There are some differences and similarities between the concepts of management and leadership. Leadership can be defined in many different ways. There are many theories and researches on leadership, each with their own definitions of leadership and management. According to Batten, 'Leadership is Development of a clear and complete system of expectations in order to identify, arouse and use the strengths of all resources in the organization - the most important of which is people' (Batten, 1991). The trait approach was the first systematic way to study leadership in 20th century. According to trait approach "no consistent set of traits differentiated leaders from non-leaders. 'According to trait approach, a person who is working as a leader in one situation might not have been a good leader in another situation. 'It was re-conceptualized as a relationship between people as opposed to a set of traits' (Stogdill, 1948). The trait approach focuses on the leader and not on the followers. It suggests that organizations will run smoother if people in management positions have designed leadership profiles. According to my view, this approach is not a useful approach for training and development of leadership. This theory has also failed to take situations into account.
The skills approach is the other kind of approach made to the leadership. This approach is mainly emphasizes the capability of the leader. The advantage of this approach is anyone can become an effective leader. The skills approach is descriptive, describing leadership from a skills perspective. It provides structure for effective leadership. This approach provides a structure for leadership education and training. Also, this theory says that everyone can learn skills and then become strong leaders. 'Factors in a leader's situation that lie outside the leader's competencies, characteristics, and experiences are environmental influences (for example, available technology, subordinates competencies', task complexity or communication quality). Environmental influences are a part of the skills model but not usually under the control of the leader' (Northouse, 2007). According to my view, this theory seems to be more emphasis on skills and not enough on leadership. This may cause over confidence on peoples and cause failure. It doesn't define how each component of the skills style will impact performance. This theory doesn't explain how variations can affect performance. The approach is new and has not widely used in leadership settings.
Style approach is one of the main approaches toward leadership and management. Style approach emphasizes the behaviour of the leader. It deals with how leader do their work and how they act. The style approach increases the scope of leadership research to include the behaviours of leader and what they do in different situations. The style approach can be easily applied in organizations. It forms like a mirror for managers that help them understand how they perform as a manager. 'The style approach is heuristic in providing a broad conceptual map that is worthwhile to use in attempts to understand the complexities of leadership. Based on this approach, leaders can assess their actions and determine how they could improve their leadership style' (Northouse, 2007). In my view, this approach has not adequately shown how leaders' styles are associated with performance outcome. It has failed to find out a common universal style of leadership that could be effective in almost every situation.
Fiedler's contingency theory is another theory that deals with management. This model is supported by a great deal of empirical research. According to Fiedler's contingency theory there is no best way for managers to lead. The manager should be capable to create different leadership style for different situations. The style which works in one environment may not work in another. Fiedler looked at three elements that decide leader's situational control. These elements are task structure, leader/member relation, Position power. Fiedler's model paved the way for other theories that have no one perfect style of leadership such as Hersey and Blanchards's Situational Leadership. 'Contingency theory, although having several strengths, generally falls short in trying to explain why leaders with certain leadership styles are effective in some situations but not others. It is also criticized that LPC scale validity as it does not correlate well with other standard leadership measures. Contingency theory also fails to adequately explain what should be done about a leader/situation mismatch in the workplace' (Northouse, 2010).Â According to my point of view this model is inflexible and ignores a leader's presence. It fails to explain, why individuals with certain leadership styles are more effective in some situations than in others. This model is hard to apply in practice. It requires analysing the leader style and three relatively complex situational variables
According to Blanchard and Hersey, Situational approach is the most widely recognized approach in 70s. This theory is based on Reddin's 3-D management style theory. This theory is used extensively in organizations for training and development. 'To achieve the effective leadership the leader should diagnose the development level of subordinates in a task situation and exhibit the prescribed leadership style that matches that situation' (Northouse, 2007). This theory says that different condition need different kind of leaderships. This theory is very practical and prescriptive; it tells when to do and what to do in difficult conditions. According to my view, there have been only a few research studies conducted to support this theory. Demographic characteristics such as education, age, experience and age are not considered in the situational approach.
There are many distinctions between the concepts of management and leaderships. The managers are administers and leaders are innovates of the organization. The managers can make development to the organization and can decide what development should be done and how to do it. The leader mainly focuses of peoples and their works and managers focus on system and structure. The managers have a short-range view on the organization but leader has a long-range perspective. Leaders know their own strengths and weakness. They can make arguments and timely decisions. The qualities of leadership are motivation, courage, decisiveness, initiative, integrity, loyalty, knowledge, ability to communicate, judgment etc. and qualities of management are authority, discipline, unity of command, subordinate of individual interests, specialization of labour, initiative etc. Although there are some differences between leadership and management, they are identical in practice. All the above qualities of manager are vital for an effective leader.
Leadership and management are often confused to be same. Both, management and leadership are aiming the development of organization and completing the goal. Both organize and utilise resources to achieve their roles. Both depend upon subordinates and try to motivate them to increase the productivity.
In conclusion, Leadership and manager must go in hand to hand. They are practically similar and identical. Leadership is about getting management to do the things that need to done. Management is about doing the things that leaders believe is critical to the success of the organization. "The art of getting things done through people"(Mary Parker Follett (1869). In short, being a successful leader also means having the skills and ability to be an effective manager. Managers can display leadership abilities. Contrariwise, leadership efforts can help to become a good manager. There for it is safe to say that you have to be a good leader to become an effective leader.