Goel wrote: A person working on his vision is a leader, else he becomes a manager to fulfill a leader's vision. Willoughby wrote: I think that your question is an excellent one and a significantly important issue that has become mired in the new management system because of the busyness of the area. Leaders and managers from my perspective are very different professions. Leaders are the go-getters.
They want to change things, they think outside of the square and they make it happen. I see managers as managing the day-to-day issues. This shift came when significant numbers of middle managers were retrenched as a result of a more flat hierarchy.
It isn't a good shift and isn't helping business to thrive. Symington wrote: To be a manager simply requires that you have a title and some employees.
Maybe a budget. To be a leader requires followers. Anyone can lead, from any position. It only requires that someone. And sometimes, the very best leaders are--the first followers. Slayton wrote: Leadership focuses more on the people side of the business, while management is more about systems and processes.
I've seen strong leaders who have little or no management skills be very successful on the people side of the business but drop the ball all day long with the administrative side of the job. Conversely, I've seen strong managers who are weak in leadership skills struggle to build culture and loyalty amongst their team. Lead from the front of the room and manage behind close doors. Guerra wrote: Gosh this is THE most important question for next generation at work. The breakthrough of Superperformance is that management and leadership are opposite hemispheres and need each other for completion.
They are the left and right hemisphere of the organization. Because we are tethered to a mechanistic worldview we operate with a fully expressed left brain and a dwarf right brain.
Handout - MIT Enterprise Forum Texas
When the right brain is expressed leadership along with the left brain management Superperformance emerges. Pearce wrote: A good manager gets his subordinates to focus inwardly on process quality and product delivery, good communications, and both business and personal professional development. A good leader gets his subordinates to focus outwardly on vision realization, mission attainment, and goal accomplishment. Both are necessary to maximize the opportunities for success.
Sullam wrote: The focus of a manager is on money results, the focus of a leader is on people.
- The East German Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives in the Interpretation of the GDR;
- Communicable disease control in emergencies : a field manual.
- Secondary menu.
- Growing @ the Speed of Change.
- Marine Geochemistry.
A good leader of a political party, or an organization sees material things as instruments to satisfy his goals, usually the betterment of his people. To summarize, the leader sees money as means, in order to improve people's life; the manager sees people as means in order to reach his money objective. But the managers will never admit this truth. You can distinguish a manager from a leader, when money is scarce: a manager will fire people, to return to profits, while a leader will do everything to avoid it.
Otherwise I'm probably going to need leadership. Seamon wrote: Management is the job. In the course of their work, Managers have the opportunity to lead. Therefore it is helpful for Managers to develop leadership skills. Greene Who cares?! Call it goopy goopy! The hormones make some monkeys want to be over other monkeys and make the under monkeys do genetically programmed subservience behaviors praising the junk the bigger monkeys say.
Let us get our business discussions out of zoos and into human civilized domains. Haeck wrote: To add to the other answers, it is important to note that a leader can come out of nowhere, from any rank in any job or organization. Leadership is something that you are given, not something you take. It is something you earn buy respect that has been given to you.
A good manager can be a bad leader and a good leader can be a bad manager. The perfect manager is one who is also a good leader who is able to continue a forward progress through adversity and the political hierarchy of the business or organization. Sorry to go on but I could write a book on this one.
I also believe that a good manager who is not a good leader will be smart enough to find a way to work in a leader to fill that void. This requires having a small ego and a huge dedication to the ultimate goal. And conversely, a good leader with poor management skills will recognize that there is a void to be filled and fill it with a good manager.
On a smart business aspect of the question, ultimately you want to hire one person who can be both a good manager and a good leader. This is because it if very difficult to find a good leader and a good manager that can actually work together without the ego issue. It can happen though.
Good Luck! Wilson wrote: What is the most important differentiator between a good golfer and Tiger Woods? Management, by definition, is a leadership role.
1st Annual Super Selling Cloud Conference
Leadership, however, is no necessarily a management role. I have seen some powerful, blue collar, in the trenches, leaders. And good managers recognize, and capitalize on these. Bad managers are intimidated, and restrict them. Management can be done from a dark, smoke filled room in the rear. But as Patton said, you lead people, like a string of spaghetti, from the front.
MACH 2- High Performance Leadership
Smith wrote: My answer also echoes others in one fashion or another. I see a leader as being able to instill others with a sense of commitment, drive, resources and initiative that will enable them to reach a common goal. Sadly, many leaders have lofty visions but do not consider whether the resources are there to deliver on the vision. Hence, if the vision is not achieved, it is perceived as a failure.
A leader needs to know whether his vision is achievable, and works with the managers to ensure they can reach it.
Handout - MIT Enterprise Forum Texas
Evans wrote: Management is doing things right; Leadership is doing the right things. Zagalsky wrote: I once heard someone say that managers motivate subordinates by winning their fear while leaders motivate followers by winning their love. Breen wrote: The biggest difference between managers and leaders is the way they motivate the people who work or follow them.
Leaders inspire, have vision and set direction, lead people and have followers. They cultivate loyalty are charismatic and have a transformational style. They are passionate, amplify strengths; are people focus, risk-seeking and have empathy for others. Managers have a position of authority and emphasize control. Management style is transactional and tends to be reaction and minimize risk. I think Jack Welch is a wonderful example of leadership.
His goal was to make General Electric the world's most competitive enterprise, and accomplished that. Jack Welch is all about leadership, not management. Prior-Jones wrote: You manage tasks, but you lead people R. Hunsberger, Jr. Great management is learned, great leadership is developed. Fairhurst wrote: I am not sure what management actually is or what it means. Leadership on the other hand is totally different.
Throughout history people follow leaders, are inspired by leaders. I think management is implementing routine and process and ensuring that those elements are adhered to.
- Traditions & Encounters: A Brief Global History, Volume II.
- New York | Premier Executive Education!
- Fugue in A Minor, BWV947;
- Flow, Superfluidity and Superperformance;
- Supporting Children with Medical Conditions (2nd Edition).
- Browse more videos!
Leadership sets the tone for the organizations, sets its culture, its ethics and how people go about their work, with inspiration or not, with passion or not, effective leadership instills enjoyment in those working in that construct, where as, in my opinion, management tend to suppress the individual and force them into a mold. Srinivasan wrote: Leadership is about getting management to do the things that need done. Management is about doing the things that leaders believe is critical to the success of the organization.
In short management is about doing and leadership is about leading management to action. Chatterjee wrote: Leaders: Pursue opportunities.
Managers: Reduce risks. Synergy: Strategic Achievements Leaders seize opportunities; Managers avert threats. Both together progress more.