The Poynter Institute offers programs under the heading of “Leadership and Management.” Why not just leadership, or just management? What’s the difference between the two? Is one more important than the other?
My view is that there is clearly a difference between the two. Not every manager is a leader. Not every leader is a manager. You can be both, if you choose to. Social scientists have devoted large chunks of their brainpower to defining and differentiating the concepts of leadership and management.
It is tempting to see managers as lesser beings than leaders, drudges who feed the machine while leaders create visions of a better world. But consider how difficult life is when our managers don’t deliver for us. As a Manager:
- I oversee and create work schedules
- I facilitate internal/external communication
- I resource team members with tools and technology
- I select and hire new team members
- I initiate and oversee team member training
- I evaluate department success with metrics
- I demonstrate accountability of my actions to execute and expect the same
- I assess needs for developing appropriate systems
- I collaborate and coordinate across groups
That small sample demonstrates the importance of managers to organizations. It is why another leadership thinker, Joseph C. Rost, criticizes those who “denigrate management to ennoble leadership.” He praises managers for bringing order, stability, and predictability to the workplace.
But Rost opens an important door, too. He argues that management is about authority, and leadership is about influence.
That, I believe, is a clear and critical distinction. Managers have the authority to make things happen. They can do it by force (reward and punishment), by simply “pulling rank.” That’s authority. But managers who lead, and leaders who aren’t managers, reach goals through influence.
Influence comes from trust — from a person’s expertise, integrity, and empathy as perceived by others. Maximum influence accrues to those who are strong in all three areas.
As I see it, people are required to follow managers. They choose to follow leaders.
As I see it, people are required to follow managers. They choose to follow leaders.
Does “transformational leadership” sound lofty and unattainable to you? Do you have to be heroic or charismatic to achieve it; not at all? Each of us, managers and non-managers, has the ability to turn the routine transactions of our lives into something better. What it takes is dedication to the people, not just the product. If you want to lead at this level, consider these commitments, and whether they reflect your leadership philosophy:
- I don’t lead people like they are a means to an end.
- I help people achieve a genuine sense of purpose in work connecting the dots of their strengths to the role and its impact on the organization.
- I find opportunities for people to grow and their ideas to be heard.
- I learn what motivates people, both intrinsically and extrinsically; I don’t assume.
- I value people as individuals, and give them individualized attention
- I seek to shape our work environment by our cultural values
If you take a second look at those commitments, you’ll note that they easily apply to a person with the title of manager, if that manager wants to be known as a high-level leader. But they can be embraced just as easily by a person with no title at all other than “colleague.”
—
Adapted from an article by Jill Geisler published on 3/16/04.
