1) Are leadership and management the same thing?

In your response, discuss the

similarities, differences and overlaps using theoretical ideas and examples.
Management is the mechanism by which organizational goals are set and achieved by
its functions: projection, planning, communication, learning and monitoring-evaluation.
Leadership is: the ability to manage you, the ability to direct others, the human aspect of
business for teachers. Leadership interest soared in the early part of the 20th century.
Early leadership theories centered on traits that differentiated leaders from followers,
while theories examined other variables, such as contextual variables and levels of
skills. Other factors underline elements that distinguish leadership management, and
call them two entirely different systems. The terms manager and head are very
frequently used to name the same leader, but they reflect alternate worlds and the
biggest difference is how people around are inspired. The distinction between managing
and leading is straightforward. Controlling is a profession. Leadership is a telephone
call. A leader is someone who instinctively follows his own decision, whereas a leader
must be followed. A director may have only acquired his authority status through time
and loyalty, not due to his leadership qualities. A leader may be unorganized, but his
dream unites people around him. Management and leadership are two concepts that
are often used interchangeable terms. These terms represent, however, two separate
definitions. Leadership is the principal component of transition, having a vision and
commitment to its implementation. Leadership is a knowledge that consists of
schooling, interactions, contact with people and, of course, encouraging practice.
Effective leadership primarily depends on how their representatives identify, obey and
express their views. Leadership is just one essential part of the leadership role. A
manager can even be a chief. In order to be successful, he requires formal authority.
(Popovici, 2012) Leaders prefer to applaud and encourage success while administrators
work to find defects. They portray what they see as possible for the business and strive
to empower and bring their employees into action. Instead of seeing people as just a
certain set of abilities, they think more than they do and activate them to really be part of
something really bigger. They are well aware that high-functioning teams can achieve
more when they work together than people who work alone can ever achieve. To
understand what they're doing on both sides and to achieve success, they need to know
the root of the disparity between them. This is a question of definition – how the
functions are different and how they overlap. Managers on the other side, by managing
events, can concentrate on setting, monitoring and achieving goals to achieve or meet
their targets. There are various kinds of administration and governance styles in which
different circumstances, groups or societies may need different styles to guide or ensure
they are adhered to. One way to figure out which one of two you could be is to list the
number of people outside the views directly to advise you. The more you do, the further
probable you are to be viewed as a member. "John Kotter, Harvard University
Communication Professor", fears that employers too frequently use the words
synonymously. If an organization is managed successfully, there will be joint leadership
and management. Advising and structured training will help workers use their leadership
skills and use them. According to research by the Ministry Of Higher education, the
reformatting on their job performance by 90 percent of participants who completed their
managerial and business qualifications. There was also a "rioting influence," where 81%
of those surveyed passed their experience on to colleagues. (Next generation, 2016)
The two words "leading" and "managing" shape together the structure for the skills and
skills required for a person to drive success in the team. Indeed, leadership and
management principles are transposable, especially when discussing performance
efficiency in organizations. The leadership and management functions flow in a
continuum that is not separable. Many of these roles have been used to describe the
roles of "leaders" and "managers" which blur meanings and functions into a framework
of one position. In the course of time, Zale znik's division of these roles was perpetuated
by continued vague usage of these terms as false dichotomy. According to Forbes
article in 2012,7 for example, "leadership" is characterized as what you do as an
individual, whilst "management" is described as a more know-how-based craft which
may be learned, implying that both the first and the latter as a collection of conducts
which demonstrate a form of competence. In comparison to being a better manager by
refining an art, portraying Leadership Training as a maker mechanism gives a
misleading interpretation of supposedly separate principles and greatly simplifies
technical and social development. (Azad et al., 2017)

Question 6:

History has traditionally played a marginal role in the field of organization, particularly
since the middle of the 20th century, although periodic efforts have been made to
emphasize its importance. There have recently been reports that organizational studies
may undergo a "historical shift" or at least that there may be more interactions between
history and the organization. Point of discussion took the form of categorizations that
are intended to outline various approaches to history and organizational study. The
overall meaning of these experiments is to merge both domains, giving their very
different practices more or less equal status. For example, Maclean et al. (2016)
presents a taxonomy of four history concepts in organizational studies – assessment,
explanation, conceptualization, narrative – and puts forward a strategy of 'dual integrity'
aimed at establishing a 'unified, principled historical organizational study that
incorporates organizational theory and historical analyses' (p. 611). The countries of
Western Europe were able to seek a mutual security solution. Representatives of many
Western European countries have come together to form a military alliance in response
to the growing tensions and security concerns. The Brussels Treaty was signed by
"Great Britain, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg" in March 1948.
Their treaty was mutual defense; if any of the nations were threatened, the others would
help to protect it. " At the same time, the Truman Administration" introduced a draft
peacetime, boosted military expenditure and invited the Republican Congress, which is
traditionally alone, to consider a military alliance with Europe. Republican Senator
Arthur H. Vandenburg submitted in May of 1948 a resolution that the Leader would aim
to establish an appropriate apparatus with Western Europe that would comply with the
UN Charter, but that would remain beyond the International Community where the
Soviet Union holds a veto. The Vandenburg resolution has been passed and the North
Atlantic Treaty talks have begun.While the idea behind the Treaty was generally agreed,
it took a few months to establish the exact terms. The US Congress supported the
agreement with the corresponding, but the text of the treaty remained concerned. The
nations of Western Europe required guarantees that the "United States" would
immediately intervene in the event of attack, but the authority to wage war rests with
Congress under the U.S. Constitution. Negotiations sought to find language that would
persuade European countries, but not force the U.S. to behave in a way that
undermined its own rules. European mutual safety contributions will also need large-
scale US military support to restore Western Europe's defense capacities. While the
European countries advocated individual grants and assistance, the US wanted aid to
be conditional on regional cooperation. The question of scope was a third topic. The
signatories of the Brussels Treaty wanted the membership of the alliance to be limited
to the representatives of the Treaty plus the European Union. The negotiators in the
United States thought that the new treaty was to include North Atlantic nations, such as
Canada, Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Ireland and Portugal. "These countries had
territories together, forming a bridge between the opposite shores of the Atlantic Ocean,
which, if required, would encourage military action" In practice this means that two
authenticity criteria must be met: theory creation for organizational studies is described
as 'explicit contribution towards the promotion of generalizable knowledge in this area'
(p. 615), while historical studies imply historical veracity. Similarly, Decker (2016) limits
her taxonomy to various positions of incorporation. He was the founding dean of the
School of Social Sciences of UC-Irvine from 1963 to 1969, and conducted a singular
and significant project in organizing, pedagogy and social medical research. This essay
describes this experiment and focuses on the memory and heritage of March. March
claimed that social processes could be modelled using advanced mathematical
methods, in line with the current excitement, and that this could inform science and
pedagogy alike. These methods were ahistorical. He also celebrated creativity and
interdisciplinary, thus bringing together a large population, many of them not
mathematical models. In hindsight, the School has been a significant node in
developing new and influential research streams, such as situational learning,
ethnography and conversational analysis. These strategies were also significantly
ahistorical. The experiment offers a valuable historical context for explaining how, where
and when these areas originated and shows the integration tests of expertise in
organizational theory. It also helps to explain how tradition and theory in organizational
studies and contextualization attempts to merge the two fields have become distinct
from each other. The US regarded an economically powerful, rearmed and democratic
Europe as crucial in preventing the continent's communist expansion. Consequently,
"Secretary of State George C". Suggested a large-scale European economic assistance
programme. The resulting European recovery program or Marshall Plan not only
encouraged the integration of Europe but also promoted the concept of joint interests
and collaboration between the US and Europe. The Soviet refusal to either engage in
the Marshall Plan or permit its satellite states in Eastern Europe to accept economic
assistance helped to strengthen the growing East-West divide in Europe. In
Czechoslovakia a Soviet-sponsored coup led to a socialist dictatorship coming to power
at Germany's borders. Attention was also given to elections in Italy, given that the
Communist Party had achieved substantial gains in the Italian electorate. In addition,
incidents in Germany have also caused concern. The invasion and administration of
Germany after the war had always been contested, and in mid-1948 Soviet Premier
Joseph Stalin decided to test Western resolve by introducing an embargo of West Berlin
which then was jointly dominated by the United States, England and the French, and
which was circled by Soviet-controlled Eastern Germany. The crisis in Berlin took the
"United States and the Soviet Union" to the verge of war, even though a major airlift to
resupply the city for the blockade contributed to avoid an outright conflict. These events
have led U.S. officials to become increasingly concerned that Western European
countries will address their security concerns through negotiations with the Soviets. In
order to counteract the potential turn of events, "the Truman Administration considered
creating a European-American alliance to promote the stability of Western Europe
through the United States"

Question 3:
Team working has been a trendy management concept for over half a century in the
restructuring of work. Since its presence in the UK in the 1950s, the term has evolved
and expanded extensively through industries and the world. Today, studies show that
management professionals in all fields follow teamwork strategies with enthusiasm.
Empirical analysis has, however, failed to keep pace with the dissemination of team
ideas in various contexts. In the service industries and especially in the public services,
relatively little attention was paid to the idea. This research is designed to explore team
solutions in new contexts and perform a case study in the UK city councils. An
ethnographic methodology is used to collect and analyze accurate descriptive data. Key
issues include how teamwork is used as a mechanism for organizational change and
how managers are trying to incorporate teamwork. The study results show that the
concept of teamwork in local governments is as interested as in conventional team
contexts. In the research study, teamwork has been used as part of a broad
organizational change strategy. In particular, senior management used it to legitimize
change process and to provide a soft venue for a more explicit performance regime.
The ambitious range of new team projects has led to significant problems with
implementation and worker resistance. Special management levels were seen as stuck
between the old strategy and the current team discourse. The study warns team
advocates that they appreciate motivational principles from senior management to
introduce improvement and take into account the unattractive details when
implementing and retaining collaboration programs. The outbreak of the Korean War
rapidly led the participants to incorporate and organize their Defense Forces into a
centralized headquarters soon after the establishment of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization. At the time, the attack by North Korea on South Korea was generally
regarded as an indication of communist aggression led by Moscow, so the U.s
strengthened its troop contributions to Europe to guarantee that Soviet aggression
would occur on the continent of Europe. Member States voted to admit Greece and
Turkey to NATO in 1952, and in 1955 the Federal Republic of Germany was included.
The entrance into the West Germany led the Soviet Union to take retaliatory action
against its own regional alliance, which was organized in the Warsaw Treaty
Organization and included Eastern European Soviet satellite states as members. "The
collective security structures in NATO put Western Europe as a whole under the US
'nuclear umbrella.' In the 1950s, one of the first NATO military doctrines arose as a
major reprisal, or the idea that the USA would react with a widespread nuclear attack if
any member were targeted. The threat of such a response was intended to dissuade
Soviet hostility on the continent. Although developed to meet the demands of the Cold
War, NATO has lasted past the end of the conflict and has even expanded to include a
few former Communist countries. It continues to be the world's biggest peacetime
military alliance." The analysis of teamwork, like many fields of management study,
poses thorny methodological challenges. Since the subject is concerned with the
conduct and interaction of organizational actors, there are practical constraints on
collecting accurate social activities The definition of highly competitive organizations is
not always available to External researchers analyze their structures and procedures
carefully. Similarly, in where everyone has a reputation, organizational actors are not
likely to provide Frank accounts and work knowledge in management strategies.
Because of this the problems were hampered by low quality analysis data in the
discussion of teams. A lack of thorough explanation of team tasks has led to insufficient
conceptualisation and hence the trend towards the observed Fashionable. Fashionable.
Studies have focused on narrow industrial environments, such as car production that
does not translate easily into service and public service Settings for the sector. This
research will try to address these challenges. Organizational research issues do not
stop us from trying to understand the dynamic relationship between jobs. Its effect on
the world today - it produces from cultural and technical artifacts, geographical
and Population demographic systems, social/institutional forces such as classes, Time,
leisure and family - can't be exaggerated. Teamwork is a key idea in the wide field of
organizational behavior management research. The human experiences of people in
this kind of research are revealed Organizational configurations. Settings. Too easily
research can bind itself to the powerful Monitor and success managerialist debate.
Since this is an integral part of Analysts increasingly recognize the need to 'refocus
attention on the worker'