Management vs. Leadership
My working definition of management is that it is the act of planning and coordinating efforts by people so as to achieve desired goals and objectives. This planning and coordination usually aims at managing resources required for the achievement of goals and objectives to promote efficiency and effective use. According to McKimm& Phillips (2009), management involves planning, coordinating, organizing, staffing and directing resources, which range from people, to finances, to technology, and natural resources, in order to accomplish set goals. In order for such management processes to be achieved, there has to be a manager.
On the other hand, my working definition of leadership is that it is the process whereby someone socially influences others through enlisting aid and support with the aim of accomplishing a common task. According to McKimm& Phillips (2009), leadership is where someone organizes a group of people in order to achieve common goals and objectives. In these situations, leaders may either have formal or informal authority.
The working definitions of management and leadership vary in many ways. First, while management deals with administration, leadership deals with influencing and innovation. This is why managers direct functions and operations in order to accomplish goals, while leaders influence their followers to collect and share new ideas to accomplish goals. Second, management promotes maintenance while leadership promotes development. As previously stated, management directs while leadership innovates. In this case, we find that management ensures that activities stay in the same course, while leadership ensures that new ideas and solutions are implemented frequently.
Third, management involves total control while leadership involves trust. While managers aspire to control activities in order to achieve goals, leaders encourage trust through motivating followers to share ideas and suggestions. In addition, management promotes imitation while leadership promotes originality. In this case, we find that managers are monotonous and they follow steps and procedures to manage activities and deal with issues. On the other hand, leaders frequently come up with new solutions and ideas to deal with issues. Moreover, management promotes systems and structure while leadership focuses on followers or people. In this case, we find that managers use systematic rules and procedures to lead while leaders involve the ideas and input of their followers in their leadership.
The working definition of management applies to criminal justice and security in many aspects. Security management deals with expert planning, directing, and coordinating the security of people, organizations, and data. People who work in this field range from law enforcement to security guards. They plan and direct the safeguarding of information, people, organizations, and territories. They do this through following protocol and procedures. Basically, they plan, direct, and coordinate safeguarding measures by following orders and procedures. For example, security management of information involves planning, coordinating, and implementing measures that will help protect and safeguard sensitive information that is stored either electronically(Hess & Orthmann, 2012).
On the other hand, security management of territories, e.g.) Homeland security, involves planning, coordinating, and implementing measures that help protect territories from harm such as terror and cyber-attacks. This is where criminal justice comes in. Criminal justice provides rules and regulations that have been to be followed during security management. It is a system of practices created by governments to direct and control the society by ensuring that members of society uphold social control, do not engage in crimes, and ensure that they do not violate the rules and regulations provided through security management(Hess & Orthmann, 2012).
However, security management in criminal justice is not as effective today as it used to be in the past years. This is because there is a high rise in crime because of societal change factors such as rapid urbanization. This has led to the introduction of leadership in security management. Because of this, security management agencies, such as law enforcement agencies, are offering training programs for their top leaders in areas such as situational leadership, ethics and moral dilemmas, diversity, organizational climate, and performance management(Hess & Orthmann, 2012). One area mostly emphasized today is the importance of effective styles of leadership in criminal justice.
In conclusion, leadership management in criminal justice and security management will promote improvement. This is because while security management and criminal justice follow rules and procedures, these areas are extremely delicate because they deal with people(Hess & Orthmann, 2012). For example, within the organizations, people need motivation. Strict procedures will not promote motivation because people will always follow protocol leaving no room for improvement. Secondly, in places such as law enforcement, situational leadership is important when dealing with delicate cases such as an imminent terror attack or hostage situations(Vellani, 2007). A leader would be expected to help provide quick solutions with the help of followers; people would need to act as a team. Management would not be ideal in such a situation because it is procedural and strict, leaving no room for change in order to suit the immediate delicate situation. However, overall, management and leadership go hand in hand(Mitchell & Casey, 2008).
References
Hess, K. M., & Orthmann, C. M. (2012). Introduction to Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice. Clifton Park, NY: Delmark Cengage Learning.
McKimm, J., & Phillips, K. (2009). Leadership and Management in Integrated Services. London, UK: Learning Matters.
Mitchell, M., & Casey, J. P. (2008). Police Leadership and Management. Leichhardt, NSW: The Federation Press.
Vellani, K. (2007). Strategic Security Management. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Inc.
