The dangers of Re-branding of Management Development as Leadership Development.

Management roles and leadership roles are two distinct positions within a company or a business. These roles occupy specific responsibilities and are demonstrated through various different personality traits.

For businesses, this distinction is incredibly essential but within the modern world, the line that distinguishes these roles is fading. While this is a direct consequence of the democratization of workspaces and growing opportunities, it is also becoming of the general image of managers to be seen as "authoritarian."

When people climb the corporate ladder, their development as individuals is focused on them being leaders. While this is not a bad thing, it is crucial to understand that it shouldn’t come at the expense of managerial development.

I argue that the lack of managerial development is precisely why managers are seen as "iron fist" rulers, and leaders are not. It is essential to train individuals based on their traits for positions that suit them the best. This could be both the position of a manager or a leader. Similarly, individuals, when self-training, should also be mindful of this boundary and figure out where they can perform the best.

I also suggest that this rebranding is responsible for managers not being able to fulfill their responsibilities successfully, due to their inability to recognize their role and be pragmatic with their approach.

Let’s understand what these two roles are and why the rebranding of management development as leadership development is terrible, which often leads to an "authoritarian style" of management and its dangers.

What is Management Development?

Management development is the process by which an individual who aspires to be in a managerial position can gain and apply knowledge, skills, insights, and attitudes to manage managers, workers, and work organizations effectively.

Managers are responsible for overseeing the performance of a group of people employed under their supervision. They are also responsible for planning and maintaining work systems, procedures, and policies that encourage optimum performance and a strong work ethic their team and other resources within a business unit.

For Managers, there are certain traits that are essential for their position and role in a company.

• The ability to execute a Vision:
• The ability to Direct:
• Process Management:

What is Leadership Development?

Leadership development is the improvement of skills, abilities, and confidence of individuals in key leadership positions. A leader's role is to inspire and create followers who are also self-leaders. The task of a leader is to bring about constructive and necessary change. The responsibility of a leader is to bring about the difference in a way that is responsive to the real and long-term needs of all stakeholders.

Leaders are responsible for promoting and investing in the careers of their team. This can be achieved by providing training and conducting performance reviews. Leaders multiply themselves, building the business by positioning influential leaders in critical positions.

• Vision:
• Inspiration:
• Ability to Challenge:

Why is this a trend in the modern world?

Within modern companies, managers get a bad reputation. This is because there is a stereotypical idea of the traits that a manager inhibits.

These are traits that are seen as stern and more authoritarian. As a result of this, most young career-oriented individuals who are preparing for managerial positions inculcate qualities of leadership.

This shows the prioritization of relationship building with resources, being seen as a visionary, and if I am honest, it is also a bit self-aggrandizing. This "leader" attitude doesn’t fit well with the job requirements of a manager but is often what people aim for.

This is because, within the modern world, the demand for leader-like behavior has risen. This is a direct consequence of increasing opportunities in the market where resources are demanding better treatment than before. Resources do not like hard-headed and stern managers.

Don’t get me wrong; this is not a bad thing. But the market's answer to this legitimate concern has been crazy. The rebranding of management development as leadership development has made it so that managers are ill-equipped to deal with their responsibilities.

This leads to a growing sense of frustration within managers, who then vent this through their "iron fist" approach. This happens as a result of managers being trained for leadership roles and given the responsibilities of a manager.

When these traits and learnings fail, managers often find themselves lost in their approach and have to innovate. Therefore, they resort to stereotypical authoritarian behavior, even though through training, proper alternatives do exist.

Managers don’t have to be bad cops, but this rebranding process forces them to be the bad cops, which leads to further problems at a company.

What are the dangers of rebranding Management Development as Leadership Development?

This rebranding process has significant consequences for businesses. Managers who are unable to expertly deal with productivity concerns, manage operations and execute visions become a weak link within the organizational structure of a business. Some of the resulting consequences include the following:

1. Inefficient resource management

Managing resources is an essential part of the job. It requires strategic decision making to ensure that productivity levels across the team are high.

Some of the critical aspects to ensure this include task allocation, time management and a thorough understanding of the limitations of individual members. Managers should be able to motivate their teams and not necessarily inspire them.

Moreover, managers have to keep a watchful eye on the workflows and account for the adherence to work protocols and systems.If resources are unable to follow routine or work in a standardized manner that ensures a reasonable work rate, then managers have to intervene.

Whereas leaders can disassociate themselves from such micro-management, managers have to ensure they step up. When managerial development is replaced by leadership management, managers can often fail to intervene at the right times and in the proper manner.

This leads to a lack of efficiency and task completion, which translates into missed deadlines. For managers, the development of this trait to reduce risk and encourage optimum performance is necessary. This is a vast trade-off that comes with the implementation of rebranding strategies that are used in training and development.

Lack of Pragmatism

Leaders have the room to be overly optimistic and idealists. They are supposed to craft a long-term plan and vision for a company. For them, perceptions regarding performance can be a bit more relaxed.For Managers, there is a more severe need to be in touch with ground realities. The primary task for managers is to ensure that specific solutions and methods are implemented with diligence.Good managers who understand their developmental skills rely on their ability to adhere to set guidelines. These are people responsible for making the "hard-choice" at a company.

The lack of such pragmatism can often lead to process flaws not being catered to. It allows for a delay in solving internal problems within processes.

For businesses, it is imperative to deal with such problems to ensure consistency in their performance, and managers play a crucial part in achieving that.

Frustrated resources

We have already established that a lack of proper managerial development can often lead to a dictatorial approach to process management. This is because managers find themselves ill-equipped to deal with individual circumstances.This includes a demotivated workforce and the inability to find immediate solutions to problems within the process. In such circumstances, managers tend to myopically blame individual personnel for failure.This leads to a general frustration building within their teams, leading to more inefficiency. This is because the mental pressure and exhaustion lead to reduced productivity.This reactionary management is often counter-productive and leads to more problems than it solves.

Conclusion.

At the end of the day, managers need to know how to manage their resources. They need to understand the limitations of their role and why they can’t behave as leaders do.

The rebranding of management development as leadership development has given industries a generation of managers who lack the skillset to dictate tasks and know how to get them done without being overly harsh to employees.

It has led to a blurred line between inspiring employees and directing employees. Only one of them is the role of a manager, and that understanding is pivotal to the performance of their team.