The Different Types of Managers and How They Affect the Staff

Differences between Leaders and Managers 

Leaders and managers play crucial roles in life or organizations as they are charged with transforming organizational goals into measurable and observable outputs. While managers and leaders are vital aspects of organizations, they present differences in how they handle tasks and responsibilities. Liphadzi et al. (2017) assert that leaders can create organizational vision while leaders create organizational goals. In this case, leaders envision a possibility for the organization and then inspire and engage employees and other stakeholders in turning the vision into a reality. Leaders tend to think beyond what others think and activate high-functioning teas to be part of a bigger vision. On the other hand, managers’ focus is on setting and measuring organizational goals to find out if employees have achieved them. Managers are individuals with the capacity of controlling situations and resources to ensure that employees reach or even exceed organizational goals.

Leaders and managers present significant differences when it comes to anticipating, controlling and mitigating risks in the course of their operations. Leaders are open to risks and are willing to try out new thongs even if it would mean putting the organization at risk. Leaders are not afraid of failure, as they believe that failure improves their capacities, as it is a learning opportunity. Leaders understand that failure is on the path to success and great businesses are built upon past failures (Iszatt-White & Saunders, 2017). On the other hand, managers are not ready to step out of their comfort zone and they do all they can to minimize these risks. They do all they can to avoid or control organizational problems as opposed to embracing them as part of the organization.

Leaders and managers vary in the way they deal with employees, customers and other stakeholders they deal with in their professions. Leaders realize the centrality of stakeholders who they must embrace and influence if they have to achieve a personal and organizational vision. Leaders understand who the stakeholders are and they spend significant time with these stakeholders, which allows for the buildup of trust and loyalty. In the same breath, leaders ensure that the organizations deliver on their promises to elicit satisfaction. On the other hand, managers are more focused on building processes and systems that are necessary to achieve organizational goals. Managers who are more analytical than social ensure that systems are functional to avoid bottlenecks and thus achieve the desired organizational outcomes.

Similarities between Managers and Leaders 

Managers and leaders are similar in that both work with people who they influence to achieve common organizational goals though in different approaches. Managers and leaders are tasked with the responsibility of creating the organizational foundations and its functional structure to enhance the achievement of organizational goals. Azad et al. (2017) establish that managers and leaders are concerned with the allocation of the available resources so that they are used efficiently and effectively to achieve goals. In line with this, managers and leaders must undertake the oversight role to ensure that the organizational processes, systems, and resources are aligned to the realization of the desired outcomes. To this end, one can conclude that while managers and leaders have different approaches, their tasks and responsibilities are interrelated as they are the bearers and implementers of organizational goals.

The success of any organization is dependent on the effectiveness and efficiency of its leadership and management personnel. In this case, an organization can have great managers and leaders or even poor leaders and managers. Great managers can self-motivate before they can motivate employees by taking on challenges and working independently. Apart from self-motivation, individuals who possess excellent managerial skills have great communication skills, which allow them to set clear organizational guidelines. Great managers are characterized by their readiness to share as much information with their employees, thus creating collective intelligence and trust (Kuroda & Yamamoto, 2018). Finally, great managers are capable of solving problems that arise in the course of their tenure in addition to taking responsibility for those problems instead of shifting blame. Employees who work under great managers are more motivated since the managers themselves exude self-motivation and readily share information. The employees will do all they can to deliver on the organizational objectives in line with managers' directives.

Great leaders can create, articulating, owning, and gearing up efforts to achieve the organizational vision (s). They have a way of tapping into the emotions of the employees so that they too could own the concept and work towards the achievement of that vision. Great leaders possess courage that allows them to take risks, although the risks may not necessarily translate to success. Iszatt-White &Saunders (2017) establish that great leaders are individuals who live by high integrity standards, which allows them to be honest and tell the truth at all times. Integrity is a virtue that calls upon such leaders to be open even about financial aspects as they are assured that they have used resources as required. Finally, great leaders demonstrate humility not because others are a threat to their authority but because they possess self-awareness and self-confidence in relation to others. Such leaders are always willing to admit that they could be wrong and recognize that they do not have to have all the answers and solutions to organizational problems. Employees who work under great leaders are self-driven considering that these leaders can inculcate vision and redefine the corporate culture. The employees free to be innovative despite there being chances for error because their leader is a risk-taker and anticipates challenges.

Poor managers who hamper the achievement of organizational goals engage in passive aggressiveness by micromanaging small details and providing vague directions. Such managers could end up scolding employees for low quality work because of vague direction, which in turn demotivates them. Kuroda & Yamamoto (2018) assert that poor managers are likely to take credit for others' achievements and accomplishments instead of rewarding them. This kind of behavior creates tensions in the workplace and the employees may set the manger up for failure. Poor managers prove incapable of controlling their emotions and may raise their voice at employees instead of dealing with them diplomatically. Managers who do not have control over their feelings may hamper the achievement of organizational goals having lost the trust of the staff.

Emotional Intelligence Test 

Emotional intelligence refers to individuals’ capacity in understanding, using and managing their emotions in a way that promotes empathy and reduces the chances for conflicts and stress. The emotional Intelligence test is a measure that helps one to determine how well he or she can manage emotions when exposed to various situations that elicit varied emotional reactions (O’Connor et al., 2019). The Global Emotional Intelligence Test (GEIT) test focuses on four domains namely Self-Awareness, Self-Management, Social-Awareness, and Relationship Management with each area containing ten items. Leaders and managers must be capable of dealing with their emotions considering that their positions involve dealing with people who exhibit various personalities and behaviors. If a leader or a manager is to be heralded as excellent, he or she must have high EI scores ranging between 8-10.

Analysis of my Emotional Intelligence Test Results 

I undertook the Emotional Intelligence test so that I could assess my leadership abilities and skills. The Test results were as follows:

Self-Awareness	Self-Management	Social-Awareness	Relationship Management
7	6	10	10

Self-Awareness 

This quadrant in the Emotional Intelligence Test assesses three competencies that are emotional self-awareness, Self-assessment and self-confidence. Emotional self-awareness is the ability to read one's emotions as well as understand their impacts on relationships and work performance. Self-assessment allows one to provide a realistic evaluation of one's strengths and limitations while self-confidence offers one with a strong and positive sense of one's self-worth (Global Leadership Foundation). I scored a 7 in this quadrant which indicates that I am moderate in the area of self-awareness meaning that it could hamper y leadership skills. My emotions may come in the way of my leadership roles but I have a capacity of reading them to reduce a negative outcome.

Self-Management 

The second quadrant measures five competencies that are transparency, self-control, adaptability, initiative, and achievement orientation (Global Leadership Foundation). I scored a 6 in this quadrant which means that I am moderate in self-management. This result indicates that I might not readily control disruptive emotions and impulses, which may negatively affect my leadership. Moreover, the score establishes that I may not readily adapt to change or overcome obstacles, which are everyday phenomena in the workplace. In the same breath, I anticipate that I would be hesitant to seize and act on opportunities, which may hamper the possibility of meeting internal standards of excellence.

Social Awareness 

The third quadrant focuses on three competencies namely organizational awareness, empathy and service orientation involving recognition, and meeting customers’ needs (Global Leadership Foundation). I scored a 10 in this item, which means that I have strong social awareness skills. In this case, as a leader, I can understand others and take active interests in their concerns. In the same breath, it means that as a leader, I can analyze and understand the changing organizational needs and make informed decisions. In the same manner, I am well versed in strategies that the organization could use to recognize and meet customers’ needs.

Relationship Management 

The last quadrant measures seven competencies which are developing others, visionary leadership, influence, conflict management, change catalyst, building bonds as well as teamwork and collaboration (Global Leadership Foundation). A score of 10 affirms that as a leader, I am capable of developing and maintaining effective relationships with others, which is suitable for the achievement of organizational goals. The score is indicative of my abilities to provide guidance and build my followers to embrace the vision that I have. The rating means that I can create a friendly work environment that is free of conflicts and one that embraces collective intelligence through teamwork and collaboration.

References 

Azad, N., Anderson, H. G., Jr, Brooks, A., Garza, O., O'Neil, C., Stutz, M. M., & Sobotka, J. L. (2017). Leadership and management are one and the same. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 81(6), 102. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe816102

Global Leadership Foundation. Emotional Intelligence. https://globalleadershipfoundation.com/deepening-understanding/emotional-intelligence

Iszatt-White, M., & Saunders, C. (2017). Leadership (2 nd edition). Oxford University Press.

Kuroda, S., & Yamamoto, I. (2018). Good boss, bad boss, workers’ mental health, and productivity: Evidence from Japan. Japan and the World Economy, 48, 106-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japwor.2018.08.002

Liphadzi, M., Aigbavboa, C. O., & Thwala, W. D. (2017). A theoretical perspective on the difference between leadership and management. Procedia Engineering, 196, 478-482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.07.227

O'Connor, P. J., Hill, A., Kaya, M., & Martin, B. (2019). The measurement of Emotional Intelligence: A critical review of the literature and recommendations for researchers and practitioners. Frontiers in Psychology , 10, 1116. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01116