Leadership vs.

Management
Disciplines > Leadership > Leadership vs. Management Managers have subordinates | Leaders have followers | See also

What is the difference between management and leadership? It is a question that has been asked more than once and also answered in different ways. The biggest difference between managers and leaders is the way they motivate the people who work or follow them, and this sets the tone for most other aspects of what they do. Many people, by the way, are both. They have management jobs, but they realize that you cannot buy hearts, especially to follow them down a difficult path, and so act as leaders too.

Managers have subordinates

By definition, managers have subordinates - unless their title is honorary and given as a mark of seniority, in which case the title is a misnomer and their power over others is other than formal authority.

Authoritarian, transactional style

Managers have a position of authority vested in them by the company, and their subordinates work for them and largely do as they are told. Management style is transactional, in that the manager tells the subordinate what to do, and the subordinate does this not because they are a blind robot, but because they have been promised a reward (at minimum their salary) for doing so.

Work focus
Managers are paid to get things done (they are subordinates too), often within tight constraints of time and money. They thus naturally pass on this work focus to their subordinates.

Seek comfort
An interesting research finding about managers is that they tend to come from stable home backgrounds and led relatively normal and comfortable lives. This leads them to be relatively risk-averse and they will seek to avoid conflict where possible. In terms of people, they generally like to run a 'happy ship'.

Leaders have followers

Leaders do not have subordinates - at least not when they are leading. Many organizational leaders do have subordinates, but only because they are also managers. But when they want to lead, they have to give up formal authoritarian control, because to lead is to have followers, and following is always a voluntary activity.

Charismatic, transformational style

Telling people what to do does not inspire them to follow you. You have to appeal to them, showing how following them will lead to their hearts' desire. They must want to follow you enough to stop what they are doing and perhaps walk into danger and situations that they would not normally consider risking. Leaders with a stronger charisma find it easier to attract people to their cause. As a part of their persuasion they typically promise transformational benefits, such that their followers will not just receive extrinsic rewards but will somehow become better people.

People focus
Although many leaders have a charismatic style to some extent, this does not require a loud personality. They are always good with people, and quiet styles that give credit to others (and takes blame on themselves) are very effective at creating the loyalty that great leaders engender. Although leaders are good with people, this does not mean they are friendly with them. In order to keep the mystique of leadership, they often retain a degree of separation and aloofness. This does not mean that leaders do not pay attention to tasks - in fact they are often very achievement-focused. What they do realize, however, is the importance of enthusing others to work towards their vision.

Seek risk
In the same study that showed managers as risk-averse, leaders appeared as risk-seeking, although they are not blind thrill-seekers. When pursuing their vision, they consider it natural to encounter problems and hurdles that must be overcome along the way. They are thus comfortable with risk and will see routes that others avoid as potential opportunities for advantage and will happily break rules in order to get things done. A surprising number of these leaders had some form of handicap in their lives which they had to overcome. Some had traumatic childhoods, some had problems such as dyslexia, others were shorter than average. This perhaps taught them the independence of mind that is needed to go out on a limb and not worry about what others are thinking about you.

In summary

This table summarizes the above (and more) and gives a sense of the differences between being a leader and being a manager. This is, of course, an illustrative characterization, and there is a whole spectrum between either ends of these scales along which each role can range. And many people lead and manage at the same time, and so may display a combination of behaviors.

Subject Essence Focus Have Horizon Seeks Approach Decision Power Appeal to Energy Culture Dynamic Persuasion Style Exchange Likes Wants Risk Rules Conflict Direction Truth Concern Credit Blame

Leader Change Leading people Followers Long-term Vision Sets direction Facilitates Personal charisma Heart Passion Shapes Proactive Sell Transformational Excitement for work Striving Achievement Takes Breaks Uses New roads Seeks What is right Gives Takes

Manager Stability Managing work Subordinates Short-term Objectives Plans detail Makes Formal authority Head Control Enacts Reactive Tell Transactional Money for work Action Results Minimizes Makes Avoids Existing roads Establishes Being right Takes Blames

See also

Leadership is an influence relationship; management is an authority relationship. Leadership establishes direction by developing a vision for the future. Leadership communicates vision and aligns people's energy with that vision. Management establishes structure and delegates authority and responsibility. Leadership energizes people and inspires them to overcome obstacles to change. Management monitors results, adjusts plans and solves problems. Effective leadership brings about positive, needed change. Competent management results in predictability, order and consistent results. Leadership and management are separate and distinct processes, but both are essential to organizational effectiveness.

1. The manager administers; the leader innovates. 2. The manager is a copy; the leader is an original. 3. The manager maintains; the leader develops. 4. The manager focuses on systems and structure; the leader focuses on people. 5. The manager relies on control; the leader inspires trust. 6. The manager has a short-range view; the leader has a long-range perspective. 7. The manager asks how and when; the leader asks what and why. 8. The manager has his or her eye always on the bottom line; the leaders eye is on the horizon. 9. The manager imitates; the leader originates. 10. The manager accepts the status quo; the leader challenges it. 11. The manager is the classic good soldier; the leader is his or her own person. 12. The manager does things right; the leader does the right 13. The manager plans and budgets; the leader creates vision and strategy [direction] 14. The manager is generally directing and controlling; the leader allows room for others to grow, and change him/her in the process [alignment] 15. The manager creates boundaries; the leader reduces them [alignment] 16. The managers relationship with people is based on position power; the leaders relationship and influence is based on personal power [relationships] 17. The manager acts as boss; the leader acts as coach, facilitator, and servant [relationships] 18. The manager exhibits and focuses on (a) emotional distance, (b) expert mind, (c) talking, (d) conformity, and (e) insight into organization; the leader: (a) emotional connectedness, (b) open mind, (c) listening, (d) nonconformity, and (e) insight into self [personal qualities] 19. The manager maintains stability; the leader creates change [outcome] 20. The manager creates a culture of efficiency; the leader creates a culture of integrity [outcome]thing.

Leadership v Management

Leadership and management are distinct concepts but the words are often used as though they have the same meaning. This confusion may arise from the fact that sometimes the same person is employed to do the job of leader and manager. A leaders job is to decide where the team they are leading is heading. A leader will set the ultimate aim, objective and goals for the team. They will then inspire and motivate the team to achieve the objectives set. This will involve reviewing progress and ensure that the team is on course to achieve the objectives set. A managers job is to set how the team will achieve the objectives set by the leader. They will overcome any problems the team encounter and decide how to deal with complexity. A simple way of illustrating the difference between leader and manager is to use the example of a team who are set the goal of building a path from point A to point B. The leaders job will be to

Set the goal of building a path. Decide that the path will go from A to B. Inspire and motivate the team so that they want to build a path for their leader. Review progress as the path is built and ensure that the team are building the path from A to B.

The managers job will be to

Plan the project and decide things such as budgets, pay and materials used. Implement plans and control building of the path. Organise the team and delegate tasks to them. Overcome any problems eg trees blocking the route where the path is to be built.

Another way of differentiating a leader from a manager is to think of someone known as a world leader for example Martin Luther King and think about what they did. You will discover that each of these leaders are great visionaries, and are able to inspire and motivate their audience. They will present their ideas and dreams to the world in a way that they feel appeals to the audience. They will give them an overview of the vision and will not set the small details of how their vision will be achieved. Instead the small details will be decided by other people. Other people will plan and manage the work needed to achieve the leaders vision. The leaders job is to continue motivating and ensuring that project is on course to achieve its objectives. ion and pride in supplying one fo the highest-thrust engines in the industry. Teams also send members to a work council that deals with issues such as supplier problems, computer systems and human resource issues, and the like.

And what is the managers job? Listening, informing, focussing the teams on costs (during the past 5 years, costs were cut 10 percent per year), and representing the factory to the customer and within GE.

Perceptions of Management
The Dilbert comic strip reminds us that in an age where the young may know more than their elders, technical staff may view managers as people who don't understand technology and who make life difficult for them with demands that make little sense. Perhaps technical teams with Dilbertian managers would be fed up enough to take over the management function. The manager in the Dilbert strip is a leader only in the sense that members of the technical staff are forced to follow his directions. Of course, ideally a manager is also a leader that people want to follow. In that case, there can be a relationship that strengthens a group and focuses it on meaningful work. The questions we should ask about a business leader who has a following are:

Why do people follow this leader? What should the leader do to make teams and organizations successful?

Here are some answers: People follow a leader either out of fear or for a mix of positive reasons such as hope of success, trust in the leader, excitement about a project or mission, or the opportunity to stretch oneself to the limit. In this regard, Russell L. Ackoff conceives of a transformational leader as creating an aesthetic vision which inspires people with an ideal of what can be achieved. Warren Bennis describes leaders who make people feel they are the best and can achieve whatever they can imagine. Leaders can also be dangerous, however, especially charismatic Pied Pipers who seduce people into disastrous adventures. Sometimes it can be hard to tell the difference between a Steve Jobs who promises that the team can be insanely great and a demagogue who turns out to be greatly insane.

Management vs. Leadership

A Function Planning Budgeting Evaluating Facilitating A Relationship Selecting talent Motivating Coaching Building Trust

Good Leaders

We need to recognize that there are two kinds of leaders: strategic and operational. The first priority of a strategic leader is to envisage the companys future and to invest the resources necessary to create it. Operational leaders have the job of implementing the vision. However, there are four things that both strategic and operational leaders can do to make teams and organizations successful. They are: selecting talent, motivating people, coaching, and building trust. In Organizing Genius (Addison-Wesley, 1997) Bennis and Patricia Ward Biederman point out that leaders of great teams pick talent on the basis of excellence and ability to work with others. Good leaders are not afraid to hire people who know more than they do. Jack Welch has said that his biggest accomplishment has been finding great people. In Why Work? (Second edition, Miles River Press, 1995), I suggest thinking about motivation in terms of four Rs: responsibilities, rewards, relationships, and reasons. A leader should design responsibilities that engage a persons competence and values. Responsibilities are motivating when they stretch people and are meaningful to them. Responsibilities can engage such intrinsic motivations as exercising ones abilities, creating something new, helping others and providing value to customers. Which of these meanings is most motivating depends on an individual's personality. The combination of intrinsic motivation with extrinsic rewards and recognition can produce highly motivated people. Of course, incentives, rewards and recognition should reinforce the kind of behavior needed for the team's success. If you want people to cooperate, you need to reward and recognize successful cooperation. A good leader also strengthens motivation and develops competence through coaching. In particular, he or she knows how to keep people focussed, recognizing that unless technical staff keep their eyes on priority goals, they will tend to drift into paths that are attractive to them, but not essential for the business. Good leaders also fire up people by convincing them that their job is vital for the business to succeed. On one hand, people quickly turn off when they feel their work is unnecessary. On the other, they feel motivated even doing simple repetitive work when it is meaningful, like stuffing envelopes for a cause they deeply support.

Developing Trust
Finally, good leaders develop trust by walking the talk, doing what they preach. Unfortunately, it is not always possible to keep promises in todays unpredictable business environment. The market changes, new competitors upset plans, technological breakthroughs force rethinking strategy. It is not surprising that organizational surveys typically show a large gap in trust for todays leaders.

In this turbulent climate, leaders can increase trust by promoting transparency and involvement. Transparency means clarifying reasons for decisions, and being open about compensation policy, business results and market information. Professional knowledge workers want to know what the leader knows about what is coming down the road. They also want a say in decisions they are expected to implement. They want to be sure their views are heard and taken into account. Even when they are disappointed by the decisions, knowing they have been heard increases trust, especially when the reasons are explained. To summarize, companies need good management and great leaders, and efficient function and energizing relationships. Bureaucracies are typically overmanaged and underled, resulting in bored, unmotivated employees. Start-ups are often intensely led and undermanaged, so that enthusiasm leads to unplanned problems, overspending and missed deadlines. There are many different ways to exercise the management function and people are willing to follow different leadership styles. Although there are many good examples of management and leadership, there is no one best way. You can get good ideas from observing successful companies, but you need to design your own management function by involving teammembers, and developing your own way of inspiring people to follow you.