horizontal so that everyone understands you, you vision and your goals. Once you do that, you are in a much better position to motivate them for drawing their willingness to work with you and for you.
Be a Motivator: If you really have leadership qualities, you will be a good motivator as well. As I wrote in one of my earlier posts, “Leaders do not push or pull – they don’t even motivate. They simply create an environment in which people motivate themselves.” So create that environment, wherein your team automatically elevate their esteem and spirits to work for you.
-->
Team Selection: If you have been able to demonstrate your leadership qualities, then you would know what kind of people you would like in your team – look for willing, extroverts with a shine in their eyes. People who would be willing to follow you whenever and wherever called upon. A like minded group of colleagues and co-workers should form your team to take on the assignment at hand.
TeamBuilding: Next comes the team building – this is most important. Even if you draw their support, they need to be embedded into a perfectly grind machine work. There are no individuals in a team. Every member of the team works for the team and not for personal gains. No one is “I” or “me” – everyone begins with “we” or “us”. A team is thus a group of highly motivated, efficient, trained and honest workers working hands in glove for the attainment of a common goal. That’s the team that would win you your goals.
Be Good at Finance Management: When given a project, you would be allocated a certain sum of money and resources. But remember the one who is giving you money is not doing it so that you go partying with your team. What he wants from you is to return him any multiples of the same since he is not only to run his business, but also to stay in it and be competitive. So be proficient in handling financial matter – spend less, bring more profit.
Efficient Time Management: In business, time is money – any amount of time wasted wastes money. Be good at managing the time at our disposal. Plan in a manner that you realize your goals in the least permissible or possible time. There will be spare time to rejoice and relax if you are productive. So when at work, devote yourself fully to the project to reach to your goals. However remember, time management doesn’t mean killing your self to beyond the limits, ignoring friends and family. Time management means apportioning time for everything and yet still be productive and successful.
Learn and Improve Skills in the Process: The more one is focused and dedicated to one’s job and assignment, the more one learns. The more one learns, the more he one becomes aware of one’s shortcomings and strengths. Everyday take a time out, review your day and analyze why you lagged behind on a certain aspect. And find ways and means to improving upon it the next day. Don’t be shy of hiding your weakness like an ostrich – those who learn the hard way, never commit mistakes again.
These are some of the tips that can ensure a place for you in your organization and let people know that who really is “IN CHARGE.”
Leadership in Management? – No way, many would respond as they find leadership a threat to the set rules of the management. But given a cool thought, at least I am convinced that management and leadership are two inseparable twins who make a perfect winning combination for better productivity, management and working environment.
Leadership has since ages belonged to the military. And the basic work on leadership skills and theories mainly related to the military. But lately, more research work has gone in for its application in the business as the forces acting on the process of business are much more fierce, ruthless and damaging than in the military. The only difference being that in military, leadership failure results in loss of land and human lives while in business, lack of leadership qualities result in crumbling of business empires, drastic fall in productivity and profits. Today in the corporate world, the business warfare even brings two countries to war.
So what is leadership and how does it relate to business and management. Lets first define leadership.
Leadership
Leadership being a very rare quality in humans needs to be defined and worded very carefully as a loose statement may undermine the very basis of leadership concept.
Leadership is influence exuding from character. If there is no influence over people, they will not follow. If one wants to be a leader, one has to learn how to develop one’s influence. The amount of influence one has will be determined by what kind of person one is ---one’s character, which will also determine the type of people who will. So to start with, this is one simple definition which brings in “influence over people.” The more a person wields influence over the people around him, more leadership quality he would be possessing.
Now another definition says, “Leadership is the art of motivating a group of people to act towards achieving a common goal.” It is the same influence which has now been given the name of “art of motivation”. The achievement of a common goal is must. If the goal of leader and the led is different, the desired effects cannot be obtained. Taking into a negative sense, many a times it so happens that certain people have a hidden agenda, and while apparently they seem to be propagating for the achievement of the same goal, they may in fact be striving for their own personal gains or hat of others. This is what the vagabonds do. And one finds many such leaders in our lives (I wont go into giving examples).
Lets see how personalities describe leadership. "My definition of a leader . . . is a man who can persuade people to do what they don't want to do, or do what they're too lazy to do, and like it." — Harry S. Truman, ( once President of the United States). The definition is speaks for itself. Getting a willing response from people even if they don’t like it or arousing a people otherwise not wanting to do a thing but when they do it they find it to be “The” thing they had not been wanting to do.
"I am looking for a lot of men who have an infinite capacity to not know what can't be done." — Henry Ford
-->
Management
"A manager takes people where they want to go. A great leader takes people where they don't necessarily want to go but ought to." — Rosalyn Carter
Managers have subordinates and are “PAID” to get things done (they are subordinates too). Unless they are paid they don’t work. So it defines them as paid employees who do not do anything voluntarily or something not paid for.
Difference Between Leadership and Management
Taking from the last definition of the managers, the difference between managers and leaders is working for pay or voluntarily. This doesn’t mean that a manager cannot be a leader. In fact doing a little beyond his sphere of duty/charter of work voluntarily makes a manager a leader as well.
So leader is someone with an aura, a charisma and a unique quality to take people where they don’t want to go but ought to go. I could go on and on to describe what and who is and should be a leader but above few quotes and definitions are adequate to describe the person of a leader.
But see the last definition, which also talks of a manager. From here the difference start between a manager and a leader. Managers control or direct people/resources in a group according to principles or values that have already been established. While on the contrary, Leaders set a new direction or vision for a group that they follow, i.e.: a leader is the spearhead for that new direction. When a leader acts as a figure-head without setting any direction, technically this is not leadership. So a leader must set a direction or a goal to strive for. And while the management is about directing and controlling according to established principles.
Having said that, let us also realize that leadership without management or management without leadership is meaningless. Both are required to take advantages of their strengths to over come the inherent weakness.
We will continue to write more on leadership and management skills in our future posts.
One of my blogger friends is weary of mine talking of Stick and Carrot technique to motivate or “coerce” (as he sees it) the workers to add productively and substantially towards the organization. Well the Stick and Carrot is one of the means to achieve the desired output from the workers – but it is generally seen as a negative rather than a positive methodology to be applied to the workers. But this is just one of the theories as there are many more that have been propagated, applied, accepted or rejected and viewed as motivating or de-motivating means. In fact no single theory can answer all the questions or serve as a role model universally or generally.
Today we will focus on Maslow’s “Hierarchy of Needs” theory as a means of motivation.” In his theory, Abraham H Maslow attempts to formulate a needs based framework to motivate “humans” rather than some earliest theorists whose theories were based upon the animal behaviour or instincts. Maslow asserts that human beings can be motivated by their unsatisfied needs, which he says is a healthy phenomenon that can lead us to self-actualization. A leader therefore has to understand the needs for individual workers. The Maslow’s model indicates that fundamental, lower-order needs like safety and physiological requirements have to be satisfied in order to pursue higher-level motivators along the lines of self-fulfilment.
The Maslow’s model has been constructed into five tiers as the figure below indicates.
Let us analyse the Maslow’s triangle from the lowest level:
Physiological Needs: These needs are the very basic need of any human being. According to Maslow's theory, unless a man has his very basic needs attended to our fulfilled, he will remain unproductive, and uncertain of his involvement in any organization’s productivity. So long he is embattled in fulfilling his basic needs, he is not looking any ladder upward. So the minimum motivation must address his physiological needs.
Safety and Security Needs: As he feels comfortable as regard to his very basic needs, he tends to look beyond himself and brings into his family’s food and medical need, security and safety of his employment and saving something for the rainy days. These will ensure his security from physical and emotional harm.
Love and Belonging Needs: As a person moves to the fulfilment of his send tier of needs, for him his status in the society assumes added importance. He would now be held in some status to which he interacts and want to belong.
Esteem Needs: Everyone wants a Philip on his shoulder for his hard work and productivity and kept in a high esteem than the rest for his dedication and sincerity. Esteem needs are thus about being given recognition for a job well done. They reflect the fact that many people seek the esteem and respect of others. A verbal appreciation in front of other, a pay raise or best a promotion at work might achieve this.
The Need for Self Actualization: This is the final culmination of a persons long and laborious way up at the top.This is the stage when one wants to puts in everything that he has learnt so far and do something for which he be remembered. The reward may not be from people around him but it would be a satisfaction from within that comforts him. This is often measured by the extent of success and challenge at work or something that one has been wanting to do but wasn’t in apposition to accomplish. Now sitting at the top, he can fulfil his dreams, aspirations and desires for his very own satisfaction. According to Maslow, only a small percentage of the population reaches the level of self- actualization.
Maslow's model is one of the most talked of motivational model and has great potential appeal in the business world. If applied intelligently, the management can find out the satisfaction of needs of their employees, and having reached a particular level, suitable rewards can benefit both the workers and the organization. This also helps in growth of the workers both professionally and personally. The satisfaction of needs make them work harder to attain the next level for themselves, their families, friends, society and of course the organization they work for. Maslow’s self actualization has always been subjected to criticism. Some are of the opinion that even when some people may have been deprived of lower level needs, they would still strive for self actualization. Maslow is been criticised for his vagueness for he was not very scientific in his investigations. He liked lists (lists of characteristics of self-actualizers, lists of objectives for future humanistic psychologists, even lists of possible research projects). But he never came up with actual relationship of his lists with his research.
Some people have objections to this approach. They are of the opinion that in today’s world, man’s needs are not one or restricted to a particular level. The needs are dynamic and at one time many other needs also need to be satisfied rather than restricting to one level. Likewise, it is difficult to ascertain that who has reached to which level. There may be individuals who may settle for lower salaries but for higher future benefits. But this is just a model and as said before, no model of motivation can satisfy all problems or could answer all questions. It is up to the management to intelligently apply one or more models simultaneously tailoring these to their specific requirement and environment.
