Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

10 Key Differences between Leaders and Managers

Published reports in Google News are an eye-opener. If you Google leadership crisis, youll get at least 9,000 search results for business and the public sector. If you enter the key words, management crisis, youll see twice the results. These figures can vary, but you get the idea. Further queries underscore the need for growth in many professionals, but there seems to be some confusion in understanding the difference between leadership and management. True, leaders like the late legendary UCLA basketball coach John Wooden, can manage and managers can lead.

Hopefully, managers can display leadership qualities. Conversely, leaders can be good managers. But countless news accounts show that some so-called leaders dont manage and many managers dont provide leadership. So, my sense is that its important to develop a balance sheet there are basic differences between the two. In essence, heres the salient distinction: It boils down to how professionals inspire their staffs and other stakeholders. Attributes of a leader: 1. Studies, and develops ideas and principles 2. Innovates 3. Resourceful and looks for solutions to problems 4. Empathetic with a focus on people 5. Inspires trust among stakeholders 6. Understands the big picture 7. Superior listening skills 8. Courageously challenges the state of affairs, and asks why and what can be improved 9. Looks for opportunities to develop strengths 10. Develops a following Attributes of a manager: 1. Administrates 2. Accepts the status quo 3. Pragmatic in accepting trends and events, but goes no further 4. Focus is on control, structure and systems 5. Has a linear perspective only follows whats at the end of her/his nose 6. Asks a limited set of questions just how or when? 7. Acts like a chameleon or imitator of other managers 8. Perceives threats 9. Minimizes weaknesses 10. Manages subordinates but has few, if any, devotees

An ongoing debate in academic circles over the past 50-odd years relates to the correlation between leadership and management. Does a manager have to be a great leader? Does a leader need to have good management skills? What is the difference between leadership and management?

Comparison chart</> Embed this chart

Leadership means "the ability of an individual to influence, motivate, and enable others to contribute toward Definition the effectiveness and success of the organizations of which they are members." Are often called brilliant and mercurial, with great charisma. Yet, they are also often seen as loners and Personality private people. They are comfortable Styles taking risks, sometimes seemingly wild and crazy risks. Almost all leaders have high levels of imagination
Focus Outcomes

Management comprises directing and controlling a group of one or more people or entities for the purpose of coordinating and harmonizing that group towards accomplishing a goal.

Tend to be rational, under control problem solvers. They often focus on goals, structures, personnel, and availability of resources. Managers personalities lean toward persistence, strong will, analysis, and intelligence.

Leading people Achievements

Managing work Results Create strategies, policies, and methods to create teams and ideas that combine to operate smoothly. They empower people by soliciting their views, values, and principles. They believe that this combination reduces inherent risk and generates success Risk-averse

Simply look at problems and devise new, creative solutions. Using their Approach to charisma and commitment, they tasks excite, motivate, and focus others to solve problems and excel.

Approach to risk Role in decisionmaking




Transformational, Consultative & Participative Charisma & Influence

Dictatorial, Authoritative,Transactional, Autocratic, Consultative and Democratic Formal authority & Position


Power through Organization Appeal to

Leaders have followers Heart

Manager have subordinates Head

What is the Difference Between Management and Leadership?

Adapted from The Wall Street Journal Guide to Management by Alan Murray, published by Harper Business. Leadership and management must go hand in hand. They are not the same thing. But they are necessarily linked, and complementary. Any effort to separate the two is likely to cause more problems than it solves. Still, much ink has been spent delineating the differences. The managers job is to plan, organize and coordinate. The leaders job is to inspire and motivate. In

his 1989 book On Becoming a Leader, Warren Bennis composed a list of the differences: The manager administers; the leader innovates. The manager is a copy; the leader is an original. The manager maintains; the leader develops. The manager focuses on systems and structure; the leader focuses on people. The manager relies on control; the leader inspires trust. The manager has a short-range view; the leader has a long-range perspective. The manager asks how and when; the leader asks what and why. The manager has his or her eye always on the bottom line; the leaders eye is on the horizon. The manager imitates; the leader originates. The manager accepts the status quo; the leader challenges it. The manager is the classic good soldier; the leader is his or her own person. The manager does things right; the leader does the right thing.

Perhaps there was a time when the calling of the manager and that of the leader could be separated. A foreman in an industrial-era factory probably didnt have to give much thought to what he was producing or to the people who were producing it. His or her job was to follow orders, organize the work, assign the right people to the necessary tasks, coordinate the results, and ensure the job got done as ordered. The focus was on efficiency. But in the new economy, where value comes increasingly from the knowledge of people, and where workers are no longer undifferentiated cogs in an industrial machine, management and leadership are not easily separated. People look to their managers, not just to assign them a task, but to define for them a purpose. And managers must organize workers, not just to maximize efficiency, but to nurture skills, develop talent and inspire results. The late management guru Peter Drucker was one of the first to recognize this truth, as he was to recognize so many other management truths. He identified the emergence of the knowledge worker, and the profound differences that would cause in the way business was organized. With the rise of the knowledge worker, one does not manage people, Mr. Drucker wrote. The task is to lead people. And the goal is to make productive the specific strengths and knowledge of every individual.