LEADERSHIP VS. MANAGEMENT

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 what they do. Many people, by the way, are both. They have management jobs, but they realize that one cannot buy hearts, especially to follow them down a difficult path, and so act as leaders too.

Leaders have not 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. By definition, managers have subordinates unless their title is honorary and given as a mark of seniority, in which case the title is a misnomer and their power over others is other than formal authority.

Telling people what to do does not inspire the people to follow one. One has to appeal to them showing how following them will lead to their hearts' desire. They must want to follow one enough to stop what they are doing and perhaps walk into danger and situations that they would not normally consider risking. Managers have a position of authority vested in them by the company, and their subordinates work for them and largely do as they are told. Management style is transactional, in that the manager tells the subordinate what to do, and the subordinate does this not because they are a blind robot, but because they have been promised a reward for doing so.

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 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. Managers are paid to get things done often within tight constraints of time and money. They thus naturally pass on this work focus to their subordinates.

An interesting research finding about managers is that they tend to come from stable home backgrounds and led relatively normal and comfortable lives. This leads them to be relatively risk-averse and they will seek to avoid conflict where possible. In terms of people, they generally like to run a 'happy ship'. The leaders are risk seeking, although they are not blind thrill seekers. When pursuing their vision, they consider it natural to encounter problems and hurdles that must be overcome along the way. They are thus comfortable with risk and will see routes that others avoid as potential opportunities for advantage and will happily break rules in order to get things done. A surprising number of these leaders had some form of handicap in their lives which they had to overcome. Some had traumatic childhoods, some had problems such as dyslexia, others were shorter than average.

The given table summarizes and gives a sense of the difference between a leader and a manager. This is 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.