Management and Leadership styles being interrelated concepts are not the similar. Management Style is the ways of making decisions and relating to subordinates, and is closely linked with personality. According to Yukl (2002), The Leadership Styles are more focus on “traits, behavior, influence, interaction patterns, role relationships, and occupation of an administrative position (…) is defined as the process of influencing others to understand and agree about what needs to be done and how it can be done effectively, and the process of facilitating individual and collective efforts to accomplish the shared objectives”. Management is more related to Decision Making and Leadership with motivating people, but they are related, indeed, leadership makes part of managers’ functions. Such functions are: Planing, Organizing, Staffing, Controlling and Leading.
Management Styles can be classified into 5 major categories:
1. Autocratic managers are in complete control of their organizations and make all or nearly all of the major management decisions.
2. Bureaucratic managers act much like autocrats, but derive authority from corporate management, organizational rules and regulations, and past practices. Bureaucratic managers implement decisions often made by others in a way that is generally autocratic.
3. Authoritarian managers make all of the decisions, although they also solicit and use input from other managers to reach their final decisions.
4. Democratic managers involve others in their deliberations and arrive at decisions through majority rule.
5. Participative managers let lower-level managers and employees make most of the major decisions. These managers function largely as facilitators. (Trask, K., Rice, R., Anchors, S., & Lilieholm, R. 2009)
The last Categories can apply to Leadership styles too, but those would be describe it in order to explain ways of persuade and motivate, and Managerial Attitudes. In this case, in the academic field have been identified 3 major categories: 1. Authoritarian or autocratic 2. Participative or democratic 3. Delegative or Free Reign. And not only the last three, a leader can be characterized as, task-oriented or human-oriented, depending on his inclinations in the ways of leading. It is important to underline, that interpersonal communication, is a core element, when it comes to leadership skills.
Both, Management and Leadership Styles show personality of the leader, and are influenced by the environment and the cultural background. That is why, when it comes to cross-national differences issues, there is wide debate about the flexibility of the categories and how those approaches applied to real life, are effective or not depending on the context, and also, how make a leader effective in motivating employees and obtain expected outcomes.
East Asia
1. Main similarities and differences of Japanese and Korean management styles.
Facts:
Japanese Management
- Importance to Market Share
- Long term value Maximization - Optimization
- Close relationship with suppliers: LT commitments, close cooperation
- Top Managing: Important Participation of Workers and Middle managers
- Consensus building and group loyalty as Principles
- Coexist in group
- Scan of environment: Both customers and competitors
- Flexible Manufacturing
- Corporate values as guidance
Korean Management
- Importance to Market Share
- Life time employment: workers tend to change jobs more freely
- Top Managing: Authoritarian, Centralized decision making
- Not emphasize group elements like group loyalty and consensus
- Individualistic and Hierarchical
- Managing Style: Nepotism, companies manage by the family members of founders
- Scan of environment: Monitoring rivals
“Korean firms are more “Japanese than the Japanese” in their pursuit of Market Share”
Japan and Korea have strong connections in culture, due to the past this nations share together, since Korea was actually a Japan colony back in 1910, some culture aspects are shared in their roots. Korea tends to follow Japanese Models that even Japanese already have passed and leaved, sharing finally so similar ways in the manufacturing sector and in the Internationalization policies and manners of incursion.
2. Explain the phenomenon of convergence in terms of management styles. What are the forces or factors pushing for convergence?
These two nations converge (share similarities) thanks to 2 forces:
- Firm size as measured by sales: Growth
- Globalization as measured by export ration: Internationalization
These two factors reduce the difference, being globalization/Internationalization the stronger of the last two.
The Convergence is about the Organizational characteristic, that compared across nations, are increasingly free from the particularities of specific cultures, and this convergence was found more in regional level than in a worldwide model. That outcome can be explained because: 1. Increasing managerial sophistication of the Korean firms as they grow and/or internationalize, is done by imitating the best practices of competitors, which grows similarity with its Japanese neighbors. And 2. The Isomorphic character of organizations, that helps them adapt inconsistent environmental demand, by creating a substructure in order to deal with the problem. So, Korean firms have capacity to adapt management to meet international competition requirements. Thus, Japan and Korea have to face similar challenges in the international environment.
Forces of international competition made both nations converge, but domestic factors, like cultural dimensions and level of development, make them to have certain consistent differences.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymFmBLHn0Ao
References:
Oshagbemi, T. (2008). The impact of personal and organisational variables on the leadership styles of managers. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(10), 1896-1910. doi:10.1080/09585190802324130.
Trask, K., Rice, R., Anchors, S., & Lilieholm, R. (2009). Management styles of lumber mill managers in the northern United States. Forest Products Journal, 59(3), 29-34. Retrieved from Business Source Complete database.
Keeffe, M., Darling, J., & Natesan, N. (2008). Effective 360° Management Enhancement: The Role of Style in Developing A Leadership Team. Organization Development Journal, 26(2), 89-107. Retrieved from Business Source Complete database.
Getz, I. (2009). Liberating Leadership: HOW THE INITIATIVE-FREEING RADICAL ORGANIZATIONAL FORM HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY ADOPTED. California Management Review, 51(4), 32-58. Retrieved from Business Source Complete database.
Lee Jangho, Roehl Thomas, Choe Soonkyoo, 2000, What Makes Management Style Similar and Distinct Across Borders? Growth, Experience and Culture in Korean and Japanese Firms, Journal of International Business Stuides, 31, 4: 631- 652
Ekaterini, G. (2010). The Impact of Leadership Styles on Four Variables of Executives Workforce.International Journal of Business & Management, 5(6), 3-16. Retrieved from Business Source Complete database.
De Vries, R., Bakker-Pieper, A., & Oostenveld, W. (2010). Leadership = Communication? The Relations of Leaders’ Communication Styles with Leadership Styles, Knowledge Sharing and Leadership Outcomes.Journal of Business & Psychology, 25(3), 367-380. doi:10.1007/s10869-009-9140-2.
Elizabeth B. Bolton 2007, Leadership Styles and Leadership Change in Human and Community
Service Organizations.
Standly J. Jadwinski, 2006, Leadership style for incident Command
