<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><br></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:0.5in;margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">A
principal would benefit from addressing both the managerial and leadership
aspects of administration, because although the two differ, an effective administrator
would incorporate both aspects. People who follow leaders typically believe in
the leader, and are loyal. People who follow a manager typically do so out of
obligation, just as the manger manages out of obligation. Managers often pass
work off to their subordinates, and insure the work is completed. Both leadership
and managerial aspects would benefit a principal, in that acting as a leader could
inspire and motivate their followers, while simultaneously acting as a manager-
insuring everyone follows through on their tasks. The two roles go hand in hand
in being well received administrator. <span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:0.5in;margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Stakeholders
often view effective managers positively when they are good communicators, and are
able to delegate tasks. Effective managers are focused on priorities, but are
also likeable to their subordinates. Stakeholders positively view a manager
that is personable, but task oriented enough to get things done. Although more
task oriented than a leader, effective managers seem to display many
characteristics of a leader. If a manager fails to take on the aspects of a
leader, they are negatively viewed as ridged or controlling. When it comes to
decision making, if a manager lacks charisma or personability there would be
resistance from their subordinates, because they do not feel inspired to follow.
<span></span></span></p>
<br></div>