I have 2 dissection post from my classmates and I need some one to response to each on of them in academic way with references
post one
Management is the process of decision making, planning, organizing, leading, motivating, and controlling financial, information, human, and physical resources of an organization (Prasad, 2020). Management aims to enable an organization to achieve the set goals effectively and efficiently. Management helps achieve a group’s purpose, reduces costs, and establishes a sound organization (Prasad, 2020). On the other hand, leadership is the capacity to motivate a group of people to accomplish a common objective (Goffee & Jones, 2005). Leadership is essential in any organization because it provides guidance, initiates action, builds morale, creates confidence, and builds a working environment (Goffee & Jones, 2005)
There are various desirable characteristics and behaviors that management and leadership should have. One of the desirable characteristics of management is that it should be goal-oriented. Managements always aim to accomplish the organization’s objectives (Prasad, 2020). Furthermore, it should be dynamic. It has to make changes in its activities according to the changes in the environment (Prasad, 2020). On the other hand, leadership should be built on ethics and integrity. The leaders should be deeply committed to doing the right things, even when it is challenging to stay on the course. Leadership should also be built on trust. Leaders should take actions that gain them respect hence build trust (Goffee & Jones, 2005). It should also bring others around and encourage innovation. Lack of transparency is one of the unfavorable characteristics of leadership (Goffee & Jones, 2005). If a leader misrepresents the truth and employees find out, it shutters their trust, and they become disillusioned.
The key analytical points from the Missing Piece of NIMS” are that it is beneficial in arranging and organizing response efforts for significant occurrences, but in future operative times only, when a specific quantity of order has been reinstated (Cynthia, 2012). However, NIMS has a failure. It provides limited assistance to the first responders who must deal with primary disorder characteristics at the onset of each scene (Cynthia, 2012). I will ensure that leadership in disaster and emergency management is built on trust in the future. I will ensure that I have good relations with my colleagues and that there will be no secrets. This will be a way of building an effective working environment and initiating action. Furthermore, I will ensure that the management will be flexible to changes that will be occurring.
References
Cynthia Renaud. (2012). The Missing Piece of NIMS: Teaching Incident Commanders How to Function in the Edge of Chaos. Retrieved from https://www.hsaj.org/articles/221 (Links to an external site.).
Goffee, R., & Jones, G. (2005). Managing authenticity. harvard business review, 83(12), 85-94.
Prasad, L. M. (2020). Principles and practice of management. Sultan Chand & Sons.
answer 2
Management is different from leadership in how it is absolutely necessary in the interfacing of plans with actions, while leadership is a persistent influence on brings to guide change over a long-term and hopefully inspire and appeal to stakeholders and followers. Crisis management is about managing under conditions that seem to compress time and other limitations onto the manager. They must conduct leadership while doing so, but crisis is not the same for organizational leadership in the sense that one is not going to have a long time to configure their influence and cause change in their organization prior to the crisis, they will need other types of leadership that are not necessarily transformational, but transformative and collaborative in how they are intended to press organizations to adapt quickly. The management definition is more practiced and visible in action. Leadership is more passive and yet can be persistent in all things a leader does (Kapucu & Ustun, 2018).
To understand leadership is to understand people. Leaders rely on the influence they have on others, and the way that others would perceive them, which is most effective if they are perceived as a leader. Leaders manage the way in which they are perceived and must appeal to others as authentic. The followers of an organization need to be assured that the leader shows their intent, and this helps of course because the followers can then align their goals more accurately with the leader’s. Leaders need to build trust, which would correlate with the perceptions of their authenticity. This can only be achieved by investing one’s self in achieving goals. People must see passion and belief in the goals a leader is attempting (Goffee, 2005).
The article that analyzes NIMS to probe for weaknesses and gaps in its framework. The broad issue that the author has noted is that NIMS affords very fixed procedures that attempt to obtain predictable outcomes, but that these compartmented procedures of NIMS will not adapt to chaotic problems, those which are spontaneous and less manageable. NIMS wants to break down parts of problems, as thought there is a mechanistic quality in all problems that can be solved through individual treatments of problem symptoms. Other such issues are in the very context of NIMS, where it is designating uniformity of policies and interoperability in all-hazards, which is meant to serve as effective coordination during large-scale events. This system formats incidents and the approaches toward them as bureaucratic operations, and will not account for the response agencies’ experience at the scene of an incident despite arranging for so many procedures and policies held at a management level. There is no command functions at the principle action level that first responders inevitably face, it is instead a systematic development above that leaves chances to the autonomy of first responders. The NIMS is also not a system that identifies “chaos” as a natural condition of disasters, which can make commanders generally uncomfortable with disaster as they might believe that NIMS should resolve chaos under a competent all-hazards approach. This centralized hierarchical structured thinking can lead to incompatible tactics being used when there is not enough regard for chaotic conditions emergent in the situation. NIMS can take responder’s agency to question the situation away and essentially replaces intent to help with obligation to comply (Renaud).
I believe that I will promote intent through transformative and collaborative leadership. I will be sure to approach leadership early on, because I know that management benefits greatly from any social capital stored up as a leader. I want to make sure that the centralizing elements of NIMS does not lead to confusion in the face of chaos, and therefore want to make accommodations for leadership training that is conducive for members as responders to become congruent with the organization’s goals.
Goffee, R., & Jones, G. (2005). Managing authenticity: the paradox of great leadership. Harvard business review, 83(12), 86–153.
Kapucu, N., & Ustun, Y. (2018). Collaborative crisis management and leadership in the public sector. International Journal of Public Administration, 41(7), 548-561.
Renaud, C. (2012) The Missing Piece of NIMS: Teaching Incident Commanders How to Function in the Edge of Chaos. Homeland Security Affairs. 8(8), 1-16.
