(a) Meaning of Management Planning :

The term management is explained in different ways. For example, it is said

that management is what management does? Here, management is
explained with reference to its basic functions which include planning,
organising, coordinating and controlling. Similarly, management is described
as a process which involves various elements. Management process is a
continuous one and is run by themanagers functioning at different levels.
Management is now recognised as a distinct process in which managers
plan, organise, lead, motivate and control human efforts in order to achieve
well defined goals. In fact, process means a series of activities/operations
undertaken/conducted for achieving a specific objective. Process is a
systematic way of doing things. For example, in a factory there is a
production process. Similarly, in the management process,resources and
human efforts are used in an orderly manner for achieving specific
objectives. The management process suggests functions to be performed by
the managers.

Definition of Management Planning

1. According to D. E. McFarland, "Management is the distinct process by

which the managers create, direct, maintain and operate purposive
organisation through systematic, co-coordinated and cooperative human
efforts”.

2. According to Gemp R. Terry, "Management is a distinct process consisting

of planning, organisisng, actuating, and controlling, performed to determine
and accomplish objectives by the use of people and other resources".

(b) Elements of Management Planning

1. Planning: Planning is the primary function of management. It involves

determination of a course of action to achieve desired
results/objectives.Planning is the starting point of management process and
all other functions of management are related to and dependent on planning
function. Planning is the key to success, stability and prosperity in business.
It acts as a tool for solving the problems of a business unit. Planning plays a
pivotal role in business management; it helps to visualize the future
problems and keeps management ready with possible solutions.

2. Organising: Organising is next to planning. It means to bring the

resources (men, materials, machines, etc.) together and use them properly
for achieving the objectives. Organisation is a process as well as a structure.
Organising means arranging ways and means for the execution of a business
plan. It provides suitable administrative structure and facilitates execution of
proposed plan. Organising involves different aspects such as
departmentalization, span of control delegation of authority, establishment
of superior-subordinate relationship and provision of mechanism for co-
ordination of various business activities.

3. Staffing: Staffing refers to manpower required for the execution of a

business plan. Staffing, as managerial function, involves recruitment,
selection,appraisal, remuneration and development of managerial personnel.
The need of staffing arises in the initial period and also from time to time for
replacement and also along with the expansion and diversification of
business activities. Every business unit needs efficient, stable and
cooperative staff for the management of business activities. Manpower is the
most important asset of a business unit. In many organisations, manpower
planning and development activities are entrusted to personnel manager or
HRD manager.'Right man for the right job' is the basic principle in staffing.

4. Directing (Leading): Directing as a managerial function, deals with

guiding and instructing people to do the work in the right manner.
Directing/leading is the responsibility of managers at all levels. They have to
work as leaders of their subordinates. Clear plans and sound organisation set
the stage but it requires a manager to direct and lead his men for achieving
the objectives.Directing function is quite comprehensive. It involves directing
as well as raising the Effective coordination and also integration of activities
of different departments are essential for orderly working of an
organisation.This suggests the importance of coordinating as management
function. A manager must coordinate the work for which he is accountable.
Co-ordination is rightly treated as the essence of management. It may be
treated as an independent function or as a part of organisms function.

5. Coordinating: Effective coordination and also integration of activities of

different departments are essential for orderly working of an
organisation.This suggests the importance of coordinating as management
function. A manager must coordinate the work for which he is accountable.
Co-ordination is rightly treated as the essence of management. It may be
treated as an independent function or as a part of organisms
function.Coordination is essential at all levels of management. It gives one
clear-cut direction to the activities of individuals and departments. It also
avoids misdirection and wastages and brings unity of action in the
organisation. Co-ordination will not come automatically or on its own special
efforts are necessary on the part of managers for achieving such
coordination.

6. Controlling: Controlling is an important function of management. It is

necessary in the case of individuals and departments so as to avoid wrong
actions and activities. Controlling involves three broad aspects: (a)
establishing standards of performance, (b) measuring work in progress and
interpreting results achieved, and (c) taking corrective actions, if required.
Business plans do not give positive results automatically. Managers have to
exercise effective control in order to bring success to a business plan. Control
is closely linked with other managerial functions. It is rightly treated as the
soul of management process. It is true that without planning there will be
nothing to control It is equally true that without control planning will be only
an academic exercise. Controlling is a continuous activity of a supervisory
nature.

7. Motivating: Motivating is one managerial function in which a manager

motivates his men to give their best to the organisation. It means to
encourage people to take more interest and initiative in the work assigned.
Organisations prosper when the employees are motivated through special
efforts including provision of facilities and incentives. Motivation is actually
inspiring and encouraging people to work more and contribute more to
achieve organisational objectives. It is a psychological process of great
significance.

8. Communicating: Communication (written or oral) is necessary for the

exchange of facts, opinions, ideas and information between individual’s and
departments. In an organisation, communication is useful for giving
information, guidance and instructions. Managers should be
goodcommunicators. They have to use major portion of their time on
communication in order to direct, motivate and co-ordinate activities of their
subordinates. People think and act collectively through
communication.According to Louis Allen, "Communication involves a
systematic and continuing process of telling, listening and understanding".

2.1: Definitions of Leadership

The term leadership is a word taken from the common vocabulary and
incorporated Into the technical vocabulary of a scientific discipline without
being precisely redefined. As A consequence, it carries extraneous
connotations that create ambiguity of meaning (Janda, 1960). Additional
confusion is caused by the use of other imprecise terms such as power ,
author-Ity , management , administration , control , and supervision to
describe similar phenomena. An Observation by Bennis (1959, p. 259) is as
true today as when he made it many years ago:

Always, it seems, the concept of leadership eludes us or turns up in another

form to taunt us Again with its slipperiness and complexity. So we have
invented an endless proliferation of Terms to deal with it . . . and still the
concept is not sufficiently defined.

Researchers usually define leadership according to their individual

perspectives and the asPects of the phenomenon of most interest to them.
After a comprehensive review of the leadership Literature, Stogdill (1974, p.
259) concluded that “there are almost as many definitions of leadership As
there are persons who have attempted to define the concept.” The stream of
new definitions has Continued unabated since Stogdill made his observation.
Leadership has been defined in terms of Traits, behaviors, influence,
interaction patterns, role relationships, and occupation of an adminisTrative
position.

•Leadership is “the behavior of an individual . . . directing the activities of a

group toward a shared goal” (Hemphill & Coons, 1957, p. 7).

• Leadership is “the influential increment over and above mechanical

compliance with the routine directives of the organization” (Katz & Kahn,
1978, p. 528).

• Leadership is “the process of influencing the activities of an organized

group toward goal achievement” (Rauch & Behling, 1984, p. 46).

• “Leadership is about articulating visions, embodying values, and creating

the environment within which things can be accomplished” (Richards &
Engle, 1986, p. 206).

2.2: Definition of Educational leadership

There are many definitions of leadership. However, most definitions of

leadership imply that intentional influence is exerted by one person or a
group, over other people or groups, to structure the activities and
relationships in a group or organisation. Understood as a social influencing
process, leadership concepts differ in terms of who exerts influence, the
nature of that influence, the purpose for the exercise of influence and its
outcomes.
Educational leadership is usually associated with formal organisational
position in schools. So discussions about school leadership tend to refer to
one or more of the following

Formal leaders

Head teachers

Principals

Deputy and assistant head teachers/principals

Heads of department

Subject leaders

Heads of year

• However, there are also informal leaders such as specialist leaders whose
influence stems from their subject knowledge or skills with groups of
learners, or individuals who have social influence with their peers and sway
views and attitudes.

• Leadership is not necessarily attached to a role and can be viewed as a

process rather than a position of authority. Leadership for Learning: the
Cambridge Network (LfL), for example, was created with the aim of
connecting leadership and learning in schools. Fundamental to the
Cambridge Network is the belief that leadership is both a shared and an
individual enterprise and should be distributed and exercised at every level.
Teachers are viewed as having significant leadership potential (MacBeath
and Dempster, 2009).

• The concept of leadership can also be extended to include developing

student leadership as one goal of the educational process. This is
increasingly recognised as an important life skill.

• Schools also have a role to play as leaders in their community, supporting

learning beyond the school boundaries.

What is the theory behind educational leadership?

The diversity of views about leadership results in a number of perspectives.

These include Educational leadership continued Leadership is therefore
about how leaders combine and blend these six areas: Which figure more or
less strongly in a leader’s actions? How do leaders try to balance them? How
do leaders change the blend and balance of them over time as their
organisations and their leadership develops?Viviane Robinson (2007)
completed an analysis of research

into the effectiveness of different types of leadership on students’ academic

and non-academic outcomes. She concluded that instructional leadership
produced a significantly greater influence than transformational leadership.
Six leadership dimensions are identified as having moderate to large effects
on outcomes:

• establishing goals and expectations

• strategic resourcing

• planning

• co-ordinating and evaluating teaching and the curriculum

• promoting and participating in teaching learning and

development

• ensuring an orderly and supportive environment.

‘The more leaders focus their professional relationships, their work and their
learning on the core business of teaching and learning, the greater the
influence on student outcomes.’ (Robinson, 2007, p12)

Instructional leadership focuses on the school’s core business – teaching,

learning, pupils’ progress and achievements

Transformational leadership is concerned with the commitment of

colleagues, leading change, improving performance

Moral leadership emphasises the importance of values, vision and ethical

leadership

Participative leadership stresses the importance of including colleagues,

shared decision-making and social capital

Managerial leadership focuses on the importance of defining functions,

tasks and behaviours

Contingency leadership highlights how leaders respond to the particular

organisational circumstances and challenges they face and encounter over
time

What is the theory behind educational leadership?

• Leadership is seen as a prime factor in improving school effectiveness.
Leadership makes a difference. Effective leadership improves schools.

• Learner achievement in a school rarely exceeds the quality of its

leadership. Three (of the many) factors that influence learners’ achievements
are: parental

involvement, the quality of teaching, and school leadership. Leadership is

strongly associated with school performance. Inspection reports from
organisations such as Ofsted (Office for Standards in Education, Children’s

Services and Skills in England) suggest that there are no instances of a

failing school being ‘turned around’ in the absence of good leadership.

• Good leadership is not only important in itself; it is also a powerful way to

improve classroom teaching.

What are the challenges of educational leadership?

• Not only is there a diversity of theory about leadership, it also varies

according to context. For example, in some countries, schools have high
levels of autonomy; in other countries, there may not be as much autonomy.
In some systems, principals do not appoint teaching staff; in others they do.
Ensuring that leadership is sensitive to context and that leadership
development activities reflect local circumstances is important.

• While leadership is widely understood as making a difference, measuring

an individual leader’s impact is very difficult. This is because their influence
is indirect – they work with and through

3.1 : Managerial Roles

The early descriptive research on managerial work was concerned primarily

with providing a description of activity patterns. Then, the focus of
descriptive research shifted to classifying the content of managerial activity
in terms of its purpose. A major difficulty in this research has been to
determine what behavior categories are meaningful, distinct, and relevant
for classifying observed activities of managers. In attempting to resolve this
question, different researchers have developed taxonomies of managerial
roles or functions.

The Nature of Managerial Work

Managers are responsible for the processes of getting activities completed

efficiently with and through other people and setting and achieving the firm’s
goals through the execution of four basic management functions:planning,
organizing, leading, and controlling. Both sets of processes utilize human,
financial, and material resources. Of course, some managers are better than
others at accomplishing this! There have been a number of studies on what
managers actually do, the most famous of those conducted by Professor
Henry Mintzberg in the early 1970s (Mintzberg, 1973). One explanation for
Mintzberg’s enduring influence is perhaps that the nature of managerial work
has changed very little since that time, aside from the shift to an empowered
relationship between top managers and other managers and employees,
obvious changes in technology, and the exponential increase in information
overload.After following managers around for several weeks, Mintzberg
concluded that to meet the many demands of performing their functions,
managers assume multiple roles. A role is an organized set of behaviors, and
Mintzberg identified 10 roles common to the work of all managers. As
summarized in the following figure, the 10 roles are divided into three
groups: interpersonal, informational, and decisional.

Mintzberg Managerial Roles

Informational Roles

• Disseminator

• Monitor

• Spokesperson

Decision-Making Roles

• Entrepreneur

• Disturbance handler

• Resource allocator

• Negotiator

Interpersonal Roles

• Liaison

• Figurehead

• Leader

The three interpersonal roles are primarily concerned with interpersonal

relationships. In the figurehead role,the manager represents the organization
in all matters of formality. The top-level manager represents the company
legally and socially to those outside of the organization. The supervisor
represents the workgroup to higher management and higher management to
the workgroup. In the liaison role, the manager interacts with peers and
people outside the organization. The top-level manager uses the liaison role
to gain favors and information, while the supervisor uses it to maintain the
routine flow of work. The leader role defines the relationships between the
manager and employees.The direct relationships with people in the
interpersonal roles place the manager in a unique position to get
information.

Thus, the three informational roles are primarily concerned with the
information aspects of managerial work. In the monitor role, the manager
receives and collects information. In the role of disseminator, the manager
transmits special information into the organization. The top-level manager
receives and transmits more information from people outside the
organization than the supervisor. In the role of spokesperson, the manager
disseminates the organization’s information into its environment. Thus, the
top-level manager is seen as an industry expert, while the supervisor is seen
as a unit or departmental expert.The informational roles link all managerial
work together as compared to the interpersonal roles that ensure information
is provided. The decisional roles make significant use of the information. The
performance of managerial roles and the requirements of these roles can be
played at different times by the same manager and to different degrees,
depending on the level and function of management. The 10 roles are
described individually, but they form an integrated whole.

The unique access to information places the manager at the center of

organizational decision-making. There are four decisional roles managers
play. In the entrepreneur role, the manager initiates change. In the
disturbance handler role, the manager deals with threats to the organization.
In the resource allocator role, themanager chooses where the organization
will expend its efforts. In the negotiator role, the manager negotiates on
behalf of the organization. The top-level manager makes the decisions about
the organization as a whole,while the supervisor makes decisions about his
or her particular work unit.

The supervisor performs these managerial roles but with a different

emphasis than higher managers.Supervisory management is more focused
and short-term in outlook. Thus, the figurehead role becomes lesssignificant
and the disturbance handler and negotiator roles increase in importance for
the supervisor. Sinceleadership permeates all activities, the leader role is
among the most important of all roles at all levels of management.

So what do Mintzberg’s conclusions about the nature of managerial work

mean for you? On the one hand,managerial work is the lifeblood of most
organizations because it serves to choreograph and motivate individuals to
do amazing things. Managerial work is exciting, and it is hard to imagine that
there will ever be a shortage of demand for capable, energetic managers. On
the other hand, managerial work is necessarily fast-paced and fragmented,
where managers at all levels express the opinion that they must process
much more information and make more decisions than they could have ever
possibly imagined. So, just as the most successful organizations seem to
have well-formed and well-executed strategies, there is also a strong need
for managers to have good strategies for the way they will approach their
work. This is exactly what you will learn through the principles of
management.

Who are managers?

Managers are responsible for getting work done through others. We typically
describe the key managerial functions as planning, organizing, leading, and
controlling. The definitions for each of these have evolved over time, just as
the nature of managing, in general, has evolved over time. This evolution is
best seen in the gradual transition from the traditional hierarchical
relationship between managers and employees, to a climate characterized
better as an upside-down pyramid, where top executives support middle
managers, and they, in turn, support the employees who innovate and fulfill
the needs of customers and clients. Through all four managerial functions,
the work of managers ranges across 10 roles, from figurehead to negotiator.
While actual managerial work can seem challenging, the skills you gain
through principles of management—consisting of the functions of planning,
organizing, leading,and controlling—will help you to meet these challenges.

3.2 : Leadership Roles:

Despite the multitude of ways in which leadership has been conceptualized,

the following components can be identified as central to the phenomenon:
(a) Leadership is a process, (b) leadership involves influence, (c) leadership
occurs in groups, and (d) leadership involves common goals. Based on these
components, the following definition of leadership is used in this
text:Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a
group of individuals to achieve a common goal.
Defining leadership as a process means that it is not a trait or characteristic
that resides in the leader, but rather a transactional event that occurs
between the leader and the followers. Process implies that a leader affects
and is affected by followers. It emphasizes that leadership is not a linear,
one-way event, but rather an interactive event. When leadership is defined
in this manner, it becomes available to everyone. It is not restricted to the
formally designated leader in a group.

Leadership involves influence. It is concerned with how the leader affects

followers. Influence is the sine qua non of leadership. Without influence,
leadership does not exist.Leadership occurs in groups. Groups are the
context in which leadership takes place.

Leadership involves influencing a group of individuals who have a common

purpose. This can be a small task group, a community group, or a large
group encompassing an entire organization. Leadership is about one
individual influencing a group of others to accomplish common goals. Others
(a group) are required for leadership to occur. Leadership training programs
that teach people to lead themselves are not considered a part of leadership
within the definition that is set forth in this discussion.

Leadership includes attention to common goals. Leaders direct their

energies toward individuals who are trying to achieve something together.
By common,we mean that the leaders and followers have a mutual purpose.
Attention to common goals gives leadership an ethical overtone because it
stresses the need for leaders to work with followers to achieve selected
goals. Stressing mutuality lessens the possibility that leaders might act
toward followers in ways that are forced or unethical. It also increases the
possibility that leaders and followers will work together toward a common
good (Rost, 1991).

Throughout this text, the people who engage in leadership will be called
leaders, and those toward whom leadership is directed will be called
followers. Both leaders and followers are involved together in the leadership
process. Leaders need followers, and followers need leaders (Burns, 1978;
Heller & Van Til, 1983; Hollander, 1992; Jago, 1982). Although leaders and
followers are closely linked, it is the leader who often initiates the
relationship, creates the communication linkages, and carries the burden for
maintaining the relationship.

In our discussion of leaders and followers, attention will be directed toward

follower issues as well as leader issues. Leaders have an ethical
responsibility to attend to the needs and concerns of followers. As Burns
(1978) pointed out, discussions of leadership sometimes are viewed as
elitist because of the implied power and importance often ascribed to leaders
in the leader- follower relationship. Leaders are not above or better than
followers. Leaders and followers must be understood in relation to each other
(Hollander, 1992) and collectively (Burns, 1978). They are in the leadership
relationship together—and are two sides of the same coin (Rost, 1991).

3.3 Comparing Management and Leadership

There is a continuing controversy about the difference between leadership

and management. It is obvious that a person can be a leader without being a
manager (e.g., an informal leader), and a person can be a manager without
leading. Indeed, some people with the job title “manager” do not have any
subordinates (e.g., a manager of financial accounts). Nobody has proposed
that managing and leading are equivalent, but the degree of overlap is a
point of sharp disagreement. Some writers contend that leadership and
management are qualitatively different and mutually exclusive (e.g., Bennis
& Nanus, 1985; Zaleznik, 1977). The most extreme distinction assumes that
management and leadership cannot occur in the same person. For these
writers, leaders and managers differ with regard to their values and
personalities.

Managers value stability, order, and efficiency, and they are impersonal, risk-
averse, and focused on short-term results. Leaders value flexibility,
innovation, and adaptation; they care about people as well as economic
outcomes, and they have a longer-term perspective with regard to objectives
and strategies. Managers are concerned about how things get done, and
they try to get people to perform better. Leaders are concerned with what
things mean to people, and they try to get people to agree about the most
important things to be done. Bennis and Nanus (1985, p. 21) proposed that
“managers are people who do things right, and leaders are people who do
the right thing.” However, the empirical research does not support the
assumption that people can be sorted neatly into these two extreme
stereotypes. Moreover, the stereotypes imply that managers are generally
ineffective. The term manager is an occupational title for a large number of
people, and it is insensitive to denigrate them with a negative stereotype.
Other scholars view leading and managing as distinct processes or roles, but
they do not assume that leaders and managers are different types of people
(Bass, 1990; Hickman, 1990; Kotter, 1988; Mintzberg, 1973; Rost, 1991).
How the two processes are defined varies somewhat, depending on the
scholar. For example, Mintzberg (1973) described leadership as one of the 10
managerial roles (see Chapter 2 ). Leadership includes motivating
subordinates and creating favorable conditions for doing the work. The other
nine roles (e.g., resource allocator, negotiator) involve distinct managing
responsibilities, but leadership is viewed as an essential managerial role that
pervades the other roles. Kotter (1990) proposed that managing seeks to
produce predictability and order, where-as leading seeks to
producorganizational change.

Both roles are necessary, but problems can occur if an appropriate balance
is not maintained. Too much emphasis on the managing role can discourage
risk taking and create a bureaucracy without a clear purpose. Too much
emphasis on the leadership role can disrupt order and create change that is
impractical. According to Kotter, the importance of leading and managing
depends in part on the situation. As an organization becomes larger and
more complex, managing becomes more important. As the external
environment becomes more dynamic and uncertain, leadership becomes
more important. Both roles are important for executives in large
organizations with a dynamic environment. When Kotter surveyed major
large companies in a dynamic environment, he found very few had
executives who were able to carry out both roles effectively. Rost (1991)
defined management as an authority relationship that exists between a
manager and subordinates to produce and sell goods and services.

He defined leadership as a multidirectional influence relationship between a

leader and followers with the mutual purpose of accomplishing real change.
Leaders and followers influence each other as they interact in non-coercive
ways to decide what changes they want to make. Managers may be leaders,
but only if they have this type of influence relationship. Rost proposed that
leading was not necessary for a manager to be effective in producing and
selling goods and services. However, leading is essential when major
changes must be implemented in an organization, because authority is
seldom a sufficient basis for gaining commitment from subordinates or for
influencing other people whose cooperation is necessary, such as peers and
outsiders.

Defining managing and leading as distinct roles, processes, or relationships

may obscure more than it reveals if it encourages simplistic theories about
effective leadership. Most scholars seem to agree that success as a manager
or administrator in modern organizations also involves leading. How to
integrate the two processes has emerged as a complex and important issue
in organizational literature (Yukl & Lepsinger, 2005). The answer will not
come from debates about ideal definitions. Questions about what to include
in the domain of essential leadership processes should be explored with
empirical research, not predetermined by subjective judgments.

Leadership and management are different concepts that overlap. They are
different in that management traditionally focuses on the activities of
planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling, whereas leadership
emphasizes the general influence process. According to some researchers,
management is concerned with creating order and stability, whereas
leadership is about adaptation and constructive change. Other researchers
go so far as to argue that managers and leaders are different types of
people, with managers being more reactive and less emotionally involved
and leaders being more proactive and more emotionally involved. The
overlap between leadership and management is centered on how both
involve influencing a group of individuals in goal attainment.