BA101 Week 2 Lecture
Congratulations on completing week one and move on to week two. Were going to be talking
about the functions of managers and leaders in business. So go ahead and select the lessons
tab at the top of your screen week two end in the getting started folder once you open the
getting started folder you'll see that this week we have two learning objectives. They are to
distinguish between management and leadership and to summarize the changing functions of
management and business organizations. Take a look at your activities for the week you do
have several articles that you'll be asked to read and their two lecturers went on leadership
versus management and another lecture on functions of management. Finally there is a
discussion question and an assignment of the four functions of management that you have to
complete by the end of week two. Again it is always a good idea to go ahead and print this out
and keep by your computer so that you can check off your activities as you complete them.
Let’s look at lecture one leadership versus management. During this lecture we will describe the
differences in leadership versus management. Many people use the words management and
leadership interchangeably without giving much thought to the differences between the two.
While these differences may seem subtle it's important to understand what it means to be a
manager as opposed to being a leader within an organization. I feel that having a deeper insight
into the differences could help us become more successful at those. Let’s begin by discussing it
needs a definition of both. Managing needs to direct and be responsible for subordinates
and/or resources leading is more about coming up with the vision motivating and inspiring
people to follow you and helping them buy into your vision. Leadership looks at the long-term
not just the here and now. A manager in an organization typically is focused on running the
day-to-day operations of the business and concentrate on the business becoming competitive
efficient and effective. In addition to directly supervising subordinates they develop monitor
and evaluate performance criteria. They establish budgets and design action plans for the
organization. On the other hand a leader in an organization is not necessarily involved with the
day-to-day operations and or running of the business. Oftentimes leaders do have direct
subordinates but instead they are responsible for creating and maintaining the company's
overall mission and vision. A leader is the visionary who looks ahead to where they want to see
the business in five years or 10 years. Leaders inspire employees to follow them and buy into
the vision. Leaders motivate employees by acting as role models - build the sense of community
within the organization as well as the local community and create an organizational culture and
environment where employees can both grow and develop themselves both as individuals as
well as employees. While both managers and leaders are important to an organization the
biggest difference between being a manager and a leader is the way you motivate people.
Generally speaking employees follow a manager because they have to but follow a leader
because they choose to. Making the leap from manager to leader is possible again while the
differences may be subtle, a newly promoted leader just needs to focus on the key areas below
and that is: employee morale, empowering employees, work life balance of employees, and
effective team building.
Lecture two in week 2 looks at the functions of management. I'd like to begin discussion by
defining what management is. Simply stated management is coordinating the activities of the
business by working with the people and resources of the organization to achieve its overall
goals. In today's hectic business world it is common for manager to wear several hats. Think of
it this way in many organizations the manager is not only the coach of the team but they are
also the cheerleader the umpire a groundskeeper all rolled into one. It doesn't matter what
your particular management style is there are 4 main functions that are required of all
managers. Part of being a manager is that your primary responsibility is usually to manage the
people who are actually doing the tasks not doing those tasks yourself. In my experience
understanding the basics of what a manager does will not only help you be a better manager
but will also help you become a better employee. Does that make sense?
Let’s take a look at the four main management functions. The first is planning which involves
most basic functions of management defining team goals developing strategies for reaching
goals and designing ways to merge and coordinate team activities.
Organizing tasks to accomplish the organization's goals and deciding what tasks are to be done
and who will do them
Then there is leading. Leading involves motivating employees. Positively influencing individuals
or teams as they perform tasks. Mentoring and coaching employees. And handling employee
behavior issues.
Finally there's controlling. Controlling involves evaluating if things are going as planned
monitoring and evaluating employee performance and correcting any employee issues.
under week two articles where three articles that you'll need to read but I'd like to turn your
attention to the article titled a new role for management in today's postindustrial organization
this was written by Mitch McCrimnon in August of 2010 but you’ll see that it's just as relevant
today. In many organizations employees know more about their work and their managers. This
reality should force organizations that still cling to the old top-down style of managing to
recognize that many employees today are very capable of managing themselves. This author
explains the why and how of the new style of managing for today. When we try to define
management our first thought is usually a manager who occupies the role and who has
authority over people but in the case of knowledge workers or people who manage themselves
management is seen as a process one which can engage everyone. Thus when we define
management is a role we restrict it to something that refers to managers only. Such a definition
is not only a limited one is one that does not account for the way in which work and
responsibility has changed. industrial age organizations were formal hierarchies that assigned
specific roles to employees the focus on roles put all power in the hands of managers who
covered employees by planning organizing and controlling their work. This is essentially what
made management of top-down restricting function today we talk of managing one's boss and
of having relationships with strategic partners, suppliers and customers. But if partners can
manage their relationships with each other then management cannot be a one sided
controlling activity and if you can manage your boss management isn't restricted to the use of
authority to control the people who report to you. Management is much more than what
managers simply do to get work done through employees. Today we can manage ourselves our
time and many other activities that don't require one to have a formal managerial role or even
to manage people. This is why today the function of management as distinct from the role of
the manager has become everyone's business. The truth is that the role of the manager is only
a particular application of management not the whole story of managing. A broader perspective
avoids the negative connotations so commonly attributed to management such as controlling
and restricting people. More over employee engagement especially with respect to innovative
knowledge workers cannot become a reality until we move beyond our industrial age definition
of a manager. In modern postindustrial organizations all employees need to manage. Selfmanaging teams use complex systems to help them manage their own work and precise
performance measures are openly accessible. Knowledge workers don't need to be told what to
do and often they know better than their managers. This article will outline how we should see
and define management for the 21st century by starting not with the role of the manager but
by seeing management as a process that can be led by all employees’ not just managers.
Let’s continue by talking about modern management defined. Management can be defined as
a way of achieving goals that add the most value. It’s about being sufficiently organized to
identify the right goals and best means for achieving them. To take a simple example whenever
you set priorities for yourself you're managing your time. Prioritizing means deciding which
activities are most likely to achieve a specific goal and which tasks are the most urgent or
important. Management is that like investing a process of allocating resources to obtain the
best return. Even if those resources are just your own time, knowledge, and experience. Clearly
it is possible for all employees to manage their own time and other personal resources without
occupying a formal managerial role and without managing people. Management is closely
linked to goal achievement. Suppose your goal is to develop a cure for a disease you could
achieve this goal in one of three ways by luck you could stumble on a cure while looking for
something in a disorganized wasteful manner exceeding your budget and alienating
stockholders or in a cost-effective inclusive way that makes the best use of all your resources. If
you preferred the third approach you are opting for management overlapping chaos. Everyone
has goals personal career business financial social learning and leisure among others. The fact is
that a managed approach and not necessarily regimentation will allow you to achieve more.
Front-line employees who have no one reporting to them routinely need to achieve multiple
targets and tight time frames. This is possible only if they manage key aspects of their working
time clearly they can manage a lot of things without having authority over people or
management title. One immediate benefit of adopting this perspective is that it allows us to
silence the call to banish management. Even without the complexity of the modern world no
one today can live without management. In fact complexities simply make management all the
more vital. Today we have self-managing knowledge workers and teams as a result the role of
manager needs to change. The function itself however is essential. The healing cry to get rid of
management is really a call to dismiss managers. Setting tradition aside we need to separate
management for managers and industrial age thinking treats them as one and the same which
is why management has been tarred with the same brush as managers. We need to see that
managers are just as critical as management itself. Management as we know it is not totally
without its supporters but even some of its champions are helping to sustain its industrial era
image. In his latest book managing management thinker and author Henry Mintzberg equates
management with the role of the manager thus distorting the role and overlooking how nonmanagers manage themselves and their own resources we need to rid ourselves of the concept
and practice of industrial age management but not managers. As organizations evolved to meet
new demands management must be reinvented and redefined accordingly. Importantly as well
industrial age managers need to be replaced by modern managers not by leaders.
Let’s look at the role of the manager. The operating style of industrial age managers is
represented by metaphor of the organization as person. Where the head things in the hands do
.it is no coincidence that employees were once called hired hands? The implication of this
metaphor is that managers do all the thinking of managing. The vision of employees as
unthinking hands to be moved about at will by a remote mind is unsustainable in an age of
empowerment and employee engagement. We only started to discourage managers in the
1980s when Japan's success in North America ignited the call to replace these same managers
with leaders. Previously management was regarded as a positive force in organizational life but
the 1980’s bandwagon was a case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Managers used
to have a choice of styles. Theory y people are responsible and can be trusted where theory x
people are responsible and need to be controlled but the 1980s called to replace managers
with leaders arbitrarily restricted managers to the theory X. style while gifting leadership with
the theory y style this move was made because we wanted leaders to take over the domain of
managers getting work done through people. This left us no way to differentiate managers
from leaders except through totally arbitrary style assignments. A broader definition of
management rids as of this negative image and supports two claims. The first is all employees
manage being more self-managing. They need to take more responsibility for ensuring that
they obtain the best return on all of their efforts and two if management simply means getting
work done in a way that makes the best use of all resources then there is no implication of
being rigidly controlling or canonistic. The modern manager needs to get work done through
engaged self-managing knowledge workers who are far cry from the hired hands of the
industrial age. The role of today's manager can be illustrated by four analogies. Today’s
managers need to behave something like investors, customers, sport coaches and partners.
Analogies are approximation otherwise they would be identical to the comparison objects and
not analogies at all. Thus, managers share some attributes with them, but not identical to any
of them
Let’s first take a look at managers as investors. They manage their resources to obtain the best
result. Their effectiveness is based on how well they use their resources. Managers differ from
investors and to respect. First knowledge workers want a say in what they do so any allocation
needs to be negotiated not decided unilaterally as an investor would do with his or her money.
Second managers actively develop people so they are not is arm's-length for the people they
manage as their investors.
Managers as customers. Customers as employees become more engaged their status changes
from simply being hired hands to be more like self-employed business people supplying
services to internal customers. In this relationship employees can be more proactive and able to
identify the needs of managers in deed astute employees might see needs that managers
overlook. This interaction involves two-way communication and negotiation not one-way top
down directing. Also enterprising employees might devise new services to sell to their
managers as a way of advancing their careers or building their businesses. Whenever
employees contribute ideas for process improvements to their bosses they can be framed
condescendingly as suggestion box material or more appropriately as attempts by employees to
sell their services to management. Employees who suggest a better way of managing some part
of the business and offer to do it themselves can in steps transform their roles into something
new. By thinking of themselves as operators of the business of serving their bosses of
customers and employees become more empowered to manage their own careers. When high
demand knowledge workers are in short supply they have more power than their customer the
boss. Such employees can easily move to new customers and being knowledgeable they might
offer more advice to their boss rather than the way around. So much for the belief that power
resides only at the top and all direction flows top down.
And finally what about managers and sport coaches. Professional golfers have coaches and
managers the latter help them with their business matters sponsorships and travel
arrangements however. This manager cannot fire the golfer is the other way around. The sports
managers a facilitator coordinator and advisor with no power to director control the golfer.
Modern business managers are moving in this direction although they will always be able to fire
the employees they manage. Still, when managing rare, expensive talent, they cannot fire them
without carefully weighing the consequences. In any case, modern managers do more coaching
and less directing so they need to behave more like coaches than industrial age managers. As
the power of knowledge workers grow they become more like partners then hired Toyota and
other smart companies forge partnerships with external suppliers. Employees are similarly
internal suppliers and partners. Still suppliers and employees can be fired unlike real partners
who must agree on appropriate severance. In the industrial age managers directed and
controlled the work of hired hands. In our postindustrial era managers operate more like
facilitators and instead of allocating resources like passive hands off investors that is without
much thinking they bring the right people together and engage them in planning the work and
coordinate the execution. By customers they monitor the progress of projects but they may
listen more often than provide one-way direction. In this context the acts of controlling morphs
into coaching, facilitating, nurturing, and developing. The conventional managerial functions of
planning and organizing directing and controlling become a shared activity or ones that are
completely delegated depending on the context. Management adapts to meet current needs
rather than hangs onto obsolete industrial age preconceptions.
changing how decisions are made by customers and investors managers retain the right to
decide whether and how much to invest or whether to use different resources but they can no
longer dictate if they hope to engage knowledge workers and reap the benefits of their full
potential. Now they have to ask what you think where they give orders instead of making the
decisions they need to involve employees by asking questions to draw solutions out of them.
This change in style, however, is not just a tactic to engage employees more deeply; it is
recognizing the reality that employees know as much or more than the manager. Being more
engaging and given to less distraction and direction are essential for making the best decisions.
transformational leadership or managerial motivation - the transformational leadership
bandwagon was launched in the 1980s not coincidentally at the same time that leaders were up
serving the role of managers. We used to say that managers had to motivate employees but
once managers were cast in the bad guy role of controlling disciplinarians - we needed
transformational leaders to inspire employees. Transformational leadership however is an
industrial age model because it portrays influences as a force that flows exclusively top-down.
Modern managers help employees find motivation through coaching. They help identify their
motivation and strengths. Managers then provide the kind of work that best leverages the
strengths. It’s like performing a strategic review of a business with a manager helps employees
discover their core strengths and then helps them channel their focus accordingly. Finding what
motivates particular employees is a process of discovery that is very much led by the employee.
Transformational leaders and industrial age managers operate with a boss knows best mindset.
This is why they try to inject motivation to employees in a one-way top-down manner.
Maintaining the status quo versus innovation - managers are often faulted for preserving the
status quo and blocking innovation. This accusation may have been justified for industrial age
managers but remember that the objective of managers is to achieve goals in a way that makes
the best use of all resources. All organizations have two objectives - to maintain today's
business profitability and to create the future through innovation. To foster innovation modern
managers act as facilitators and culture builders. They bring the right people and other
resources along with whatever support mechanisms are required to foster creative thinking. It’s
often said that leaders are creative while managers are not, but this again exemplifies industrial
age thinking and it’s a complete red herring because it forces exclusively on the individual in
charge which is consistent with one-way top-down mode of operating. The person in charge the
leader or manager does not need to be creative at all because the role properly fulfilled is one
of facilitating creative thinking in others. Managers can foster innovation with or without being
creative. Management reinvented and redefined as described at the resumes its rightful place
as a core driver of organizational performance. But what is there left for leadership to do?
Leadership is the process of influencing. Whenever any employee influences others to change
direction leadership has been demonstrated. Whether it's top-down or bottom-up. If leadership
is an influence process then it can make decisions thus all decisions are managerial actions even
strategic ones. A CEO shows leadership by promoting a new vision and knowledge workers
show leadership by promoting a new product. so why does this matter to achieve the level of
innovation required for competitive advantage today we need to achieve a better balance of
power throughout organizations and employees need to be more fully engaged in making
strategic decisions and in planning and organizing more of their own work. To break the
stranglehold of the organization as person metaphor employees need to share and strategic
thinking. Such ownership is the only way to achieve deep engagement. As a result managers
need to do less telling and as facilitators do more asking as in what to use think there is a trend
to view leadership in facilitative terms but this is really leadership usurping management
territory. Drawing solutions out of employees is a management technique, not a demonstration
of leadership. Keep in mind how Martin Luther King Jr. showed leadership. He didn’t facilitate
a meeting of stockholders. He spoke over their heads directly to the general public. He
challenged the status quo and called for change. He influenced people to change without the
power to decide anything for them. Competitive advantage depends on ridding ourselves of
industrial age notions of leadership and management. All employees can share in management
and show leadership, but only in postindustrial organization
Congratulations on completing the reading assignments in week two now before you're
finished with this week's work don't forget you do have to complete the discussion question
and you do have to complete the assignment. This week's discussion question revolves around
the issue of managers versus leaders and you need to discuss whether or not you were aware
of the differences between managers and leaders. Now if you've read this week's work you
know what the difference is but does it change your outlook on being a manager versus being a
leader? Why or why not. Don’t forget you have a participation requirement. This initial
substantial response needs to be in by day five and your replies to two other fellow students
within the course have to be done by day seven. Again don't forget that you do have a word
limit of between 75 and 150 words minimum for your responses and I agree or great job will
not count as a response to fellow student’s substantive reply. Your week two assignment is
about the four functions of management. Please remember that we're looking for critical
analysis which involves analysis, evaluation, synthesis, and summary. Simply writing a paper
where you describe what the four functions of management are and quote it word for word out
of your textbook will not get you a good grade on this paper. You need to show that you
understand the four functions of management and then provide some critical analysis with
that. Remember that there is a page length - your traditional paper should be 2 to 3 pages in
length. Now keep in mind that the total paper length does not include a title page does not
count references appendix , any of that ,it simply counts the body of the paper so the body of
the paper should be between 2 and 3 pages.
Weekly Related Readings
Leadership vs. Management - The Debate Continues!
The debate continues as to the difference between leadership and management. This article focuses on why that debate is so important.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/leadership-management-debate-continues-linda-marsh
How Leadership Differs from Management!
Leadership versus management, the fact is that being great at management does not necessarily equate to being a great leader.
http://www.leadership-tools.com/leadership-versus-management.html
A New Role for Management in Today's Post-Industrial Organization
When we try to define management, our first thought is usually of a manager who occupies a role and who has authority over people.
http://iveybusinessjournal.com/publication/a-new-role-for-management-in-todays-post-industrial-organization/
Please complete the following assignment, incorporating ideas and concepts from the week's
lecture and/or articles. Please feel free to incorporate outside resources as well. When completing
your assignment, please make sure to double space your paper.
Traditional Paper
Research, identify and discuss the basic functions of management. Also, explain which function
you feel is most important and why.
The requirements below must be met for your paper to be accepted and graded:
• Write between 500 – 750 words (approximately 2 - 3 pages) using Microsoft Word.
• Attempt APA style, see example below.
• Use font size 12 and 1" margins.
• Include cover page and reference page.
• At least 60% of your paper must be original content/writing.
• No more than 40% of your content/information may come from references.
• Use at least two references from outside the course material, preferably from EBSCOhost.
Text book, lectures, and other materials in the course may be used, but are not counted
toward the two reference requirement.
Reference material (data, dates, graphs, quotes, paraphrased words, values, etc.) must be
identified in the paper and listed on a reference page.Reference material (data, dates, graphs,
quotes, paraphrased words, values, etc.) must come from sources such as, scholarly journals
found in EBSCOhost, online newspapers such as The Wall Street Journal, government websites,
etc. Sources such as Wikis, Yahoo Answers, eHow, etc. are not acceptable.
Please complete the following assignment, incorporating ideas and concepts from the week's
lecture and/or articles. Please feel free to incorporate outside resources as well. When completing
your assignment, please make sure to double space your paper.
Traditional Paper
Research, identify and discuss the basic functions of management. Also, explain which function
you feel is most important and why.
The requirements below must be met for your paper to be accepted and graded:
• Write between 500 – 750 words (approximately 2 - 3 pages) using Microsoft Word.
• Attempt APA style, see example below.
• Use font size 12 and 1" margins.
• Include cover page and reference page.
• At least 60% of your paper must be original content/writing.
• No more than 40% of your content/information may come from references.
• Use at least two references from outside the course material, preferably from EBSCOhost.
Text book, lectures, and other materials in the course may be used, but are not counted
toward the two reference requirement.
Reference material (data, dates, graphs, quotes, paraphrased words, values, etc.) must be
identified in the paper and listed on a reference page.Reference material (data, dates, graphs,
quotes, paraphrased words, values, etc.) must come from sources such as, scholarly journals
found in EBSCOhost, online newspapers such as The Wall Street Journal, government websites,
etc. Sources such as Wikis, Yahoo Answers, eHow, etc. are not acceptable.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment