- Leadership and management must go hand in hand.
- Workers need their managers not just to assign tasks but to define purpose.
- Managers must organize workers, not just to maximize efficiency, but to nurture skills, develop talent and inspire results.
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 manager’s job is to plan, organize and coordinate. The leader’s 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 leader’s 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 didn’t 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.”
The Differences Between a Leader and a Boss Essay
1540 Words7 Pages
While the corporate world oftentimes uses the terms boss and (team)leader interchangeably, there are very distinct characteristics that delineate the two. W.G Rowe (Clark, 1997) identified the difference between the two by pointing out that being a boss merely means you have Assigned Leadership, with the authority to accomplish tasks. True leaders exhibit Emergent Leadership by influencing others to accomplish goals. Upon defining the difference, one can easily recognize when they have had true leadership versus simply a boss to answer to. A leader can be a boss, but a boss is not necessarily a leader.
In considering my own experiences with leadership, and negative leadership specifically, I quickly concluded that in instances in which I…show more content…
Once a year, those who were brave enough to stick around long enough, (considering the immense turnover) we would receive an annual performance review which typically consisted of vague but mostly negative feedback and rarely resulted in any monetary reward for service. Moral was low and everyone went through their daily work life will no real sense of direction, simply trying to get through the next day. While my boss was struggling through reports trying to figure out how to increase numbers, the people on the front lines felt devalued with no vested interest in the company as a whole.
This manager was a very strong-minded business professional and certainly knew the tenacity and focus required to make a business succeed. The business in and of itself was a fairly successful one, which she presumably credited to her management style. However, one has to ponder how much more successful it could have been had she developed her leadership style. She managed business well, but lead people poorly. The days that she spent locked away in her office were likely for the purposes of focusing on reports, policies and the like. But when she did emerge, it was merely to control the operations. Her human interaction appeared self-serving with very little trust in her employees’ abilities. Perhaps her lack of trust in her employees was simply a product of her not knowing her employees –