Leading vs Managing - Revision history

Chammerum at 22:36, 22 March 2022

2022-03-22T22:36:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:36, 22 March 2022
Line 128:		Line 128:
	The paper ''''Teaching Theory X and Theory Y in Organizational Communication'''' gives insight into the different ways companies approach handling managers and how communication is done within such organizations.<ref name="XY"/>		The paper ''''Teaching Theory X and Theory Y in Organizational Communication'''' gives insight into the different ways companies approach handling managers and how communication is done within such organizations.<ref name="XY"/>

	The article ''''Leadership vs Management'''' states the needs and advantages of the different styles. Knowing which style to choose and handle is a great asset for any organization or individual trying to change their way of working with subordinates.<ref name="~~LVM~~"/>		The article ''''Leadership vs Management'''' states the needs and advantages of the different styles. Knowing which style to choose and handle is a great asset for any organization or individual trying to change their way of working with subordinates.<ref name="LvM"/>

Chammerum at 22:36, 22 March 2022

2022-03-22T22:36:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:36, 22 March 2022
Line 128:		Line 128:
	The paper ''''Teaching Theory X and Theory Y in Organizational Communication'''' gives insight into the different ways companies approach handling managers and how communication is done within such organizations.<ref name="XY"/>		The paper ''''Teaching Theory X and Theory Y in Organizational Communication'''' gives insight into the different ways companies approach handling managers and how communication is done within such organizations.<ref name="XY"/>

	The article ''''Leadership vs Management'''' states the needs and advantages of the different styles. Knowing which style to choose and handle is a great asset for any organization or individual trying to change their way of working with subordinates.		The article ''''Leadership vs Management'''' states the needs and advantages of the different styles. Knowing which style to choose and handle is a great asset for any organization or individual trying to change their way of working with subordinates.<ref name="LVM"/>

Chammerum at 22:35, 22 March 2022

2022-03-22T22:35:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:35, 22 March 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:

	~~== Abstract ==~~
	Working with people as a superior, can be done in many ways and the decision to choose which one, can depend on the vision or what is needed. The two classic terms which gets referred to is leading and managing. The two methods is seen as different ways of working, leading is represented as the one standing in the front and leading his people. Managing is different as the superior is seen as the one commanding from the back and giving instructions.		Working with people as a superior, can be done in many ways and the decision to choose which one, can depend on the vision or what is needed. The two classic terms which gets referred to is leading and managing. The two methods is seen as different ways of working, leading is represented as the one standing in the front and leading his people. Managing is different as the superior is seen as the one commanding from the back and giving instructions.
	The two methods are often used simultaneously in companies to accomplish the visions set. The two methods are widely accepted as different, and people is acquired depending on which skill set they bring to a project. The skillset of leaders is inspiration, honesty, integrity, transparency, and communication, which all needed for people to follow and feel valuable. A manager is often described as focused, rule-bound, ability of being direct and being able to execute on a vision.		The two methods are often used simultaneously in companies to accomplish the visions set. The two methods are widely accepted as different, and people is acquired depending on which skill set they bring to a project. The skillset of leaders is inspiration, honesty, integrity, transparency, and communication, which all needed for people to follow and feel valuable. A manager is often described as focused, rule-bound, ability of being direct and being able to execute on a vision.
Line 120:		Line 118:

	== Industry needs ==		== Industry needs ==
	Companies today needs to adapt to survive, which often leads to change in vision and different styles of resource handling is needed. Analyzing a company is often a fast way to check if management or leadership is in use. The more traditional way of handling resources is managing, which goes very far back. The companies used their people as resources with very little engagement, as the workers had very single tasks as "pull that lever" or "hand peel fruits". In todays society those tasks are often automated and the need for people to do labor is more rare, but is still needed for specific and difficult processes. Managing was great back then as the workers was seen as labor/resources and the managers had to figure out how to use them efficiently. The contrast to that today is leadership which has a completely different sound and meaning to workers. Leaders are the ones leading the pack and setting a good example, this includes taking a big workload themselves and showing the rest how to do things effectively. The leaders has become a more popular way of handling resources as the world is moving more away from labor and more into a effective focused world. Managers used every drop resource to get the vision set complete, leaders use their resources more effectively and focus on how to get to the goal is more in focus. Managers focus is not on how the employees feel about the work but instead on accomplishing the vision set.<ref name="LvM"/>		Companies today needs to adapt to survive, which often leads to change in vision and different styles of resource handling is needed. Analyzing a company is often a fast way to check if management or leadership is in use. The more traditional way of handling resources is managing, which goes very far back. The companies used their people as resources with very little engagement, as the workers had very single tasks as "pull that lever" or "hand peel fruits".<ref name="Marketing"/> In todays society those tasks are often automated and the need for people to do labor is more rare, but is still needed for specific and difficult processes. Managing was great back then as the workers was seen as labor/resources and the managers had to figure out how to use them efficiently. The contrast to that today is leadership which has a completely different sound and meaning to workers. Leaders are the ones leading the pack and setting a good example, this includes taking a big workload themselves and showing the rest how to do things effectively. The leaders has become a more popular way of handling resources as the world is moving more away from labor and more into a effective focused world. Managers used every drop resource to get the vision set complete, leaders use their resources more effectively and focus on how to get to the goal is more in focus. Managers focus is not on how the employees feel about the work but instead on accomplishing the vision set.<ref name="LvM"/>
	This way if a managers is inserted into an area where customer interaction is key and the satisfaction of the employees is important to their willingness to interact with customers, the result might go down as the employees don't feel like one force working together. Inserting a leader in this area, should make the employees willingness to satisfy the customers much better and give a better experience to the customer. The same problem will arise if a leader is put into a managers role. Managers are great at utilizing resources, which leaders might be as well, but not in the same sense. Having a leader in a production facility where tasks are easy and time is minimal, there won't be time to motivate the employees or lead the pack. These facilities and situations change a lot which is the reason both roles are still in use today.		This way if a managers is inserted into an area where customer interaction is key and the satisfaction of the employees is important to their willingness to interact with customers, the result might go down as the employees don't feel like one force working together. Inserting a leader in this area, should make the employees willingness to satisfy the customers much better and give a better experience to the customer. The same problem will arise if a leader is put into a managers role. Managers are great at utilizing resources, which leaders might be as well, but not in the same sense. Having a leader in a production facility where tasks are easy and time is minimal, there won't be time to motivate the employees or lead the pack. These facilities and situations change a lot which is the reason both roles are still in use today.<ref name="Smarp"/>

Chammerum at 22:32, 22 March 2022

2022-03-22T22:32:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:32, 22 March 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~''''~~

	== Abstract ==		== Abstract ==

Chammerum at 22:30, 22 March 2022

2022-03-22T22:30:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:30, 22 March 2022
Line 121:		Line 121:

	== Industry needs ==		== Industry needs ==
	Companies today needs to adapt to survive, which often leads to change in vision and different styles of resource handling is needed. Analyzing a company is often a fast way to check if management or leadership is in use. The more traditional way of handling resources is managing, which goes very far back. The companies used their people as resources with very little engagement, as the workers had very single tasks as "pull that lever" or "hand peel fruits". In todays society those tasks are often automated and the need for people to do labor is more rare, but is still needed for specific and difficult processes. Managing was great back then as the workers was seen as labor/resources and the managers had to figure out how to use them efficiently. The contrast to that today is leadership which has a completely different sound and meaning to workers. Leaders are the ones leading the pack and setting a good example, this includes taking a big workload themselves and showing the rest how to do things effectively. The leaders has become a more popular way of handling resources as the world is moving more away from labor and more into a effective focused world. Managers used every drop resource to get the vision set complete, leaders use their resources more effectively and focus on how to get to the goal is more in focus. Managers focus is not on how the employees feel about the work but instead on accomplishing the vision set.		Companies today needs to adapt to survive, which often leads to change in vision and different styles of resource handling is needed. Analyzing a company is often a fast way to check if management or leadership is in use. The more traditional way of handling resources is managing, which goes very far back. The companies used their people as resources with very little engagement, as the workers had very single tasks as "pull that lever" or "hand peel fruits". In todays society those tasks are often automated and the need for people to do labor is more rare, but is still needed for specific and difficult processes. Managing was great back then as the workers was seen as labor/resources and the managers had to figure out how to use them efficiently. The contrast to that today is leadership which has a completely different sound and meaning to workers. Leaders are the ones leading the pack and setting a good example, this includes taking a big workload themselves and showing the rest how to do things effectively. The leaders has become a more popular way of handling resources as the world is moving more away from labor and more into a effective focused world. Managers used every drop resource to get the vision set complete, leaders use their resources more effectively and focus on how to get to the goal is more in focus. Managers focus is not on how the employees feel about the work but instead on accomplishing the vision set.<ref name="LvM"/>
	This way if a managers is inserted into an area where customer interaction is key and the satisfaction of the employees is important to their willingness to interact with customers, the result might go down as the employees don't feel like one force working together. Inserting a leader in this area, should make the employees willingness to satisfy the customers much better and give a better experience to the customer. The same problem will arise if a leader is put into a managers role. Managers are great at utilizing resources, which leaders might be as well, but not in the same sense. Having a leader in a production facility where tasks are easy and time is minimal, there won't be time to motivate the employees or lead the pack. These facilities and situations change a lot which is the reason both roles are still in use today.		This way if a managers is inserted into an area where customer interaction is key and the satisfaction of the employees is important to their willingness to interact with customers, the result might go down as the employees don't feel like one force working together. Inserting a leader in this area, should make the employees willingness to satisfy the customers much better and give a better experience to the customer. The same problem will arise if a leader is put into a managers role. Managers are great at utilizing resources, which leaders might be as well, but not in the same sense. Having a leader in a production facility where tasks are easy and time is minimal, there won't be time to motivate the employees or lead the pack. These facilities and situations change a lot which is the reason both roles are still in use today.

Line 127:		Line 127:
	== Annotated Bibliography ==		== Annotated Bibliography ==

	The paper ''''The leader's edge: the seven keys to leadership in a turbulent world'''' gives a short and exact way for leaders to stay on top of the competition. By combining different tools and aspects to be successful any leader can expand the qualities to become better.		The paper ''''The leader's edge: the seven keys to leadership in a turbulent world'''' gives a short and exact way for leaders to stay on top of the competition. By combining different tools and aspects to be successful any leader can expand the qualities to become better.<ref name="SevenKeys"/>

			The paper ''''Teaching Theory X and Theory Y in Organizational Communication'''' gives insight into the different ways companies approach handling managers and how communication is done within such organizations.<ref name="XY"/>

			The article ''''Leadership vs Management'''' states the needs and advantages of the different styles. Knowing which style to choose and handle is a great asset for any organization or individual trying to change their way of working with subordinates.


	<ref name="Smarp">https://blog.smarp.com/leadership-vs-management [Accessed on 19.3.2022]</ref>		<ref name="Smarp">https://blog.smarp.com/leadership-vs-management [Accessed on 19.3.2022]</ref>

Chammerum at 22:20, 22 March 2022

2022-03-22T22:20:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:20, 22 March 2022
Line 126:		Line 126:

	== Annotated Bibliography ==		== Annotated Bibliography ==

			The paper ''''The leader's edge: the seven keys to leadership in a turbulent world'''' gives a short and exact way for leaders to stay on top of the competition. By combining different tools and aspects to be successful any leader can expand the qualities to become better.

	<ref name="Smarp">https://blog.smarp.com/leadership-vs-management [Accessed on 19.3.2022]</ref>		<ref name="Smarp">https://blog.smarp.com/leadership-vs-management [Accessed on 19.3.2022]</ref>

Chammerum: /* Employees */

2022-03-22T22:13:44Z

Employees

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:13, 22 March 2022
Line 118:		Line 118:

	== Employees ==		== Employees ==
	Mental health and overall happiness has become a much bigger necessity for companies to value. Most ~~companies~~ nowadays don't just sell products, they sell a lifestyle or a story with the product. Marketing and atmosphere is a much more important part of consumers thoughts.<ref name="Marketing" /> When a customer walks into a shop they expect happy employees and to know that the they feel motivated and joy to go to work. Companies can very quickly get backlash if the employees don't feel like the company motivates or makes them happy to stay there. On the other hand if a companies employees don't feel like they are being used correctly or working on the wrong task, they might get unhappy as well. For companies to get the most out of their employees it is important to understand the types and how to support such employees. Categorizing people is often very difficult, but understanding your workers and their needs is essential for a company to run successfully. Belbin's team roles is a great tool for understanding the type of workers a company has<ref name="Belbin" />. Figuring out a team and maybe even designing a team around key aspects of job can be very beneficial in the long term. <ref name="BelbinLeader"/> A team having a singular leader for a group of people is more beneficial than having multiple or no leaders at all. Thus mixing both a manager and a leader for the employees does not make a great result.		Mental health and overall happiness has become a much bigger necessity for companies to value. Most organizations nowadays don't just sell products, they sell a lifestyle or a story with the product. Marketing and atmosphere is a much more important part of consumers thoughts.<ref name="Marketing" /> When a customer walks into a shop they expect happy employees and to know that the they feel motivated and joy to go to work. Companies can very quickly get backlash if the employees don't feel like the company motivates or makes them happy to stay there. On the other hand if a companies employees don't feel like they are being used correctly or working on the wrong task, they might get unhappy as well. For companies to get the most out of their employees it is important to understand the types and how to support such employees. Categorizing people is often very difficult, but understanding your workers and their needs is essential for a company to run successfully. Belbin's team roles is a great tool for understanding the type of workers a company has<ref name="Belbin" />. Figuring out a team and maybe even designing a team around key aspects of job can be very beneficial in the long term. <ref name="BelbinLeader"/> A team having a singular leader for a group of people is more beneficial than having multiple or no leaders at all. Thus mixing both a manager and a leader for the employees does not make a great result.

	== Industry needs ==		== Industry needs ==

Chammerum at 22:13, 22 March 2022

2022-03-22T22:13:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:13, 22 March 2022
Line 10:		Line 10:

	== Managing Styles ==		== Managing Styles ==
	When working in an environment as a manager, different styles can be used. It depends on the environment and the subordinates which is available to choose which style to go with. Coming into an environment where the subordinates is well trained and very self-sufficient one style may prioritized. Coming into a less trained and the subordinates are very needy in terms of attention from the manager or in need of help, then another form of managing is prioritized.		When working in an environment as a manager, different styles can be used. It depends on the environment and the subordinates which is available to choose which style to go with. Coming into an environment where the subordinates is well trained and very self-sufficient one style may prioritized. Coming into a less trained and the subordinates are very needy in terms of attention from the manager or in need of help, then another form of managing is prioritized. Making sure to change the style accordingly to the environment of the organization , is a great way to make the vision of the company is met. It is often not the manager who gets to choose his style but more so the company and the board above him. The manager become the head of subordinates which both the manager and the organization has to choose what the best match is. Taking the individual personality into consideration as much as the subordinates and the tasks needed to complete to be successful.

	=== Democratic Managing ===		=== Democratic Managing ===
Line 122:		Line 122:
	== Industry needs ==		== Industry needs ==
	Companies today needs to adapt to survive, which often leads to change in vision and different styles of resource handling is needed. Analyzing a company is often a fast way to check if management or leadership is in use. The more traditional way of handling resources is managing, which goes very far back. The companies used their people as resources with very little engagement, as the workers had very single tasks as "pull that lever" or "hand peel fruits". In todays society those tasks are often automated and the need for people to do labor is more rare, but is still needed for specific and difficult processes. Managing was great back then as the workers was seen as labor/resources and the managers had to figure out how to use them efficiently. The contrast to that today is leadership which has a completely different sound and meaning to workers. Leaders are the ones leading the pack and setting a good example, this includes taking a big workload themselves and showing the rest how to do things effectively. The leaders has become a more popular way of handling resources as the world is moving more away from labor and more into a effective focused world. Managers used every drop resource to get the vision set complete, leaders use their resources more effectively and focus on how to get to the goal is more in focus. Managers focus is not on how the employees feel about the work but instead on accomplishing the vision set.		Companies today needs to adapt to survive, which often leads to change in vision and different styles of resource handling is needed. Analyzing a company is often a fast way to check if management or leadership is in use. The more traditional way of handling resources is managing, which goes very far back. The companies used their people as resources with very little engagement, as the workers had very single tasks as "pull that lever" or "hand peel fruits". In todays society those tasks are often automated and the need for people to do labor is more rare, but is still needed for specific and difficult processes. Managing was great back then as the workers was seen as labor/resources and the managers had to figure out how to use them efficiently. The contrast to that today is leadership which has a completely different sound and meaning to workers. Leaders are the ones leading the pack and setting a good example, this includes taking a big workload themselves and showing the rest how to do things effectively. The leaders has become a more popular way of handling resources as the world is moving more away from labor and more into a effective focused world. Managers used every drop resource to get the vision set complete, leaders use their resources more effectively and focus on how to get to the goal is more in focus. Managers focus is not on how the employees feel about the work but instead on accomplishing the vision set.
	This way if a managers is inserted into an area where customer interaction is key and the satisfaction of the employees is important to their willingness to interact with customers, the result might go down as the employees don't feel like one force working together. Inserting a leader in this area, should make the employees willingness to satisfy the customers much better and give a better experience to the customer. The same problem will arise if a leader is put into a managers role. Managers are great at utilizing resources, which leaders might be ~~aswell~~, but not in the same sense. Having a leader in a production facility where tasks are easy and time is minimal, there won't be time to motivate the employees or lead the pack. These facilities and situations change a lot which is the reason both roles are still in use today.		This way if a managers is inserted into an area where customer interaction is key and the satisfaction of the employees is important to their willingness to interact with customers, the result might go down as the employees don't feel like one force working together. Inserting a leader in this area, should make the employees willingness to satisfy the customers much better and give a better experience to the customer. The same problem will arise if a leader is put into a managers role. Managers are great at utilizing resources, which leaders might be as well, but not in the same sense. Having a leader in a production facility where tasks are easy and time is minimal, there won't be time to motivate the employees or lead the pack. These facilities and situations change a lot which is the reason both roles are still in use today.

	~~==Utilisation of leadership and management in APPPM==~~

	== Bibliography ==		== Annotated Bibliography ==

	<ref name="Smarp">https://blog.smarp.com/leadership-vs-management [Accessed on 19.3.2022]</ref>		<ref name="Smarp">https://blog.smarp.com/leadership-vs-management [Accessed on 19.3.2022]</ref>
	<ref name="LvM"> Leadership vs. management, Weathersby, George B.Management Review; New York Vol. 88, Iss. 3, (Mar 1999): 5</ref>		<ref name="LvM"> Leadership vs. management, Weathersby, George B.Management Review; New York Vol. 88, Iss. 3, (Mar 1999): 5</ref>

Chammerum at 18:19, 22 March 2022

2022-03-22T18:19:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:19, 22 March 2022
Line 76:		Line 76:
	!Skill		!Skill
	!Explanation		!Explanation
	\|-Skill increase		\|-
	!Low to no skill development as the autorcratic manager hands out tasks which don't challenge the subordinates.		!Skill increase
	\|		\|Low to no skill development as the autorcratic manager hands out tasks which don't challenge the subordinates.
	\|-		\|-
	!Low motivation		!Low motivation

Chammerum at 18:18, 22 March 2022

2022-03-22T18:18:35Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:18, 22 March 2022
Line 26:		Line 26:

	{\| class="wikitable plainrowheaders"		{\| class="wikitable plainrowheaders"
	\|+ Table 1. Advantages of Democratic ~~managing~~ <ref name="XY"/>		\|+ Table 1. Advantages of Democratic Managing <ref name="XY"/>
	!Skill		!Skill
	!Explanation		!Explanation
Line 44:		Line 44:

	{\| class="wikitable plainrowheaders"		{\| class="wikitable plainrowheaders"
	\|+ Table 1. Disadvantages of Democratic ~~managing~~ <ref name="XY"/>		\|+ Table 1. Disadvantages of Democratic Managing <ref name="XY"/>
	!Skill		!Skill
	!Explanation		!Explanation
Line 57:		Line 57:
	==== Autocratic Managing ====		==== Autocratic Managing ====

	~~Advantages:~~
	{\| class="wikitable plainrowheaders"		{\| class="wikitable plainrowheaders"
	\|+ Table 1. Advantages of Autocratic ~~managing~~ <ref name="XY"/>		\|+ Table 1. Advantages of Autocratic Managing <ref name="XY"/>
	!Skill		!Skill
	!Explanation		!Explanation
Line 71:		Line 70:
	!Working optimally		!Working optimally
	\|When the only focus is create value in terms of money, then the manager often includes lean which makes sure everything that don't bring value is cut.<ref name="Lean"/>		\|When the only focus is create value in terms of money, then the manager often includes lean which makes sure everything that don't bring value is cut.<ref name="Lean"/>
			\|}

			{\| class="wikitable plainrowheaders"
			\|+ Table 1. Disadvantages of Autocratic Managing <ref name="XY"/>
			!Skill
			!Explanation
			\|-Skill increase
			!Low to no skill development as the autorcratic manager hands out tasks which don't challenge the subordinates.
			\|
			\|-
			!Low motivation
			\|As the subordinates don't have any voice and can feel suppressed do to no involvement in decision making.
	\|}		\|}