Change Management Or Leadership Change Management Essay

form circumspection Or Leadership alter Management EssayChange, is the swear kayoed of moving from the current state to a quite a little of the future day practicable Management Skills, 2012. This transition sometimes puts fear, which often causes distress for passel in the governing body (source www.pratical-managemet-skills.com, 2009-2012). Leadership and perplexity have very wide-ranging and entangled domain, and their elements be perceived in various ways. The history has created a muss of great leaders and coach-and-fours, whose stories bring us valuable leading and managerial lessons to examine.The concepts of Change Management and Leadership Change however, have been inter heightenably use and interpreted by different people. Ricketts (2012) argues that, some individuals see these terms as synonymous and frequently use them inter wobbleably finishedout phrases and sentences. However, the misinterpretation and construe of these terms has generated a controvers y among scholars over the self-reliance transmit watchfulness or Leadership castrate? Which is more most-valuable?This study get out commence by reviewing counter transport steering as well as leading alteration. The paper discusses the similarities and differences mingled with the dickens. Also, the key theories and models of transfer direction and change leadership entrusting be discussed in this report. The study will therefore, rafttle by critically analyzing and juxtaposing the two and see which is more important or if it will be necessary to integrate them as well.Understanding Change Management Leadership ChangeChange management is defined as a set of processes employed to interpret that signifi fecal mattert changes atomic number 18 utilise in a formled and systematic manner (University of Adelaide, Australia, 2011). It involves the use of basic tools and structures to control and manage any organisational change efforts. This means that a change man ager in every organisation is duty-bound to initiate and lead change in an organization. It really clarifies that, management implies leadership and leadership is a subset of management. The change management focuses on people, their resistance, their coping mechanisms and ultimately how they accept change in the charmplace (Gotsill Natchez, 2007).On the other- gradient of the coin, leadership is the lifting of peoples vision to a higher sight, elevator of their performance to a higher standard, building up of their personality beyond its normal limitations (Drucker, 1986). It concerns with the visions, driving forces and processes that fuel large-scale veeration (Kotter, 2011). Looking at the definitions above, each one of them put much emphasis on warp, vision, facts of life of peoples performance and binding them together. This really riles leadership a key image of the management. In this context, the leader of the change effort is duty-bound to transform the work place openly and transp arntly to ensure proper management in the workplace. Hannagan (2008, p. 40), opines that, leadership change motivates and scoff people to act in a fictional charactericular way to achieve specific goals. This preempt be attributed to those with charismatic and transformation leadership appearances. Such people like Barack Obama, Nelson Mandela, among others speak to inspire their people. Those leaders are democratic and sometimes apply certain way of life of leadership found on the situation.Griffith and Karyl, (2007) argue that, change leadership set principles, techniques or activities applied to the human position of executing change to influence intrinsic acceptance while reducing resistance. Change leaders who are charismatic use several techniques for adjust people and through and through stiff communications, direct those whose corporations will be needed. However, because of their situational modality of leadership, they sometimes adopt an aut horitarian style of leadership just to eradicate if not possible keep d take resistance. Nelson Mandela who is seen as one of the democratic leaders in the world at a certain point in time became a dictator and autocratic with the aim of reducing resistance among his people.Similarities differences between change management and leadershipChange management based on its definitions, focus on minimising the distraction and impacts of the change, whiles, change leadership is much more concerned with putt an engine on the whole change process to urinate it survive faster (Kotter, 2012).Also, change management brings a degree of order and conformity in an organization. On the contrary, leadership change does not produce torso and order, it rather produces movement. Change management sets up plans, budget, organize, staff, control and solve problems in the organization. On the other-side of the coin, change leadership direct, communicate, coordinate, assess, and make decisions (Druc ker, 2007). This shows that, change leaders manifest and direct where a group of people should go, and energise them to overcome the essential obstacles that may come on their way. Kotter (2011) look ats that, leadership creates a vision for the future along with strategies for producing the change needed to achieve those visions.Comparatively, the two are clearly similar in some ways. This is because when it comes to taking decisions on what needs to be done, creating networks of people and relationship that can accomplish an agenda, both of them are involved. They both try to ensure that employees get the job done. It is now obvious that those who regard that management is an instruction execution part of leadership ignores the fact that the leadership has its own implementation processes which is aligning people to raw directions and then inspire them to make the change witness. On the contrary, those who also think leadership is only part of the implementation aspect of management ignore the direction setting aspect of leadership (Griffiths and Karyl, 2007).Brief Explanations of the Various representatives in Change Management on that point are several change management models but the most preferably utilise by companies are basically three they areKotters 8 locomote of change model,Mckinsey 7-S model andLewins change management modelKotters 8 steps of change modelThe first model which is Kotters 8 steps of change was postulated by Harvard University scholar and Professor, John Paul Kotter (innate(p) 1947). Kotter (2007, p.1), opines that, leaders who successfully transform business do eight things and they do them in the repair order. The 8 steps involved in this model are1. make up the urgency for change.2. Build a police squad dedicated to change.3. Create the vision for change.4. Communicate the need for change.5. Empower staff with the ability to change.6. Create hornswoggle term goals.7. Stay persistent.8. Make the change permanentMcK insey 7-S ModelOur assertion is that productive organisational change is not simply a subject area of structure, although structure is important. It is not also simple as the interaction between strategy and structure, although the strategy is critical too. Our claim is that effective organizational change is really the relationship between structure, strategy, systems, style, skills, staff, and something we call superordinate goals (Waterman, Jr et al., 1980, p.17). The above quotation mark shows how the Mckinsey 7-S framework was developed.http//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/McKinsey_7S_framework.svg/350px-McKinsey_7S_framework.svg.png(Adapted from Waterman Jr. et al (1980p.18)The Mickinsey 7-S model was propounded by Robert H. Waterman, Jr., Thomas J. Peters, and Julien R. Philips in the early 1980s. The model is used to assess and monitor changes in the internal situation of an organization.Lewins ModelLewins Model of Change Management which is the third mo del to be discussed in this paper was propounded by a German-American psychologist, called Kurt Lewin in the 1950s. His model was based on Unfreeze, Transition (change) and Refreeze as demonstrate below (source www.mindtools.com/pages/ phrase/newPPM).http//www.mindtools.com/media/Diagrams/Lewin.gifUnfreezing Transition (change) Refreezing(Adapted from http//www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_94.htm)According to Lewin, in order to initiate change in an organization, you must melt the ice in the cup to make it amenable to change (Unfreeze). Then from there, you can mold the ice water as demonstrated above in the shape you want it to be (that is- change) and when change takes place, you can also solidify the new shape if you want a new shape (Refreeze) (source www.mindtools.com)To conclude, change management should be a process that focuses on people, their resistance, their coping mechanisms and ultimately how they accept change in the workplace (Gotsill Natchez, 2007). canvass of Leadership TheoriesSeveral academic scholars such as Dulewicz Higgs, 2003 Handy, 1982 Partington, 2003 have categorise leadership theory into six main schools of thoughts over the last cardinal years. Diagrammatically, these are the six theories of leadership.However, due to the nature of the question, only three out of them will be treated in order to beat the intelligence activity limit.The trait schoolThe idea behind the trait theory is that, leaders Abraham Lincoln, Mahatma Ghandi, Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great are extraordinary people who are born with leadership qualities and they are destined to lead.Situational theoriesAs the name implies, this leadership style requires the leader to be dynamic. This is because some situation may require a different style of leadership such as autocratic style or democratic style. For e.g. Mandela at a certain point in time adopted the autocratic style in order to make his people accept the change he wanted to bring.Transform ationalTheoryThe profound concept here is change and the role of leadership in picturing and implementing the transformation of organisational performance (Bolden et al, (2003).(Adapted some of them from Wikipedia, Kendra (2012) Bolden (2003)).Analysis on Change Management or Leadership Change? Which is more important?From the explanations above, successful implementation of major managerial innovation such as customer-centric restructuring, six sigma and the likes, which are critical to the survival of every organization relies on integrating both change management and change leadership (Griffith and Karyl, 2007). To them, integrating both creates mensurate on a given realize or initiative for a number of reasons. Lewthwaite (2010), argue that, a leader who lacks basic skills in management is unlikely to get any further than a manager who cannot lead. She maintained that, although a leader can fire people up with a vision, but he might lack the ability to make it into a reali ty. On the contrary, change management may know the nuts and bolts of get things done but he might have to drive the team every step of the way (Lewthwaite).Griffith and Karyl (2007) pointed out that, since organisational change focuses on the people side of change, working with all levels of staff to ensure that employees are unbidden and able to make the change, they might need change leadership which will set principles, techniques or activities to influence the intrinsic acceptance of their employees. They expatiate that, this will help to eradicate, if not possible, reduce resistance of employees to its minimum. To Hannagan (2008), the most effective managers are also leaders and the quality of leadership has become increasingly important of management ability. He further argued that, in an entrepreneurial role, whereas change management initiate and lead change in an organization, change leadership sees opportunities and challenges and make decisions to deal with them.In add ition, the best strategic planning is of no pry if the organisation is not ready to execute the strategy proactively through a timely and dynamic change leadership process Griffith and Karyl, (2007, p.17). These two scholars believe that, when technical activities and people side activities are combined, the right steps can be taken at the right time in the put lifecycle to help employees embrace change and produce the right outcomes for the project. They argued that, crafting of a vision, prompt and adhere to people affected by the change in an organization to make sure they adopt and support the change is the work of the change leadership. In view of this, Hannagan (2008) sees leadership as a subset of management. To him, the management concerns itself with behaioural and non-behavoural matters. Massie and Douglas (1977) argued that, whereas managers are corned with developing strategies, putting resources together and organising and controlling activities to achieve organizati onal objectives, change leadership would select these goals and objectives of the orgainsation, decide what is to be done and inspire people to do it.Last but not the least, Griffith and Karyl (2007), argue that, based on the activities, scope and nature of the discipline, both are equally important. This is because, the two combined encourages the free flow of information and solves communication barriers. To them, the combined admission will make sure the affected employees are receiving the appropriate information. Hence, the project team receives effective feedback on adoption, usage and reaction to the change.SummaryTo summarize everything, the study has revealed that, whiles management makes systems of people and technology work well through planning and budgeting, organising and staffing, controlling and solving problems, leadership creates the systems that managers administer and transition them through creating a vision and strategy, communicating and setting directions, motivating action and aligning people to avoid hazards (Kotter, 2011). Also, whiles management takes complex systems and technology and make them menstruate efficiently, leadership as a discipline creates those systems that managers can administer and transform them in times of growth, evolution, opportunities and hazard avoidance in the organization (Kotter, 2011). Hannagan (2008) summarizes his contrast by saying that, whereas change management is about coping with complexity, leadership is about coping with change. He concludes that, leaders set directions and managers plan, organize and contend the change.ConclusionTo amass everything, this study strongly agrees with Griffith and Karyl (2007) that, change management and change leadership are equally important in a guts that, when an organization introduces a change with a project or initiative, that change needs to be effectively managed on both the technical side and the people side. The technical side ensures that the chan ge is developed, designed and delivered effectively. The discipline of leadership change provides the structure, processes and tools to make this happen.On the contrary, the people side focus seeks to ensure the change is embraced, adopted and utilized. Change management provides the basic structures, processes and tools to make this happen (Hornstein, 2012).