Characteristics of a Manager

Describe about the Marketing and Communication for Leadership Experience.

The study includes the description of the characteristics of a manager along with a leader. The study also demonstrates the need of Steve Wright, chairman of Golden-tone communication PLC to become a leader rather than a manager. The proofs that have been provided in the study properly support the statements. The term manager refers to a person who is equipped with the responsibility of administrating and handling a group of an employee in an organization. On the other hand, the leader is the person who leads or controls a group of staff in an organization. The key difference between them is that manager sees co-workers as just employees and leader perceives the co-workers as followers. Another difference between them is that managers have good ideas, but the leaders actually take the responsibility to implement them.

The study also has supported to the fact that the organizations need responsive organizational structure. Organizational structure is the blueprint on the basis of which the organization stands still and does business. For responding as quick and accurately as possible the organizations forwards through incorporating the responsive organizational structure. An organization’s market strategy can be reflected through its responsiveness (Yinan, Tang and Zhang 2014).

Personal Features:

Self-motivation: The self-motivation is a very crucial characteristic of a manager. Every manager should have the quality (Contractor et al. 2015).  If the manager is not capable of motivating himself or others then in crucial time the organization can face various issues.

Reliability: Every manager should be dependable. The higher authorities, as well as the co-workers and juniors, should be able to depend on the manager (Lam et al. 2015).

Written communication: Effective writing skills are must have the quality of the good manager. A manager should have knowledge of writing with proper grammar and format (Davis, Matsumoto and Zhang 2015).

Public speaking: Knowing the methods of speaking publicly is another crucial feature of a good manager. It enhances the skill of motivating other workers.

Particular: The managers have to be specific at what they want so that no confusion remains in the mind of the employee about delivering the task accurately (Contractor et al. 2015).

Industry knowledge: When the managers are completely aware of what kind of industry they are in, they can provide a better quality effort for the organization (Hung and Huang 2014).

Organization: Knowing the organization is another feature that the managers should have to be a good one.

Characteristics of a Leader

Basic money is handling: A manager must have the knowledge of the capital he or she is allowed to spend so that the fund can be utilized properly (Verboncu et al. 2015).

• Customer Service: Looking forward to providing enhanced customer service has to in the mind of manager every time (Hung and Huang 2014). The managers must put resources to improve the customer service day by day.
• Team player: The managers must function as a team so that the progress of the organization never stops (Verboncu et al. 2015).

• Collaboration: Setting up collaboration with other employees is as much important as making better relation with the customer (Hung and Huang 2014).
• Value to others: A good manager should have the decency to give value to the employees. According to Davis, Matsumoto and Zhang (2015), it has been proven that the employees seek recognition from their supervisor, it assists them in doing well in the given tasks.
• Organizing presentation: A manager should be all ready for giving a presentation as the motivation

The manager and leader, these two can be distinguished very easily in a theoretical way but in reality is hard to separate. It is because most of the person contains both the characteristics. The following three reasons have been discussed in the study to support the point.

The Drawbacks of Steve Wright: The comities rather takes decisions rather Steve Wright which increases the time of confirming and applying decisions. It avoids Steve to provide his full potential and skills to make changes as per the rapid changing environment. Steve Wright is not able to address the rapid changes in the telecommunication industry as the organization does not include any fresh technology. As the organization have not been able to address the issues due to change in the telecommunication sector, Steve Wright have not able to make the organization competitive. In addition with that, Steve Wright does not include the skills that a leader must contain. It have been a great factor in terms of increasing the internal strengths such as efficiency of employees.

Create Energetic Environment: As a leader tends to move the team toward a successful position rather pushing them to achieve the objectives. If Steve can lead the team rather continuously pushing them then, the employees will feel more valuable to the organization and create an atmosphere where everyone will tend to work harder (Horowitz and Stam 2014).

Relationship Building: For making the better relation between employees and management the manager is the key. If the manager becomes a leader, then he will be more connected to the team and higher management will have more information about the employees. This way a healthy environment can be created (Boon and Biron 2016).

Going in the Correct Path: The manager pushes the team toward getting the objective without knowing how to eliminate the slightest faults in the process. These small faults can be the cause of the delay of work or even failure (Bolton, Brunnermeier and Veldkamp 2013). As the leader will be a part of the movement, the leader will have all the information of the smallest activities in the task.

Jason Robbins, CEO and President of ePromos Promotional Products, can be taken as a successful leader to be compare with Steve Wright. He has the capability of hiring the right employee which Steve does not have. Jason also has the intellectuality of accepting failure. On the other hand, Steve have been failed to accept his failure as a manager which resulted into creating more pressure on employees. The reason have been an another cause for Steve to become a leader. A leader values its employees but Steve have also failed to do that.

The Reasons Behind Steve Wright Should Behave Like a Leader

Making a true natural inclination with your staff makes it a greater amount shocking that distinctive issues What’s more scorn can worm to Also crash the gathering (Senge 2014). During those side of the point The point when your bunch understands that you need aid human should be their worries, they will presumably worth of effort with you furthermore the table for your vision, as opposed to encouraging negative sentiments.

Continuously an unfaltering pioneer will pick up you respect Furthermore validity, which is key will getting the buy to starting with the gathering (Northouse 2015). Eventually, Tom’s perusing setting an instance of respectability also validity; the gathering will be compelling reason on enactment the same route.

Those people who would straightforward, especially something like concerns, make it altogether more possible that snags will a chance to be had a tendency to Concerning illustration contradicted should stay away starting with. Validity Moreover takes under record preferred assessment Also advancement (Hunter  et al. 2013). 

Hosting the dream will break peculiar also try to magnificent things that point those employees to set those strides imperative to arrive is a vital typically for the great activity. By seeing the thing that might make and managing those targets on the greater part proficient technique will arrive, an incredible pioneer can settle on stunning transform (Senge 2014)

Viable correspondence keeps the gathering managing the good undertakings with those good state of the brain. In the off chance that you confer viable over desires, issues Also exhortation, your staff will most likely react furthermore help your targets (Hunter  et al. 2013). Made as an example, on the off risk that a website crashes, the association loses that true customer, alternately organization’s subsidizing drives away, administering organization’s gathering through the system without solidifying will be as attempting Similarly as it is incredulous. Certification may be associated with profitability, and its manager’s occupation concerning illustration the gathering pioneer should instill a sure vitality (Northouse 2015). That is the spot your silly slant will finally bring about shortages. Chief assembly with giggles during the missteps likewise restricted should holler. On the off possibility that you need aid continually figuring crazy how will find the amusingness in the battles, your working environment will transform under A glad and heartless space, the place organization’s agents suspect attempting in, as contradicted should dreading it. The supervisor might make it and side of the point to break jokes for the aggregation and help distinctive examinations about weekend arranges Furthermore outings. It’s these short breaks starting with those present workload that stay with effectiveness levels higher and much better (Hunter  et al. 2013).

Compassion and Consistency

Not every issue solicitations the same plan. Toward continuously versatile to new contemplations What’s more sufficiently liberal should consider them as you move forward the likelihood that you will spot the vast majority perfect gas response (Daft 2014). You will situate an instance for organization’s one assembly and adjust keen contemplations. 

A big dream and the capability to see it through may be a champion around the practically fundamental depicts for power. The pioneer who puts stock in the mission furthermore progresses in the course for it will be an inspiration What’s more at stake with their devotees. Made similarly as an example, not each single individual are those same. An essential idea, notwithstanding something that is consistently overlooked (Hernandez, Long and Sitkin 2014). An individual need social viewpoints, vernacular hindrances, different informatively foundations, personality qualities Furthermore varying regard frameworks with which people originate pre-adapted that unbelievably impacts how information may be taken care of What’s more translated (Daft 2014). A couple of kin works outstandingly underweight, and others don’t. Some respond best will heighten adoration; others contemplate it truly and close down. Keeping On mind those conclusion objective will move forward An leader’s viability Concerning illustration A pioneer, you ought further bolstering have the capacity with changing your procedure with respect to a person toward distinct premise, in perspective of the present cautiously. Leader’s capability will execute this thought will expect An enormous part clinched alongside your limit will get the best fill in crazy for your one assembly what’s more distinctive accomplices along he alternately she sets out (Hernandez, Long and Sitkin 2014).

As per the business and target market of Golden-tone Telecommunication PLC (GT), the flat organization structure is the best option.  The flat organization structure refers to the framework that consists of less or often no levels of management between employees and management.

That level cooperation oversees specialists same time propelling their extended Incorporation in the essential heading transform. It raises the representatives’ level about commitment in the affiliation.

• It expels plenitude layers for administrations enhance that coordination furthermore paces for correspondence the middle of laborers (Yinan, Tang and Zhang 2014).
• Fewer levels of organization invigorate a requesting fundamental heading transform around laborers (Witt and Schwesinger 2013).
• Eliminating those pay rates of focal point organization diminishes an association’s using costs (Yinan, Tang and Zhang 2014).

The Difference between Hierarchical and Flat Structure:

Communication: The felt organization structure provides a great communication between the employees and management as there is less amount of management in between them (Griffin 2013). On the other hand, the communication among them in the hierarchical organization structure is very low as there exist multiple managers between the employees and management.

 Decision making: In flat organization structure as the communication is sound; the decisions can be made more effectively and quickly (Witt and Schwesinger 2013).  In hierarchical organization structure, the decisions can take a lot of time as the analysis has to the done to the ground and because of less connection of management to the staffs it faces various obstacles.

Trustworthiness and Heading

Lesser Cost: As there are no multiple layers in the flat organization structure, the cost of the GT in terms of giving salaries will decrease and the saved capital can be used for enhancing various parts of the business (Griffin 2013).

The speed of Change: In hierarchical structure, the increased bureaucracy is hampering the pace of the GT toward changing with the market needs. Through transforming into the flat organization, the organization will see a tremendous flexibility (Witt and Schwesinger 2013).

Better Communication: Littler organizations with authoritative level structures can all the more effortlessly speak with workers at all levels. By sheer volume, bigger organizations face challenges in conveying steady and precise data (Erkutlu 2012). Level hierarchical structures evacuate obstructions between top-level supervisors and bleeding edge representatives.

Hierarchical Flexibility: Associations with fewer levels amongst directors and workers can all the more effortlessly execute vital administration arranges, make a move ventures for transient objectives and make a move on approach and procedural changes (Heger, Jung and Wong 2012). By following up on a level nearer to cutting edge workers, directors can screen progress toward objectives and targets and in addition get more prompt input with respect to the attainability of a particular activity arrangement.

Authoritative Response: Extensive associations with numerous administration levels may not surrender obligation to lower-level chiefs to settle on vital choices or even choices specifically influencing client administration at lower levels (Erkutlu 2012).

Offer Organizational Goals: Extensive associations might have the capacity to viably convey hierarchical objectives, yet because of the distinction between upper administration and lower level representatives, the common advantage of achieving those objectives may not be caught on (Heger, Jung and Wong 2012). Level authoritative structures incorporate lower-level administrators in the objective setting process and enable them to help the organization achieve those objectives (Erkutlu 2012).

Team: Through integrating the responsive organization structure GT will enhance the working abilities of the employees they will be more efficient and flexible in terms of serving as per the market criteria (Heger, Jung and Wong 2012).

Better Organizational Culture: As GT needs to establish a good organization culture which will provide the environment that the employees need to work better and sincerely, the organization must integrate a responsive organizational structure (Souitaris, Zerbinati and Liu 2012).

To be More Reflective to the Market Need: The organization can predict and act as the market will change. This is one of the most important criteria for every organization (Witt and Schwesinger 2013). IF GT will not be able to act as per the changes in the market, then the organization will be doomed.

Correspondence

Better at Achieving Objectives: The organization will be able to make the best out of its resources and reach to the objective as fast as possible. This will help the organization to concentrate on the parts that need to be corrected or modified as well as growing in the market rapidly (Souitaris, Zerbinati and Liu 2012).

Encouraging Employees: In order to make all the employees feel the need of the responsive organization structure, the manager may not encourage them for integrating responsive structure directly instead of that he can encourage them about connecting with the colleagues in a different way so that the work can be done more efficiently.

Protecting Proprietary Data: Regarding sharing information, the organization must create such policies that will provide priority to ‘need to know’ rather than ‘dare to share.’ It is because in most of the businesses transparency is the prime driver of responsiveness.

Documentation: Through documentation of GT’s hierarchical framework and publishing it on its website will allow everyone to see the reporting structure, respective roles and liabilities. This way the employees will have more information about their organization’s environment.

Conclusion:

From the above study, it can be concluded that the transformation from the hierarchical structure to the flat organization structure is not only a profitable but also will serve the organization to remain in the market for years. There are various diverse hierarchical structures each with their focal points and inconveniences. The most suitable structure will rely on upon the span of the business and the sort of business. Level structures function admirably for little organizations or those with a little number of employment parts. However, a business with a level structure needs to guarantee that every chief’s range of control does not turn out to be too wide so they can not deal with their immediate reports adequately. The characteristics of the manager and leaders assisted in differentiating the small facts that separate those from each other. The recommendation also has been a good approach to make GT consider to focus on the prime areas of implementation.

References:

Bolton, P., Brunnermeier, M.K. and Veldkamp, L., 2013. Leadership, coordination, and corporate culture. The Review of Economic Studies, 80(2), pp.512-537.

Boon, C. and Biron, M., 2016. Temporal issues in person–organization fit, person–job fit and turnover: The role of leader–member exchange. Human Relations, p.0018726716636945.

Contractor, F., Foss, N.J., Kundu, S. and Lahiri, S. eds., 2015. Microfoundations of Global Strategy: Role of Leadership and Manager Characteristics. Global Strategy Journal.

Daft, R.L., 2014. The leadership experience. Cengage Learning.

Davis, A.K., Ge, W., Matsumoto, D. and Zhang, J.L., 2015. The effect of manager-specific optimism on the tone of earnings conference calls. Review of Accounting Studies, 20(2), pp.639-673.

Erkutlu, H., 2012. The impact of organizational culture on the relationship between shared leadership and team proactivity. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 18(1/2), pp.102-119.

Griffin, R.W., 2013. Fundamentals of management. Cengage Learning.

Heger, L., Jung, D. and Wong, W.H., 2012. Organizing for resistance: How group structure impacts the character of violence. Terrorism and Political Violence, 24(5), pp.743-768.

Hernandez, M., Long, C.P. and Sitkin, S.B., 2014. Cultivating Follower Trust: Are All Leader Behaviors Equally Influential?. Organization Studies, p.0170840614546152.

Horowitz, M.C. and Stam, A.C., 2014. How prior military experience influences the future militarized behavior of leaders. International Organization, 68(03), pp.527-559.

Hung, L.F. and Huang, C.M., 2014. An analysis of the relations among job characteristics, manager leadership behaviours, and employees’ job satisfaction-The case of Taiwanese tax officials. African Journal of Business Management, 8(15), p.612.

Hunter, E.M., Neubert, M.J., Perry, S.J., Witt, L.A., Penney, L.M. and Weinberger, E., 2013. Servant leaders inspire servant followers: Antecedents and outcomes for employees and the organization. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(2), pp.316-331.

Lam, J., Fox, K., Fan, W., Moen, P., Kelly, E., Hammer, L. and Kossek, E.E., 2015. Manager characteristics and employee job insecurity around a merger announcement: The role of status and crossover. The Sociological Quarterly, 56(3), pp.558-580.

Northouse, P.G., 2015. Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.

Senge, P.M., 2014. The dance of change: The challenges to sustaining momentum in a learning organization. Crown Business.

Souitaris, V., Zerbinati, S. and Liu, G., 2012. Which iron cage? Endo-and exoisomorphism in corporate venture capital programs. Academy of Management Journal, 55(2), pp.477-505.

Verboncu, I., Zeininger, L., Miha, M. and Irimie, S., 2015. Romanian Sme’S Management: Leader Versus Manager In A Nutshell. In Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE (Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 21-32). Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania.

Witt, U. and Schwesinger, G., 2013. Phylogenetic footprints in organizational behavior. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 90, pp.S33-S44.

Yinan, Q., Tang, M. and Zhang, M., 2014. Mass customization in flat organization: The mediating role of supply chain planning and corporation coordination. Journal of Applied Research and Technology, 12(2), pp.171-181.