The less general. The contrast between the two characters

The contrast between leadership and leadership skills is an ongoing activity among business critics (Northouse, 2004; Kotter, 2011; Kotterman, 2006; Shahrill, 2014; Zaleznik, 2005).It is an excess of literature devoted to the analysis of part and importance of the leader because it determines to be the standard theme of the education industry (Ackerman & Maslin-Ostrowski, 2002; Hecke, Callahan, Kolar & Paller, 2010; Kotter, 1996; Kouzes & Posner, 2012; McKee, Boyatzis, & Johnston, 2008). However, management is not so general a general idea as management.

Although there is a lot of literature about the work of the leader; It has been proven that the other is less general. The contrast between the two characters appears to give a professional benefit to the role of a leader, as the leader assumes the role of a traditional bureaucrat (Kotterman, 2006; Shahrill, 2014; Zaleznik, 2005).Hedescribed how attitudes of leadership and leadership were moved separately interms of role and importance. It is necessary to know the implications of sucha point of view on business people.

In addition, it is not unreasonable to winthe way a business student finds the truth to become an elegant and meaningfuladditional executive of a manager. In this context, the student can questionthe importance of management or even his role as manager. Many studies compareand fight the role and function of leaders and executives. However, the lack ofliterary framework compromises this model (Bolden 2007, Bush 2007, Kotterman2006;  Shahrill, 2014; Zaleznik, 2005). This work builds on earlier studies because it questions the importance of managers in terms of managers. In addition, he excludes such association in higher education; because it’s a common idea that a business student needs attention to become an executive. Finally, the study proposes a standard change in which management and leadership are integrated into one course; with the same goals for organizational development. This accounting assumes that if leadership is more important than management; Then it is no problem to learn management skills.

The secondary hypothesis mentions the idea that management is considered average in terms of leadership. In this situation, when management and leadership are formed as a single business route; Business students would have a stronger business setup. The collaborators in theory are systematically discussed in addition to this document.In a guideline that endorses both primary and secondary assumptions, a somewhat old background is offered; with the desire to create the structure of the existing understanding of management and leadership. Leadership and management ideas are systematically defined, linked and differentiated. These instructions are presented in the feature identification guide, which spreads the idea that leaders are better than managers. The major dissociations between leaders and managers are presented in the form of narratives. This will determine howDissociationwill disrupt organizational development; which can actually be measured as athird hypothesis.

The assumptions and research strategy are greatly increasedbecause the accounting resources used in this document are essentially the sameeducational resources used by economics students. Finally, the degree anddiscussion are monitored to be trained when it is necessary to change attitudesin which leadership and leadership are qualified; and if that relationshipinfluences organizational development. In theory, the importance of this studyis based on the development of standards of categorization of the work ofmanagers and leaders. Although the organizational context, technology,organizational assessment and other characteristics of the business havechanged; It is perfectly true that theories stay in position, not parallel tothe model change.

In theory, when the administrative culture and purpose arechanged, it makes sense to follow academic ideas and literature; to provide aneffective business education. Practical demands are all the more importantbecause they openly affect organizational investors. This article presentsnarratives to show that the practical implications undermine the developmentand coherence of the organization.