Leadership - The Roles of Leaders vs. Managers in Business

There has been a lot of politically correct pontificatingover managed in the absence of leadership. When
of late in corporate circles about the differencesleadership has been abdicated to management in a
between managers and leaders. Most of thecorporate setting you will always find that growth
commentary I have read attempts to please bothslows, morale declines, creativity wanes and the
audiences. Those of you who have read my work incompetitive edge is weakened. That being said, I
the past know that I am rarely politically correct norhave personally experienced the value of true
do I ever seek to try and please all the people all theleadership at every stage of my life from the athletic
time.playing field, to the military battleground to the
While there is clearly a need for both managers andcorporate boardroom. Let's look at an example of
leaders in the business world and while I respect andthe value of leadership from each of the three
have developed close friendships with many aareas:o An example from the world of athletics...If
manager, this author simply believes that the law ofyou were the owner of an NFL franchise and had to
scarcity applies to the topic at hand. There is anchoose between having the #1 quarterback in the
infinitely greater supply of managers causing a muchleague or the #1 center in league what would your
greater demand for leaders. Put simply, becausechoice be? Again this doesn't mean that a great
leaders are much more difficult to come by, they arecenter isn't valuable, it just means that the role player
therefore more valuable to an enterprise.isn't as valuable to the team as having the talent
The paragraph above begs the question why arefactor and leadership characteristics of a true impact
there fewer leaders than managers? I believe it isplayer. Simply reflect back upon your own life
because not everyone has it in them to be a leaderexperiences and you'll see that you have come
and thus the old axiom "a born leader". The intrinsicacross many utility players over the years, but very
quality of leadership often begins with nothing morefew franchise players.o A military example...Contrast if
than raw talent and a certain state of mind. Toyou will the differences of two enlisted men of the
possess the innate qualities of a leader is howeversame rank. The fist is a sergeant in a headquarters
not the same thing as being a leader. As important asunit charged with the administrative support of a
your DNA is, effective leadership skills are developedcompany commander. The second sergeant is a
and refined by time, experience, and a true desire tocombat controller in a special operations unit charged
be more than just a manager, but a true leader.with coordinating air strikes from the ground behind
Let's breakdown the DNA of a typical leader...A leaderenemy lines. While both of the enlisted men described
is usually a very creative, dynamic, outgoing andabove hold the same rank, are part of a team, and
unflappable individual. They tend to think big pictureplay important roles, one is clearly an impact player in
focusing on vision and strategy while looking to makea leadership capacity while the other is solely a utility
a long-term impact. By way of contrast let's examineplayer acting in a management capacity. The military
the DNA of a manager. Managers are usually morehas determined that it is a rare individual who exhibits
analytical while focusing on process and procedurethe characteristics necessary to become a member
looking to make short-term contributions. Theof a special operations unit. Therefore they are willing
following list adapted from Mind of a Manager, Soulto make a much larger investment in the combat
of a Leader by Craig Hickman, John Wiley &controller and in return the military expects a much
Sons, demonstrates the DNA gap between leaderslarger contribution from that individual.o A corporate
and managers:example...This example will be short and sweat, but
Managers build systems and procedures, Leaders buildhopefully very clear in its statement of impact. Who
teams and develop talent.do you believe is of greater value and makes a larger
Managers surround themselves with subordinatescontribution to a corporation, someone who
& Leaders surround themselves with the bestadministers policy and creates processes or someone
& brightest.who sets the vision and creates the strategy? Just
Managers avoid risk and Leaders thrive on risk.examine the difference in the pay stubs of the two
Managers find comfort in the status quo &individuals contrasted above and you'll quickly see
Leaders serve as a catalyst for change &who the enterprise deems to be of higher value.
growth.I want to be clear that I am not "anti" manager. I am
Managers settle for industry standard & Leadershowever very "pro" leadership when it comes to
demand the best.optimizing the talent factor in any organization. My
Managers wield power while Leaders apply influence.bias toward leadership doesn't mean that I don't
Managers control & Leaders inspire.understand the principles behind such truisms as:
Managers formulate policy & Leaders set"there is no "I" in team" or, "the sum of the parts is
examples.greater than the whole" or that "a chain is only as
Managers instruct...Leaders mentor.strong as its weakest link." Rather it simply means
Managers are reactive while Leaders are proactive.that I believe you achieve a much greater return on
Managers plan...Leaders innovate.human capital with investments made into leadership
Managers refine...Leaders revolutionize.due to the scope and scale of the impact that a
Managers reorganize...Leaders reinvent.leader can make. The bottom line is that I prefer to
Managers pursue the tangible while Leaders seek thelead rather than manage and to be led rather than to
intangible.be managed.
We have all witnessed companies that have been