Leadership & Management

By Daljinder Maan ECE

  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.

 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.

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.

20 diffrence between leadership and manegment

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 leader’s 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 thing.

Above-quoted Richard Daft looked at the differences between management and leadership from 5 different angles: (i) that of direction, (ii) alignment, (iii) relationships, (iv) personal qualities, and (v) outcomes. From characteristics that have not been mentioned by Bennis, Daft listed:

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 manager’s relationship with people is based on position power; the leader’s 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]

Leadership without management

...sets a direction or vision that others follow, without considering too much how the new direction is going to be achieved. Other people then have to work hard in the trail that is left behind, picking up the pieces and making it work. Eg: in Lord of the Rings, at the council of Elrond, Frodo Baggins rescues the council from conflict by taking responsibility for the quest of destroying the ring - but most of the management of the group comes from others.

Management without leadership

...controls resources to maintain the status quo or ensure things happen according to already-established plans. Eg: a referee manages a sports game, but does not usually provide "leadership" because there is no new change, no new direction - the referee is controlling resources to ensure that the laws of the game are followed and status quo is maintained.

ADVANTAGES

(1)-High Morale- Under this style the enthusiasm of the managers and the employees is sky-high.Both consider each other their well-wishers.

(2)-Creation of more efficiency and productivity-Since the employees are participants in the decision-making,they give full cooperation in implementing them.In this way their efficiency increase.

(3)-Availablity of Sufficient time for Constructive work- Under this leadership style the workload of the managers gets decreased. By using their spare time constructively they make the development and expansion of the enterprise possible.

DISADVANTAGES

(1)-Requirement of Educated Subordinates- The chief characteristic of this leadership style is that the subordinates are made partners in taking decisions, so much so that some little affairs are left to them.

(2)-Delay in Decision- It is clear that while taking decision the subordinates are always consulted.