Dembowski 1 The Changing Roles of Leadership and Management in Educational Administration This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of the Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. Introduction How the pendulum swings! The purpose of this introductory chapter is to discuss the dynamic roles of leadership, management, and administration as they relate to educational organizations. There has been much debate on this topic, particularly regarding the roles of leadership and management, and usually management comes out the worse for it. Typically, when education field practitioners or professors are asked about leadership and management, leadership will be thought of in a positive sense and management will likely be viewed negatively. It seems that no educational administrator wants to be seen as being a manager. Educational administration preparation programs are now usually housed in departments of educational leadership. When seeking a new principal or superintendent, the position description will very likely seek “a strong leader with vision.” Historically, in the early phases of this dialogue, the focus was on administration (see Wilson [1887] who noted that the study of administration was being added to the curriculum of universities). Then the focus was on management in school administration, as noted in Callahan’s work (Cult of Efficiency). Next, and continuing until the present, the focus was on leadership. Many volumes have been written on these topics. Currently, a number of scholars and field practitioners have again been talking about the importance of management and the need 1 Dembowski 2 for balance between leadership and management. There are a number of reasons for these “paradigm shifts” as will be discussed in later sections. At a professional development workshop for educational administrators, when asked to rate their perception of the terms “leader” and “manager” on a scale of 1 to 10 where one is low, their responses rated “leader” at an average of 9.2 and “manager” rated 8.8; this was by a group of school business managers (Dembowski, 1999)! A review of the textbooks currently used in principal and superintendent preparation programs will also highlight the dominance of leadership. However, when the actual activities on a day to day basis of principals and superintendents were analyzed in a workshop, the participants reported that the majority of their time is spent on management related tasks, “putting out fires” (Dembowski, 1999). Leadership and management are both important functions, but they have different purposes and they seek to obtain different outcomes. About 40 years ago, Kurt Lewin (1936) put it this way, “Every organization structures itself to accomplish its goals in a way that is in tune with or responsive to its environment.” Once the efficiency of the organization is established, people go about simply maintaining the system, assuming that the environment will stay the same. Management is the main focus because it keeps the organization going well with little change. But the thing is, the environment for any organization is always changing. Times like this require organizations to think more in terms of leadership. Leaders begin to ask questions like, "What is really going on here? How do we become relevant again? How do we fulfill our goals in these new times? What will prompt people to think that what we do is meaningful?" This observation continues to be relevant. Leaders seek to bring their organization more in line with the realities of their environment, which often necessitates changing the very structures, 2 Dembowski 3 resources, and relationships of their organization which they have worked so long and so hard to manage” (Lewin, 1936). Warren Bennis, a professor and researcher who has devoted years to studying leadership and management, was more direct and summarized the two behaviors as follows: “Management is getting people to do what needs to be done. Leadership is getting people to want to do what needs to be done” (Bennis, 1994). While the tasks and functions of management and leadership are unique, there is a link between them. It is clear that different problems require different solutions at different times. Rather than being mutually exclusive, these two competencies are interdependent. For example, once a leader articulates the intended direction, plans must be put in place to provide concrete ways to move in that direction. Once people have been hired into an organization (the structure of which was defined by a manager), a leader must align those people with a vision. Finally, the leader must motivate and inspire people to overcome the challenges that management processes of controlling and measuring have uncovered (Adamchik, n.d.). Donna E. Shalala (1988), while serving as secretary of the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, stated that “I think about management and leadership as linked processes. Managing in the public sector is quite different from that in the private sector. It is not really possible to think about control in an organization that has very few well-defined goals and technology and has substantial participant involvement in the affairs of the organization” (Shalala, 1998).“Success in organizations requires a balance of both leadership and management. The manager is the stone and the leader the fire. Both elements are necessary to forge a successful business. … the notion of leadership over management is being overemphasized. And 3 Dembowski 4 this overemphasis is often a turnoff to the very persons who need to hear the message” (Womack, n.d.). What is the relative importance of effective leadership and management? Many scholars feel that both are equally important. “Strong leadership with weak management is no better, and sometimes actually worse, than the opposite. The challenge is to achieve a balance of strong leadership and strong management” (Maxwell, n.d.). "Leaders manage and managers lead, but the two activities are not synonymous…. Management functions can potentially provide leadership; leadership activities can contribute to managing. Nevertheless, some managers do not lead, and some leaders do not manage." This is Bernard Bass’s assessment in his 1,200 page opus, "Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership" (Bass, 1985, p. 383). An appropriate balance of leadership and management is required to successfully operate any organization. Even leaders must appreciate the value of control, conservation of resources, and analysis of operations and outcomes. They also likely know when these management functions should be put to effective use. “Yet they must balance that appreciation with vision, communication, risk taking, and optimism, particularly in creating a new work environment or changing management philosophies” (Womack, n.d.). However, while leadership seems to be thought of as the predominant function of administrators, it is widely recognized that efficient management is required in complex organizations in order to drive the purposes of leadership through systems for decision-making, co-ordination, reward, and accountability. In the period 1850 through 1950, the imperatives of control and accountability for resources and activities dominated public and institutional concerns, resulting in an emphasis on restraint and containment rather than on empowerment, 4 Dembowski 5 initiative, and creative development. It was during this period that the position of superintendent was established. Since the 1970s, the role of leadership gained ascendancy. Many scholars in the 1960s and 1970s maintained “administration” as their focus, not leadership (see for example Willower and Culbertson, 1964; English, 1994; Hoy and Miskel, 1978, 2001). Most of the current texts are centered on leadership principles and practices. See for example the nature of the chapters in Carr and Fulmer (2004). Many of their chapters focus on leadership and the failure of leadership preparation programs. The need for, and value of, leadership and management is driven by the environmental context in which organizations exist and operate. Some conditions demand strong management while others require strong leadership. As times change, the roles of leadership and management also change. And what is “administration,” the term that was predominantly used until the 1990’s? Where does that fit in? This chapter presents an overview of these topics with a focus on the roles of leadership and management, within the context of educational organizations. While leader roles are viewed here equally important as management, the comprehensive treatment of leadership has been treated well elsewhere (see Hoyle, English, and Steffy, 1998, 2005; Schwahn and Spady, 1998; and Carr and Fulmer, 2004). In the discussion that follows, the terms management, leadership and administration will in turn be defined, compared, and contrasted. Next, the links between them will be discussed and the conditions under which they are needed will be considered. Finally, recommendations for the future roles of these functions in both educational organizations and in training programs will be made. What is Management? 5 Dembowski 6 A manager, according to the Handbook of the American Management Association (AMA), is one whose power is derived from the position he or she holds and who is accountable for achieving organizational objectives through the actions of subordinates (AMA, n.d.). “Manage” comes from the Latin word meaning “hand” in the context of handling something. Management usually implies the handling or carrying out of policies and plans laid down by someone else (one's own self, if management and leadership are administered by the same person). It is more of a science than an art, where procedure and protocol are both important and satisfactory fulfillment of the management role is highly reliant upon calculation, statistics, methods, timetables, and routines (Stigmergicsystems, n.d.). According to C.S. George, traditionally management has been defined in a narrow sense as the art of getting things done by others; a manager is one who accomplishes the objectives by directing the efforts of others. This definition is lacking in two ways: (1) No realistic goal is set in this sense. (2) A suitable internal environment is also not created. (Nature, n.d.) Massie and Douglas (n.d.) stated “Management is the process by which a cooperative group directs actions of others towards common goals.” Koontz and O’Donnell (1978) stated “Management is establishing an effective environment for the people operating in formal organizational groups.” Kreitner (2004) stated: “Management is a process of working with or through others to effectively achieve organizational objectives by efficiently using limited resources in the changing environment.” Management is about the "hard skills." Management focuses on the business of the organization; it involves planning and budgeting, organizing and staffing, and controlling and measuring. “Management is not just getting things done. It is much more. It involves the whole 6 Dembowski 7 range of activities directed towards achieving organizational goals” (Nature, n.d.). For example, management seeks the maximum utilization of available resources in the best possible interest of an enterprise. It is a set of functions directed at the efficient and effective utilization of available resources. To be more specific, to manage means to forecast and to plan, to organize, to command, to coordinate, and to control. Thus management may be defined as “creating the internal environment of an enterprise where individuals working together in groups can perform efficiently and effectively toward the attainment of group goals.” (Nature, n.d.). Management is essential for the successful operation of an organization. It is essential in all organizations and at all levels of administration. “Without the enlightened guidance of the management; the productive resources will remain as resources only and shall never become production.” (Nature, n.d.) As Edwin Robinson rightly said, “No business runs itself on momentum but needs repeated stimulus” (Nature, n.d.). Management has a focus on efficiency. “Managers translate the strategic vision of the leaders into the tactics necessary to achieve the goals. Managers establish the specific measurable objectives that are used to monitor the organization’s progress towards the goals” (Searson, 2000). "Management is focused on maintaining standards. . . . It looks for declines in performance, in productivity, in quality. When it finds those declines it seeks to restore things to the standard. It essentially looks backward and tries to fix things that are broken” (Zeeck, 1997). Management is a combination of an organized body of knowledge and skillful application of this knowledge. Much of this knowledge can be found in various academic disciplines, including business and the social sciences. Effective performance of various management functions is dependent on an adequate basis of knowledge and a scientific approach. Thus 7 Dembowski 8 management is both science and an art. It is a science because it requires continuous practice and an art because it requires personal skills (Nature, n.d.). Like other social sciences, management is an inexact science. “Management deals with human behavior which is subject to constant changes and cannot be predicted on the basis of absolute laws and experiments. Because of this, the degree of inexactness in the case of management is quite high, and the principles of management are still evolving” (Nature, n.d.). It is said that “the art of management starts where the science of management ends” (Nature, n.d.). Management is neither a complete science nor a complete art because only by training and practice an art can be mastered. Constant experimentation by training and practice is essential for an art. A person cannot become a successful manager without learning the systematized body of knowledge and principles of management. Similarly, a person cannot become a successful manager without learning the principles of management in a scientific manner. He also needs scientific training and practice in the field of management.” (Nature, n.d.) Nature also stated, “It is said that the manager embodies the best possible mixture of art and human sciences. In this sense of managers having to master the principles of management, we can say that ‘managers are not born but made.” Many aspects of management are often viewed as a component of leadership. “Management is a thinking function. Managers must think before doing anything. For the purpose of determining organizational goals, for selecting the resources and for efficient utilization of resources, the manager needs a high degree of vision and judgment” (Nature, n.d.). However, vision is usually considered as a trait of leadership. 8 Dembowski 9 Kepner (1976) described the role of management as: “to create and support a culture throughout the organization where staff freely access and supply information.” This approach to management utilizes expert information of staff to help develop and implement changes to enhance work processes and outcomes that are responsive to the customers’ needs. However, the development of a “culture” is also often seen as a function of leadership. The roles of leaders and managers are complementary. The role of the manager is one of stewardship, necessitating qualities of good administration, abilities to make efficient and effective use of resources. Managers like and tend to preserve the steady state. They don't like anything that “rocks the boat.” They are expected to handle crises (“fire fighting”), but it is expected that they should have enough forethought to be able to avoid them. This is where leadership is necessary. An effective manager is one who can invoke support through the channeling of a clear shared vision through the organization. “The manager is the dynamic, life-giving element in every business… above all, the quality and performance of the managers determine the success of a business; indeed they determine its survival” (Drucker, 1988). “The senior managers in many organizations are often and correctly acknowledged as remarkably talented pioneers. The integrated structures emerging under their guidance, however, are typically so new and so dynamic that even the seasoned executives in this movement are still learning to create and operate highly integrated systems or networks” (Drucker, 1988). Managers are visionary regarding “process,” leaders are visionary regarding outcomes. Managers see the here and how, and leaders project the when and if. A manager’s role is to plan, implement, monitor, and control activities over relatively short time frames from a few months to a few years. Tasks include budgeting, managing 9 Dembowski 10 workflows and systems, and coordinating resources (including people). Definitions, as expected, vary. For example Peter Senge (1990) viewed the manager’s role as changing from one of organizing and controlling to a new dogma of shared vision, values, and mental models. Again, this is more akin to the descriptors for leadership. The superintendent has both leadership and management roles. As manager, the superintendent attends to those functions that are mainly internal to the school district and are crucial for the day-to-day functioning of the district as an organization. In this role, rather than exercising community leadership and statesmanship skills, the superintendent must serve as the organization’s chief administrative/executive officer/manager. The responsibility for the operation of the school district as an organization is delegated to the superintendent by the school board. “In both roles of leadership and management, it is essential that the superintendent provides supervision and fosters an understanding of an array of managerial approaches and tools related to the effective functioning of various managerial sub-systems” (Dembowski, 1999). What is the effect on superintendents’ failure to both lead and manage? Dembowski (1998), based upon his surveys of superintendents, formulated the Superintendent’s Maxim: “You get hired for being a good leader; you get fired for being a poor manager.” What is Leadership? While the complete treatment of leadership is beyond the scope of this text, a review of the definition and functions of leadership are pertinent here. For a comprehensive treatment of the subject, see Hoyle, English and Steffy (1998, 2005), Schwahn and Spady (1998), and Carr and Fulmer (2004). “Leadership is a set of processes that creates organizations in the first place or adapts them to significantly changing circumstances. Leadership defines what the future should look 10