Leadership and Management: Styles, Differences, and Australian Context

This essay provides a comprehensive overview of leadership and management, exploring various leadership styles including transactional, autocratic, democratic, laissez-faire, bureaucratic, transformational, and situational leadership. It delves into the core differences between leadership and management, highlighting the distinct roles and responsibilities of each. The essay further examines the application and nuances of these concepts within the Australian context, potentially discussing specific challenges or best practices relevant to the region. It analyzes the qualities of effective leaders and the importance of communication. The paper includes a brief introduction to the topic, an overview of different leadership styles, a comparison of leadership versus management, and a conclusion summarizing the key takeaways.

RUNNING HEAD: LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMNT
Title: Leadership and Management
Name of Student:
Name of University:’
Author Note:

1LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
Introduction:
Leadership in the Organisational behaviour is defined as the ability of managing the
people in the organisations and making wise decisions in inspiring the people in the organisation
to perform well (Arrons, Green& Trott et al, 2016). It is thus, in short, the ability of persuading
other by means of influencing and inspiring them in achieving the common goal of the
organisation. The whole process of leadership makes an executive to guide, set a direction and
influence the organisational behaviour in a given situation. An effective leadership skill also
includes the infusion of the zeal and confidence among the employees.
Leadership is mainly characterised as an inter-personal process that includes the
managing and guiding of the employees through effective communication and identification of
the problem. The main qualities that are required for being an effective leader are maturity,
intelligence and personality. Since, the whole process of leadership involves a two way
interaction, communication is the key fir leadership. A leader is expected to involve into
moulding and shaping the perspective of the behaviour, through an effective and positive
communication. Through the process of this co-ordination, the leader is supposed to reconcile
the personal interests with the organisational goal. Since, the art of leadership is totally
situational and no particular style can suit all the situation, various leadership styles have been
formulated by analysing the behavioural differences in the organisations.
Leadership Styles:
Though the main purpose of leadership in the organisation is the achievement of the
shared goal, the styles in leadership varies in different organisation depending on the

2LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
organisational culture and the mindset of the employees. Different leadership styles impart
different impact in the organisation. A leader has to be judicious enough to identify the most
suitable style of leadership depending on the structure and situation of the organisation since it is
a crucial factor in the success of the team. The various leadership styles are discussed further:
1. Transactional leadership:
Max Weber first formulated this style of leadership in 1947, which was further
remodelled by Bernard Bass in 1981. The managers in the organisation as the main focus of this
style is on the management process of organising, controlling or the short-term planning. The
purpose of the transactional leadership is the effective interaction between the followers and the
leaders. The main premise of this leadership style is that the members will be agreeing to abide
by the leader after taking a particular responsibility (Nazzim, 2016). The main idea of
“transaction” comes from the agreement that they will be payed by the organisation in return of
their compliance and effort. This style is based on the concept of the reward and punishment as
the organisation is of the view that the behaviour of the employees solely depend on these two
factors. The transaction thus involved in the whole process is a rewarding motivation for the
employees. thus, the motivation or encouragement is done through the system of rewards and
punishment. The main transactions involved in the process are:
1. Contingent Reward- the goal of the organisation as well as the employee is linked with reward
in this case. The expectations are clarified and the team is presented with the required resources
and upon the successful attainment of goals, they are rewarded (Karthikeyan, 2017)..

3LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
2. Active Management: the leaders in this kind of leadership styles are active in monitoring the
performance of the team and keep a watch on any kind of deviation from the set rules and policy.
They take corrective actions for preventing the mistakes.
3. Passive Management Expectation: in general the transactional leaders do not intervene in the
ongoing task and give the team an optimum freedom. However, in case of deviation from
standards they intervene and can use the mode of punishment as a corrective response to the
inappropriate performance.
2. Autocratic Leadership:
Also known as, the Authoritarian leadership style, the autocratic style is characterised by
the controlling of the whole action by one individual. This type of leadership do not take into
consideration the inputs of the team members and the decision making process is solely done by
the leader. In this type of leadership, the total authority is accessed by the leader, who imposes
the decisions and course of actions upon the employees. No opposition or deviations from the set
rules or decisions are accepted (Karthikeyan, 2017). This type of the leadership involves the
absolute control over the group. This leadership style is one of the most classical approach where
the motivation for the employees is created by the formation of a structured set of punishment as
well as reward. The autocratic leadership is the most effective style when an urgent decision has
to be taken. The autocratic leaders are mostly concerned with the three pillars- preparation,
discipline and victory. Thus, this kind of leadership is mostly effective in areas where staffs need
training and things are to be done with perfectness.

4LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
3. Democratic Leadership:
This type of leadership is also known as the participative leadership that asks for the
delegation of responsibilities, collaboration of energies and the decision making is done in a
group level. This type of leadership requires a collaborative leader who would be effective in the
cultivation of the potentialities of the participants and empower the team with required boosting.
The leader is expected to work in line with the members of the team in every level (Smolović
Jones, S., Smolović, & Grint et al,2016). This kind of leadership believes in the decentralisation
of the authority and the decisions taken by the leader is not unilateral as that is in the case of
autocratic leadership. The leader is expected to invite the subordinates in taking part in the
decision making system and also welcomes suggestions for tacking problems so that the team
and the leader can work as a social unit. The leader keeps up consulting the members in every
phase and draws his authority from the collective force within the group. However, this type of
leadership is not feasible in the situations of energy since much time in consulting or group
discussions cannot be invested.
4. Laissez-faire style leadership:
This is also known as free rein leadership where the team members are given complete
freedom in their action. The function of the leader is restricted only in determination of policies,
programmes and bounds for any action and most part of the creative process is left for the team
members to carry on. Thus this type of leadership depends largely on the team which needs to
establish their goals and solve their own problem. The group members train themselves and
derive the motivation for the attainment of the goals by themselves. The role of the leader is just
to maintain the contacts with the team and with the outer resources for the sourcing of
information that would help the team in developing the structure. The leader in this type of

5LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
leadership remains more or less passive and the major activities are seen among the group
members. The free rein leadership is mainly characterised as the leader’s role as an advisor who
does not necessarily give directions by himself. Thus the workers work in a liberal control
system where the communication process is open. Though such kind of leadership imparts job
satisfaction and the establishment of an improved relationship, researchers have find out that this
style results in poor productivity because of the lack of integration and management.
5. Bureaucratic Leadership
This type of leadership is characterised through a high functional formalised set of
process, structures and procedures. The structure depends solely upon the rules and the
management process is thus merely a set of routine actions. This routine marks the obligation of
the team members directing them to do the particular assigned task in a particular way. The rules,
policies and the hierarchical structures form an explicit chain of command (Peker, S., Inandi, Y.,
& Giliç, F. 2018). No team members have the authority to participate or initiate suggestions in
other levels of bureaucracy and the team members are accountable to their immediate superiors
who are in turn accountable to the larger eco system of the structure. It has been noted that this
kind of leadership brings in a sense of apathy towards work because of the severe specification
and limitations. Moreover this type of leadership serves a need of the minimum level of
acceptable performance this style of management is however necessary and effective in the
companies that do not work much upon innovations and creativity. As this style focuses mainly
on the administrative needs, it can be used in the public sector effectively that depends largely on
the consistency and adherence towards rules.

6LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
6. Transformational leadership:
Mainly regarded as the leadership style that encourages, motivate and inspire employees,
transformational leadership aims at innovation and the creation of the changes that fosters the
growth of the company and ensures the future success of the same (Nazzim, 2016). A
transformational leader is expected to navigate an organisation towards improvement by means
of altering the existing set off rules, process, thoughts and culture that is no longer effective in
the current situation. The leader in this style inspires the workers, without micro managing and
fixes their beliefs on the trained employees. The high sense of the culture in the corporate is
established through the example set by the executives and imparting independence in the
workplace. This type of leadership thus, enhances the morale of the workers and thus fosters a
sense of ethics and responsibilities among them. The alteration of the stereotyped rules and the
long existing ineffective work policies creates an attitude of self-interest and working for the
greater good of the common people.
7. Situational Leadership:
Situational style of leadership alludes mostly to the possibilities in an organisation as a
characteristically versatile duty rather than the explicit styles of leadership. Situational leadership
had been a consistently adaptable style that is ideally fit for the modification of the system,
vision and method as per the terms and condition of the organisation. Adaptability is one of the
key factors for the success of the situational leadership. This still is not, however, dependent on a
specific style of management but requires the adaptation of the various types as and when the
management requires. Leaders thus, must be flexible enough in adapting to these various styles
and must have the proper insight of understanding the time of changing the management style
(Perna, 2016).

7LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
Difference between Leadership and Manager:
While leadership is mainly denoted as the key qualities and capabilities that enable an individual
in influencing people so that the shared goal can be achieved, management is specifically the art
of managing the things in the best possible way. The term management contains mostly a formal
connotation while leadership can be applicable in any situation (Terzi, A. R., & Derin, R. 2016).
The key points of differences between management and leadership are:
1. Leadership denotes an art of leading people by means of encouragement and influence.
Management is solely the proper ways of managing the activities in an organisation.
2. For an effective leadership process, the trust of the followers is a very important factor. In
management, however, the control of the manager over the whole team is enough for the
smooth running of the process.
3. Leadership denotes the ability of inspiring and influencing people; management is just
the task of ruling.
4. One of the major differences denoted by the researchers is that leaders do the right things
while management is only concerned with the doing of things in a right manner.
5. Leadership requires an optimum amount of farsightedness that helps the leader in
showing his team the consequences and motivating them. Management requires just a
short range of vision for the accomplishment of activities.
6. Pro-activity is the main key for leadership while management mainly dwells on reactive
polices.

8LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
Leadership Situation in Australia:
In the “Study of Australian Leadership”, much of the leadership situations and the
required leadership skills in the Australian context has been discussed in detail. The leadership
skills in Australia need to be enhanced for the improvement in the productivity and a sustainable
future which is a crucial point in Australia. With the increase of technological changes and the
globalisation, it has been necessary for Australia to set up short term financial results. Moreover,
the continuous failure in the global ranking in leadership has created a new compulsion for
Australia to strive for better. The economic uncertainties in Australia has also created a pressure
on the financial results (Ghasemy, Hussin, & Daud, 2016). It has been found in a research that
the leaders of Australia in the community sectors are not always well trained in the corporate
modes of training and experience in the field of leadership. The community service is one of the
most evolving service in Australia. The service has been giving social, medical as well as
residential support to the residents and is looking into the well being of the community. Thus, the
service requires a deft leader and skilled professionals who can take up the huge responsibility.
The industry is rewarding and rich and offers a great scope for the careers. However, researchers
have found out that the Australian leaders lack in the basic potentials of motivating and holding
high responsibilities. Though they are highly qualified in their own fields, the leaders in the
community sectors could not deliver the proper guidance in influencing the members. Majorly,
they lacked in the social innovation (Ghasemy, M., Hussin, S., & Daud, M. A. K. M. 2016). This
sector can focus upon interviews and discussions that will stimulate the discussion on the
important elements of leadership and provide some personal insights. Various previous
Australian community leaders have agreed to take part in debates and discussions for the further
improvement in this sector.

9LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
Conclusion:
It has thus been understood from the discussions about the various styles of leaderships
and the analysis of the effectiveness of the same in various situations, that the skill of leadership
is an important function in the management structure. It imparts motivation, provides guidance
and creates confidence among the employees. The absence of leadership skills can lead to a
dysfunctional organisational structure without any positive mission for the organisation.

10LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
Reference List:
Aarons, G. A., Green, A. E., Trott, E., Willging, C. E., Torres, E. M., Ehrhart, M. G., & Roesch,
S. C. (2016). The roles of system and organizational leadership in system-wide evidence-
based intervention sustainment: a mixed-method study. Administration and Policy in
Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 43(6), 991-1008.
Connolly, M., James, C., & Fertig, M. (2019). The difference between educational management
and educational leadership and the importance of educational responsibility. Educational
Management Administration & Leadership, 47(4), 504-519.
Cox, J. (2016). Leadership and management roles: Challenges and success strategies. AORN
journal, 104(2), 154-160.
Drouin, N., Müller, R., Sankaran, S., & Vaagaasar, A. L. (2018). Balancing vertical and
horizontal leadership in projects: empirical studies from Australia, Canada, Norway and
Sweden. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 11(4), 986-1006.
Ghasemy, M., Hussin, S., & Daud, M. A. K. M. (2016). Academic leadership capability
framework: A comparison of its compatibility and applicability in Australia, New
Zealand, and Malaysia. Asia Pacific Education Review, 17(2), 217-233.
Karthikeyan, C. (2017). ExPLORING 7 LEVEL CONCIOUSNESS IN A LEADER AND
ORGANISATION: A LEADERSHIP PERSONALITY PERSPECTIVE. International
Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 7(4).

11LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
Nazim, F. (2016). Principals' Transformational and Transactional Leadership Style and Job
Satisfaction of College Teachers. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(34), 18-22.
Peker, S., Inandi, Y., & Giliç, F. (2018). The Relationship between Leadership Styles (Autocratic
and Democratic) of School Administrators and the Mobbing Teachers Suffer. European
Journal of Contemporary Education, 7(1), 150-164.
Perna, B. S. (2016). Exploring situational leadership in quick service restaurants. Journal of
Business Studies Quarterly, 8(2), 1.
Popli, S., & Rizvi, I. A. (2016). Drivers of employee engagement: The role of leadership
style. Global Business Review, 17(4), 965-979.
Smolović Jones, S., Smolović Jones, O., Winchester, N., & Grint, K. (2016). Putting the
discourse to work: On outlining a praxis of democratic leadership
development. Management Learning, 47(4), 424-442.
Terzi, A. R., & Derin, R. (2016). Relation between Democratic Leadership and Organizational
Cynicism. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(3), 193-204.