Leadership is the power/ability to act upon a group of people toward the accomplishment of ends set by an administration. It involves set uping a clear vision. sharing that vision with other people and supplying the cognition and method to recognize the vision. Covering with things and people or commanding things and people is all what directors do. Peter Drucker ( 1909-2005 ) stated the basic undertaking of direction includes both selling and invention. Directors are responsible for pull offing others in a company or concern and controlling resources and outgo. Some people argue that leading is merely one facet function of the direction. Others argue that the part of leaders and directors is different ; leaders have followings. directors have subsidiaries. people who follow their regulations and work under them. Leaderships are largely seen as visionaries and they drive new enterprises ; in contrast directors look to accomplish stableness. Harmonizing to Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus ( 1985 ) directors do things right. while leaders do the right thing. Making the right things implies a way. a end. an aim. a dream. a vision. a range and a way.

To get down. let’s see the difference between directors and leaders by their definitions. A individual who is responsible for directing and be aftering the work of a individual’s group. commanding and administrating their work. and taking disciplinary action when necessary is known as director. Directors are besides responsible to command outgo and resources. The most of import thing managers’ do is do speedy. accurate. and decisive determinations. However. the function of a leader is much more complex ; A leader by its significance is the individual who ever goes first and leads others by illustration. so that other people are motivated to follow him.

A leader is “a individual who influences a group of people towards the accomplishment of a goal” . This is a basic demand. To be a leader. a individual must hold a fixed committedness to the end that he will seek his best to accomplish it even if cipher follows him. A hint for this definition would be 3P’s – Person. Peoples and Purpose. Where individual ( leader ) influence people to accomplish the intent ( ends ) . There are so many authors who have made differentiation between leading and direction. Categorization of direction and leading is distinguished in figure of ways by Martin ( 2001 ) . In footings of the function. he thinks leading is a constituent of direction. Martin besides argues that leaders tend to be focused inside. whereas directors tend to be focused externally.

In footings of function. he views leading as constituent of direction and argue that leading is what directors do to be effectual. A individual can be a leader non the director. In certain state of affairss. as in the work of squad on extremely proficient undertaking. the leader of the undertaking may non be the most senior individual in the squad in footings of hierarchy. In footings of function. Martin argues that directors tend to be outward focused. while leader tend to be inward focused.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

In footings of context. there are some administrations that place less accent upon direction than leading because direction activities tend to be focused on everyday processs. On the other manus. leading accomplishments are necessary under conditions of alteration. In footings of what directors and leaders do. Leaderships explore world. taking in the relevant factors and analysing all these factors carefully. On this footing they produce constructs. plans. visions and programs. Directors adopt the truth from others and so implement it.

In footings of state of affairs. leaders tend to be more situation-specific. Whereas. directors are appointed in the administration to a specific place and their occupation is defined by occupation description and contract. but different leaders may emerge at different times as the state of affairs demands.

It could be argued that effectual leaders need to be outward every bit good as inward-oriented. Descrying an chance in the market before everyone else fits the features of a leader. Directors can non merely be concerned with the modus operandi. Therefore. leading is an indispensable ingredient of successful direction.

True leaders are born with this ability non everyone can be an effectual leader. A good leader can make the function of an effectual director. But leading is complex. its non needfully something that effectual directors can larn. As trait theory attack described that people are born with familial traits. Leaderships should hold as qui vive to environment. adaptability to state of affairss. self-asserting. ambitious and achievement oriented. concerted and dominant with desire to act upon other. identified by Stogdil ( 1974 ) . In add-on. a leader should hold certain accomplishments such as being persuasive. diplomatic and tactful. conceptually and socially skilled. On the other manus. rational end theoretical account believe that direction is a rational and scientific procedure of traveling an administration and its employees towards some settled end. Frederick Winslow Taylor ( 1947 ) was the main advocate of it. whose work changed the manner of administrations in the earlier portion of the 19th century. more particularly fabricating operations. worked.

As like many direction theoretical accounts. Taylorism was a merchandise of his clip. Henry Fayol’s part to the development of direction prevarications in the creative activity of rules of direction and in the designation of the basic direction undertakings. Henry identified the nucleus direction undertakings as forming. planning. commanding. commanding and organizing. Henry Mintzberg classified 10 managerial functions and he placed these functions in three Calories such as informational functions. decisional functions and interpersonal functions. He argued that the combination of these regulations are played by all the directors. although their importance varies with the degree of director in the hierarchy. the personality of the director and the type of concern. However. Fred Luthans ( 1983 ) argued that the job with categorization. such as those of Stewart and Mintzberg. is that they may add to our cognition of what directors do and what function they play. but they offer small usher to directors themselves on the activities that may do the difference between success and failure. Managers’ public presentation is measured by Luthans in term of success and effectivity.

He measured entree and effectivity ; entree in term of whether directors had been promoted and effectiveness in footings of teams’ degree of satisfaction and their public presentation. He identified four types of activity such as traditional. communicating. networking and direction. particularly outside the administration and prosecuting in human resources direction and organizational political relations. Harmonizing to him a successful directors. those that got publicity. spent most of their clip as networkers and least of their clip covering with staff issues. On the other manus. effectual directors spent most of their clip communication and prosecuting with staff. In decision. as clearly demonstrated above people have different statement about leading and direction and it is go oning.

As it is argued directors and leaders are different people. They differ in the manner they think. the manner they act. personal history and motive. Leadership rudimentss can be thought anyone but to be a good leader you need more mere cognition because there is non any cutoff to be a leader. They besides need moralss. character and the right values. In add-on. leading does non merely necessitate cognizing the accomplishments needed to be effectual. it besides requires tapping into 1s unconditioned abilities. In contrast. the direction accomplishments are really easy to get because they are based on existent and logical state of affairss and processes John ( 2001 ) . People appreciate an effectual director every bit long as they have their occupation. but they tend to retrieve an effectual leader in any instance. Therefore. you don’t needfully be a good director to be an effectual leader.


Buchanan. D. . 2010. Organizational Behaviour. Seventh Edition. United kingdom: Pearson Education Ltd.

Needle. D. . 2010. Business in context. 5th Edition. UK Thomson Learning. Robbins. S. . 2010. Organizational Bhaviour. United kingdom: Pearson Education Ltd.


I'm Niki!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out