George FreemanThought Leader | Author | Architect| Florida, United States
Defining the roles/responsibilities and value of a project manager is not too difficult when we use PMI based descriptors. However, what we see in the field for such titled professionals varies dramatically. To the extent that it often creates elevated debates on the topic, as one’s perception of the roles/responsibilities and value of a PM are typically taken from their interaction with resources so named. Stated differently, there are countless sub-type roles of project managers, but yet most carry the same formal title, thus creating dialectic truths and confusion.
For example, when you have a non-empowered, non-accountable “PM titled” resources on a project, it’s understandable that the perceptions of observers will be highly slanted towards viewing PM’s as A) schedule trackers, B) communication relayers, C) managers in name only, and the like. We then have over-the-top agilest whose perspectives of “relegating us to a case study in antiquation,” are well known.
Recognizing the “image problems” we have in our profession, how would you quantify our value to the uninformed? Please state it in the following two categories:
- Standard Value Propositions
- Extradoniary Value Propositions (i.e., value to the enterprise/organization that goes beyond the standard tangible statements) Saving Changes...
Peter RapinSubject Matter Expect; Project Delivery| Independent ConsultantOntario, Canada
Aug 23, 2020 10:49 PM
Replying to George Freeman
...
Adrian,
The discussion that is occurring here aligns to the point of my question, that is, we all have different perceptions of what a project manager “is,” based on our interaction with resources of that title. In fact, your perception of a PM appears to be what I stated, A) a schedule tracker, B) a communication relayer, and C) a manager in name only. Hence, the image problem we have in our profession.
Some Thoughts:
- A traditionally chartered project manager is empowered by executive management and acts in proxy of them. Thus, your statement that a project sponsor or business user would go around them to the “real decision maker” flies against accountability principles. To that point, a business user taking that route in my world would be making a CLM (i.e., a Career Limiting Move).
- As it relates to delegation: When an empowered and accountable PM executes their project plan (regardless of how the plan was created), he/she is delegating those tasks to their team. That is the nature of an accountable position. I understand that principle seems inequitable, but it’s a functional reality in most organizational structures.
Adrian, I have worked in the software industry for four decades and very much understand your thoughts and opinions regarding project managers, architects, technical project leads, and the like. I’m a business and IT architect who is also a project manager – and proud of it. However, I recognize from experience and the wisdom of the profession that being both at the same time is problematic.
Your experience is entirely valid and understood, but I would like you to consider is that the project managers you have experienced, or at least the ones you have described, are functionally acting as project coordinators or administrators and not the traditional (PMI based) project manager.
We may be getting to the crux of the matter. The title Project Manager is being applied too widely. I see a distinct difference between a Project Coordinator, a Project Administrator and a Project Manager. The industry, for numerous reasons, miss-titles the various project roles and applies the term Manager where there is no management function.
Manager: a person who has control and directs (dictionary definition)
There is also a reluctance in the industry to recognize that the management of projects is a subject matter and that a true Project Manager is an SME. One of the main challenges of the PM is to integrate all the other SMEs so as to effectively achieve the project goals. It would probably be beneficial if the PM has some knowledge of each subject in order to effectively communicate but that knowledge would not give him authority over technical matters - that rests with the technical SMEs. However the technical SMEs do not have authority over project matters (scope, cost, time, risk, etc).
The Project Charter or Project Plan should clearly identify roles and responsibility and project success is enhanced when the team (and stakeholders) understand and respect those roles. Saving Changes...
Peter RapinSubject Matter Expect; Project Delivery| Independent ConsultantOntario, Canada
Aug 23, 2020 7:26 PM
Replying to Adrian Carlogea
...
Hi Peter,
While the PM's subject matter expertise is not essential for the project delivery this attribute is very important for the way the PM is being perceived by others. And that's true especially for the team members but also for the other stakeholders.
I am saying this from experience, if the PM is not an expert in a relevant line of work for the project then he is not going to be perceived as a leader by the project team members. Also the project sponsor and the business users would often bypass him and would go directly to the real decision maker.
Regarding delegation, with all due respect, I don't agree with your definition, but I admit that I may be wrong. For me delegation is only when you are responsible for doing something you can do it yourself but you choose to ask someone else to do it on your behalf.
I will try to give an example:
Imagine a software project where you have, among others, a PM, a software architect and some developers. When the software architect is making software architecture decisions he will not need any delegation from the PM. The PM may ask the architect to make those decisions but since this is not his responsibility this is not really delegation. Asking someone to do a work is not always delegation.
If the PM asks the Software Architect to attend on his/her behalf a meeting with the stakeholders regarding the management of the project then this is delegation.
Delegation is also when the software architect asks a developer to make some architectural decisions on his behalf.
Delegation is not mandatory. A PM can delegate nothing and still the technical decisions may be taken by relevant SMEs and not by himself.
In my mind 'delegation' relates to authority not the assignment of work or tasks unless that assignment includes the authority to make decisions.
As an example, if I have the authority to commit $1m towards delivery of the project I can delegate all or some of that authority down the line or to select SMEs. I may chose to delegate $500k to may second in command and (s)he in turn delegate $200k to his second. However, I retain full accountability (for the $1m).
In terms of technical authorities, the SMEs gets their delegated authority through their organizational structure. However any decision that impacts on the project (cost, time, etc) must also get authority from the PM. The SMEs should not have the authority to deliver a task incompatible with the project objectives. Saving Changes...
Yes but those that are being assigned on a project don't need any authority to do their work. Like the PM the other team members are being assigned a role on the project and they have to play that role.
For example a software developer once he is being assigned to the project by his line manager does not need any authority from the PM or from someone else to write the code. There is no need of any delegation of authority for the software developer.
Indeed the SMEs can't deliver tasks incompatible with the project objectives, but those objectives are not being defined by the PM. The business users define what they need and the sponsor makes the final decision on what exactly is going to be delivered.
...
1 reply by Peter Rapin
Aug 24, 2020 4:36 PM
Peter Rapin
...
Sounds like you don't need a PM. You need an Administrator and/or Coordinator. - Nothing to manage!
The discussion that is occurring here aligns to the point of my question, that is, we all have different perceptions of what a project manager “is,” based on our interaction with resources of that title. In fact, your perception of a PM appears to be what I stated, A) a schedule tracker, B) a communication relayer, and C) a manager in name only. Hence, the image problem we have in our profession.
Some Thoughts:
- A traditionally chartered project manager is empowered by executive management and acts in proxy of them. Thus, your statement that a project sponsor or business user would go around them to the “real decision maker” flies against accountability principles. To that point, a business user taking that route in my world would be making a CLM (i.e., a Career Limiting Move).
- As it relates to delegation: When an empowered and accountable PM executes their project plan (regardless of how the plan was created), he/she is delegating those tasks to their team. That is the nature of an accountable position. I understand that principle seems inequitable, but it’s a functional reality in most organizational structures.
Adrian, I have worked in the software industry for four decades and very much understand your thoughts and opinions regarding project managers, architects, technical project leads, and the like. I’m a business and IT architect who is also a project manager – and proud of it. However, I recognize from experience and the wisdom of the profession that being both at the same time is problematic.
Your experience is entirely valid and understood, but I would like you to consider is that the project managers you have experienced, or at least the ones you have described, are functionally acting as project coordinators or administrators and not the traditional (PMI based) project manager.
"your perception of a PM appears to be what I stated, A) a schedule tracker, B) a communication relayer, and C) a manager in name only. Hence, the image problem we have in our profession."
This is true only if the PM is not also a SME in relevant line of work for the project.
" As it relates to delegation: When an empowered and accountable PM executes their project plan (regardless of how the plan was created), he/she is delegating those tasks to their team."
To be honest I may not understand the meaning of the word delegation. For me it means doing someone else's work at the request of that person. Delegation is not mandatory managers may choose not to delegate anything to their teams but this does not mean that the team members would not perform those tasks.
In order to perform some tasks you don't delegation from anyone if performing those tasks is your responsibility. Delegation, in my opinion, is only when you are doing someone else's tasks on that person's behalf.
...
1 reply by George Freeman
Aug 24, 2020 4:44 PM
George Freeman
...
Adrian,
I’m trying to take the discussion of delegation to a different level, that being the concept of accountability and delegative authority. For instance:
- An executive grants delegative authority to a project manager through a charter.
--- The project manager then so empowered, grants delegative authority to the project team.
------ Project leads then grant delegative authority to their respective teams and so forth.
Each level does not necessarily know the specific activity details that are occurring under them, but yet they are responsible for those details (for the good or the bad) as if they were completing the work themselves.
Most people recognize this concept in the medical context, where you have a doctor who grants delegative authority to, for instance, a Nurse Practioner or Midwife. The NP or Midwife does not have any authority outside of that provided them by the doctor (even though they are independently licensed and trained), but yet they operate independently and at the same time with full accountability to the MD (at least in most states).
This style of project management is not practiced everywhere, but it is the cornerstone of traditional project management – at least from my perspective.
George
Saving Changes...
Peter RapinSubject Matter Expect; Project Delivery| Independent ConsultantOntario, Canada
Aug 24, 2020 3:06 PM
Replying to Adrian Carlogea
...
@Peter,
Yes but those that are being assigned on a project don't need any authority to do their work. Like the PM the other team members are being assigned a role on the project and they have to play that role.
For example a software developer once he is being assigned to the project by his line manager does not need any authority from the PM or from someone else to write the code. There is no need of any delegation of authority for the software developer.
Indeed the SMEs can't deliver tasks incompatible with the project objectives, but those objectives are not being defined by the PM. The business users define what they need and the sponsor makes the final decision on what exactly is going to be delivered.
Sounds like you don't need a PM. You need an Administrator and/or Coordinator. - Nothing to manage! Saving Changes...
George FreemanThought Leader | Author | Architect| Florida, United States
Aug 24, 2020 3:14 PM
Replying to Adrian Carlogea
...
"your perception of a PM appears to be what I stated, A) a schedule tracker, B) a communication relayer, and C) a manager in name only. Hence, the image problem we have in our profession."
This is true only if the PM is not also a SME in relevant line of work for the project.
" As it relates to delegation: When an empowered and accountable PM executes their project plan (regardless of how the plan was created), he/she is delegating those tasks to their team."
To be honest I may not understand the meaning of the word delegation. For me it means doing someone else's work at the request of that person. Delegation is not mandatory managers may choose not to delegate anything to their teams but this does not mean that the team members would not perform those tasks.
In order to perform some tasks you don't delegation from anyone if performing those tasks is your responsibility. Delegation, in my opinion, is only when you are doing someone else's tasks on that person's behalf.
Adrian,
I’m trying to take the discussion of delegation to a different level, that being the concept of accountability and delegative authority. For instance:
- An executive grants delegative authority to a project manager through a charter.
--- The project manager then so empowered, grants delegative authority to the project team.
------ Project leads then grant delegative authority to their respective teams and so forth.
Each level does not necessarily know the specific activity details that are occurring under them, but yet they are responsible for those details (for the good or the bad) as if they were completing the work themselves.
Most people recognize this concept in the medical context, where you have a doctor who grants delegative authority to, for instance, a Nurse Practioner or Midwife. The NP or Midwife does not have any authority outside of that provided them by the doctor (even though they are independently licensed and trained), but yet they operate independently and at the same time with full accountability to the MD (at least in most states).
This style of project management is not practiced everywhere, but it is the cornerstone of traditional project management – at least from my perspective.
George
...
1 reply by Adrian Carlogea
Aug 25, 2020 7:22 AM
Adrian Carlogea
...
Thank you, George, for trying to explain delegation to me.
Since PMs usually don't own any resources it is more than clear for me why they need delegation from management. Without such delegation PMs can't do anything.
However once the PM has been delegated the authority to manage the project, I see no reason why he should further delegate the authority to the team. In my opinion there is no need of any delegation at this level.
The PM should not delegate the authority to the team but instead he should be using the delegated authority to request, command if you want, the team members to perform the required tasks for delivering the project.
For example, imagine an IT Project Manager with no direct reports. Management my delegate to the PM the authority to use two days per week the time of a Business Analyst on his project (the rest of the time the BA will be working on other projects).
In this case I see no reason why the PM would have to delegate authority to the BA. Instead the PM should use the delegated authority to request the BA to perform work on the project. In this case the BA would not be doing work on behalf of the PM but at the request of the PM. At least this is how I see things. ??
In my opinion real delegation is only when the PM asks the team members to perform purely project management tasks that are part of the PM’s duties and are not related to the actual work the team member is supposed to do. For example, the PM may ask the BA to attend on his behalf a management meeting regarding the project, this is delegation. When the PM asks the BA to perform purely business analyses tasks then this is not delegation.
I’m trying to take the discussion of delegation to a different level, that being the concept of accountability and delegative authority. For instance:
- An executive grants delegative authority to a project manager through a charter.
--- The project manager then so empowered, grants delegative authority to the project team.
------ Project leads then grant delegative authority to their respective teams and so forth.
Each level does not necessarily know the specific activity details that are occurring under them, but yet they are responsible for those details (for the good or the bad) as if they were completing the work themselves.
Most people recognize this concept in the medical context, where you have a doctor who grants delegative authority to, for instance, a Nurse Practioner or Midwife. The NP or Midwife does not have any authority outside of that provided them by the doctor (even though they are independently licensed and trained), but yet they operate independently and at the same time with full accountability to the MD (at least in most states).
This style of project management is not practiced everywhere, but it is the cornerstone of traditional project management – at least from my perspective.
George
Thank you, George, for trying to explain delegation to me.
Since PMs usually don't own any resources it is more than clear for me why they need delegation from management. Without such delegation PMs can't do anything.
However once the PM has been delegated the authority to manage the project, I see no reason why he should further delegate the authority to the team. In my opinion there is no need of any delegation at this level.
The PM should not delegate the authority to the team but instead he should be using the delegated authority to request, command if you want, the team members to perform the required tasks for delivering the project.
For example, imagine an IT Project Manager with no direct reports. Management my delegate to the PM the authority to use two days per week the time of a Business Analyst on his project (the rest of the time the BA will be working on other projects).
In this case I see no reason why the PM would have to delegate authority to the BA. Instead the PM should use the delegated authority to request the BA to perform work on the project. In this case the BA would not be doing work on behalf of the PM but at the request of the PM. At least this is how I see things. ??
In my opinion real delegation is only when the PM asks the team members to perform purely project management tasks that are part of the PM’s duties and are not related to the actual work the team member is supposed to do. For example, the PM may ask the BA to attend on his behalf a management meeting regarding the project, this is delegation. When the PM asks the BA to perform purely business analyses tasks then this is not delegation.
...
2 replies by George Freeman and Peter Rapin
Aug 25, 2020 9:06 AM
Peter Rapin
...
Adrian; in your example the IT Project Manager is NOT a PM. A PM is assigned and authorized, within specific constraints, to deliver a project - through the Charter as George described. The PM then determines how the project will be delivered - how many resources etc. The PM establishes the resources needed and obtains them either internally or externally.
When the PM is "authorized" to assign a task for X hours to a particular resource, (s)he is not "managing" but administering (PM in name only)..
I'm in agreement with George's concept:
"- An executive grants delegative authority to a project manager through a charter.
--- The project manager then so empowered, grants delegative authority to the project team.
------ Project leads then grant delegative authority to their respective teams and so forth."
In a matrix project delivery organization, which is what George is describing I think, the PM manages the project, the functional leaders (technical SMEs) manage the delivery of their specific subject or discipline.
Note that subject to the size and complexity of the project the PM could well have staff to support in the administration and organization of the team and dealing with various stakeholders.
Aug 25, 2020 12:01 PM
George Freeman
...
Adrian,
In my opinion, having direct reports or not as a project manager is irrelevant to this discussion.
In an appropriately chartered project (PMI, Prince2, or other), the team is adopted/drafted into a “logical entity.” Think of this entity as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the company authorizing the project. The team members are then transiently transferred to this entity (both full-time and part-time workers), whose head, or president, is the project manager. The project manager then reports to a committee (e.g., a steering committee), which can be viewed as the board of directors in this analogy. There are countless variations of this structure, but they are all built around an empowered/accountable PM.
So, if you would allow me, I would like to “cut through” to what I believe is the core issue that is preventing us reconciling our viewpoints (notice that I didn’t say agreeing):
--- You find it unconscionable to have a non-expert (i.e., not domain literate on either the IT or business side) be in charge of a project. As you believe they would NOT be viewed as the real person in charge, and thus not respected for their role – among other things.
So again, if you would allow -- I have found that this opinion is almost always rooted in one’s personal experience. Specifically, the experience wherein a less-knowledgeable individual on a given subject provides direction to one who is more-knowledgable. This, “I know better than you” setup is something we ALL have experienced and can relate to., but seemingly becomes a “justifiable bias” in systems engineering circles.
Please recognize that a knowledgable empowered/accountable PM is NOT going to intrude and make technical dictates to their teams, as they recognize that they are ultimately responsible for the project and that such moves are counterproductive to objective-success. I’m a firm believer that PM’s should endeavor to have extended domain knowledge, but that knowledge is not for controlling technical details, it’s instead knowledge that helps one’s internal compass point to success. So, if you were exposed to a PM who “crossed the line,” then please recognize it as such.
Whether agile, hybrid, or waterfall, Project Managers have a pivotal role, that is, to direct their project as the one accountable for its success or failure. Or stated from an executive’s point of view, “the project manager is the one-throat-to-choke” if the project misses its objectives. Recognizing that their job is on the line, empowered/accountable project managers build the best team possible, and then empower those teams to accomplish the goals and objectives of the project. It’s as simpledifficult as that.
Saving Changes...
Peter RapinSubject Matter Expect; Project Delivery| Independent ConsultantOntario, Canada
Aug 25, 2020 7:22 AM
Replying to Adrian Carlogea
...
Thank you, George, for trying to explain delegation to me.
Since PMs usually don't own any resources it is more than clear for me why they need delegation from management. Without such delegation PMs can't do anything.
However once the PM has been delegated the authority to manage the project, I see no reason why he should further delegate the authority to the team. In my opinion there is no need of any delegation at this level.
The PM should not delegate the authority to the team but instead he should be using the delegated authority to request, command if you want, the team members to perform the required tasks for delivering the project.
For example, imagine an IT Project Manager with no direct reports. Management my delegate to the PM the authority to use two days per week the time of a Business Analyst on his project (the rest of the time the BA will be working on other projects).
In this case I see no reason why the PM would have to delegate authority to the BA. Instead the PM should use the delegated authority to request the BA to perform work on the project. In this case the BA would not be doing work on behalf of the PM but at the request of the PM. At least this is how I see things. ??
In my opinion real delegation is only when the PM asks the team members to perform purely project management tasks that are part of the PM’s duties and are not related to the actual work the team member is supposed to do. For example, the PM may ask the BA to attend on his behalf a management meeting regarding the project, this is delegation. When the PM asks the BA to perform purely business analyses tasks then this is not delegation.
Adrian; in your example the IT Project Manager is NOT a PM. A PM is assigned and authorized, within specific constraints, to deliver a project - through the Charter as George described. The PM then determines how the project will be delivered - how many resources etc. The PM establishes the resources needed and obtains them either internally or externally.
When the PM is "authorized" to assign a task for X hours to a particular resource, (s)he is not "managing" but administering (PM in name only)..
I'm in agreement with George's concept:
"- An executive grants delegative authority to a project manager through a charter.
--- The project manager then so empowered, grants delegative authority to the project team.
------ Project leads then grant delegative authority to their respective teams and so forth."
In a matrix project delivery organization, which is what George is describing I think, the PM manages the project, the functional leaders (technical SMEs) manage the delivery of their specific subject or discipline.
Note that subject to the size and complexity of the project the PM could well have staff to support in the administration and organization of the team and dealing with various stakeholders. Saving Changes...
George FreemanThought Leader | Author | Architect| Florida, United States
Aug 25, 2020 7:22 AM
Replying to Adrian Carlogea
...
Thank you, George, for trying to explain delegation to me.
Since PMs usually don't own any resources it is more than clear for me why they need delegation from management. Without such delegation PMs can't do anything.
However once the PM has been delegated the authority to manage the project, I see no reason why he should further delegate the authority to the team. In my opinion there is no need of any delegation at this level.
The PM should not delegate the authority to the team but instead he should be using the delegated authority to request, command if you want, the team members to perform the required tasks for delivering the project.
For example, imagine an IT Project Manager with no direct reports. Management my delegate to the PM the authority to use two days per week the time of a Business Analyst on his project (the rest of the time the BA will be working on other projects).
In this case I see no reason why the PM would have to delegate authority to the BA. Instead the PM should use the delegated authority to request the BA to perform work on the project. In this case the BA would not be doing work on behalf of the PM but at the request of the PM. At least this is how I see things. ??
In my opinion real delegation is only when the PM asks the team members to perform purely project management tasks that are part of the PM’s duties and are not related to the actual work the team member is supposed to do. For example, the PM may ask the BA to attend on his behalf a management meeting regarding the project, this is delegation. When the PM asks the BA to perform purely business analyses tasks then this is not delegation.
Adrian,
In my opinion, having direct reports or not as a project manager is irrelevant to this discussion.
In an appropriately chartered project (PMI, Prince2, or other), the team is adopted/drafted into a “logical entity.” Think of this entity as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the company authorizing the project. The team members are then transiently transferred to this entity (both full-time and part-time workers), whose head, or president, is the project manager. The project manager then reports to a committee (e.g., a steering committee), which can be viewed as the board of directors in this analogy. There are countless variations of this structure, but they are all built around an empowered/accountable PM.
So, if you would allow me, I would like to “cut through” to what I believe is the core issue that is preventing us reconciling our viewpoints (notice that I didn’t say agreeing):
--- You find it unconscionable to have a non-expert (i.e., not domain literate on either the IT or business side) be in charge of a project. As you believe they would NOT be viewed as the real person in charge, and thus not respected for their role – among other things.
So again, if you would allow -- I have found that this opinion is almost always rooted in one’s personal experience. Specifically, the experience wherein a less-knowledgeable individual on a given subject provides direction to one who is more-knowledgable. This, “I know better than you” setup is something we ALL have experienced and can relate to., but seemingly becomes a “justifiable bias” in systems engineering circles.
Please recognize that a knowledgable empowered/accountable PM is NOT going to intrude and make technical dictates to their teams, as they recognize that they are ultimately responsible for the project and that such moves are counterproductive to objective-success. I’m a firm believer that PM’s should endeavor to have extended domain knowledge, but that knowledge is not for controlling technical details, it’s instead knowledge that helps one’s internal compass point to success. So, if you were exposed to a PM who “crossed the line,” then please recognize it as such.
Whether agile, hybrid, or waterfall, Project Managers have a pivotal role, that is, to direct their project as the one accountable for its success or failure. Or stated from an executive’s point of view, “the project manager is the one-throat-to-choke” if the project misses its objectives. Recognizing that their job is on the line, empowered/accountable project managers build the best team possible, and then empower those teams to accomplish the goals and objectives of the project. It’s as simpledifficult as that.
...
1 reply by Katie Young
Aug 16, 2022 10:10 PM
Katie Young
...
I'm leaving a comment on 2-year-old thread, but we'll see if anyone sees this. Anyway, I came upon this thread because I entered "treated like a coordinator instead of a manager" in the PMI keyword search bar because I'm really looking for advice/perspective on this issue. I think this discussion thread really nailed the company culture I'm experiencing. I appreciate everyone who took the time to contribute and share their personal experiences.
George, your recapping here of the distinct roles of knowledgable PMs vs the SMEs carrying out the work for the project is really helpful for my problem. I think what I'm experiencing is a culture of SMEs treating me like a coordinator, rather than a manager, of the projects I'm supposed to be managing. The delegation authority I need as a PM to make a project happen isn't being recognized, and this lack of recognition is made worse by SMEs thinking they trump me for some reason. I think this perspective is due to the SMEs treating PMs as really "coordinators" rather than an SME of Project Management, and that I'm being hired to lead a distinct operation for the company, which is managing special projects to advance strategic business goals. These project activities are very distinct from solely operations, which is the jurisdiction of the SMEs. Also, it doesn't help that the SMEs I'm collaborating with on these projects have been at the company for 10-30 years, so I'm up against so many levels of nuance.
Anyway, it was really difficult for me to articulate the problem I'm experiencing, but I think I'm starting to piece it together thanks to this thread. All of this really helps me see things from a bird's eye view and not personalize the unpleasant antics by my new colleagues.
Saving Changes...
Bruno FonsecaDeputy Project Manager| Teixeira Duarte Engenharia e Construções, Lda.Santarém, Portugal
"A strategist with authority who leads by example and achieves buy-in from the team and stakeholders."
In other words: He who devises the strategy - because he has experience and sees beyond. He who has authority to decide - because this authority has been delegated to him; He who is a respected leader - because others trust him and feel confident by his side; He who promotes the project and aims at satifying those who are interested in it - because he believes in what he does.
Some people do not understand the meaning of leadership and its purpose. Saving Changes...
