The Difference between Leadership and Management

Throughout history, leadership and Management have raised questions regarding similarities and differences in the definition. Boreland, Kane, and Burton (2014) define leadership as "an influence aimed at moving organizations, groups or groups of people toward an imagined future that depends upon alignment (2014). Management, as defined by Kotter, "is about coping with complexity. Leadership, by contrast, is about coping with change" (George, 2011). Leaders challenge the status quo while managers ensure goals are met. Through comparisons, John Kotter’s article and the textbook highlight several differences. Buy this excellently written paper or order a fresh one from acemyhomework.com

The first difference focuses on Management and developing what exists instead of implementing or creating change. In contrast, leadership seeks opportunity for change by bringing new vision and innovative ideas to ensure matching competition in a highly competitive market. In Management, this is an example of the power theory. “A leader is in a state (power) to offer guidance, direction, incentive, or punishment to his or her subordinates” (Borland, Kane, & Burton, 2014). Influence over people exists because of titles and job descriptions.

In contrast, leaders focus on the holistic development of the person and energize employees to focus on the employee and the organization's success. Third, management focus on the task in the present. However, leadership has a clear picture of the future for long term success. Leaders are put into positions because of their wide range of perceptions and the ability to see the bigger picture. Management involves instituting processes that are overlooked while monitoring results.

In contrast, (Kotter 1990a) helps people accept and move through change. Finally, Management relies on control, whereas leadership relies on trust. When employees understand vision along with goals, a positive culture is created and sustained. Leaders understand rewarding, motivating, and inspiring others to ensure employees are being heard as well as constantly having input to steer the direction of the company. A true leader does not have to use their title to motivate others, yet the vision's excitement has demonstrated the intention.

Per Kotter’s framework, organizing, and staffing versus aligning people, Athletic Directors (AD) deal with decisions each year when hiring staff to match the university's vision and goals. The AD must “ensure that plans are implemented precisely and efficiently. Leaders, however, look for the right fit between people and the vision” (Borland, Kane, & Burton, 2014).

Athletic Directors at the high school and Division III level must not only be strong leaders, but strong managers to continuously develop individually, their staff, and student-athletes. However, Athletic Directors at the Division I level and General Managers at the professional level must be strong managers to support the coach's vision to be the leader.

Everyone communicates, but few connect. Being a leader in sports has been defined by wins and losses, but it is what is communicated behind the scenes and publicly that make good leaders.

Works Cited

Borland, J. F., Kane, G. M., & Burton, L. J. (2015). Sports leadership in the 21st century

George, H.B.R.P.F.D.D.G. B. (2011). HBR's 10 Must-Read on Leadership (with featured article

"What Makes an Effective Executive," by Peter F. Drucker). [Yuzu]. Retrieved from https://reader.yuzu.com/#/books/9781422172025/