Managers Vs. Leaders

MANGERS VS. LEADERS : You may think of the words “manager” and “leader” as two concepts representing opposite ends of a continuum. The term manager typifies the more structured, controlled, analytical, orderly, and rule-oriented end of the continuum. The leader end of the continuum connotes a more experimental, visionary, unstructured, flexible, and impassioned side. Managers and leaders are not the same. They think differently internally, and behave differently externally. The two are related, but their central functions are different. Management's concern with efficiency means doing things right to conserve resources. Leadership is focused on effectiveness - doing the right thing. For example, the military must manage its resources well to maximize efficiency. But in waging war, the military's critical responsibility is to be effective and win the war regardless of the resources required. Getting a bargain does not reflect effective leadership if it means losing the war. Good management is important, but good leadership is essential. The business sector in today’s society is increasing rapidly, and with this increase comes the need for more people to manage and lead the growing companies, but this growing need also raises some potential questions: Can anyone become a leader or a manager? Is there a difference between the two? Can people be trained to become leaders or a managers? Just like many other questions that might be asked in business; these questions have no one, definite answer. Let’s begin first by acknowledging the definitions of the two root words; the word manage means to handle, where as the word lead means to go. Similarly as the two words have different definitions, they also have different purposes. The manager administers; the leader innovates. A manager basically directs resources to complete predetermined goals or projects. For example, a manager may engage in hiring, training, and scheduling employees in order to accomplish work in the most efficient and cost effective manner possible. A manager is considered a failure if he/she is not able to complete the project or goals with efficiency or when the cost becomes too high. On the other hand, a leader within a company develops individuals in order to complete predetermined goals and projects. A leader develops relationships with his/her employees by building communication, evoking images of success, and by eliciting loyalty.

Here are some key differences: A manager takes care of where you are; a leader takes you to a new place. A manager deals with complexity; a leader deals with uncertainty. A manager is concerned with finding the facts; a leader makes decisions. A manager is concerned with doing things right; a leader is concerned with doing the right things. • A manager's critical concern is efficiency; a leader focuses on effectiveness. • A manager creates policies; a leader establishes principles. • A manager sees and hears what is going on; a leader hears when there is no sound and sees when there is no light. • A manager finds answers and solutions; a leader formulates the questions and identifies the problems. • • • •

A manager looks for similarities between current and previous problems; a leader looks for differences. • A manager thinks that a successful solution to a management problem can be used again; a leader wonders whether the problem in a new environment might require a different solution. Management's concern with efficiency means doing things right to conserve resources. Leadership is focused on effectiveness - doing the right thing. For example, the military must manage its resources well to maximize efficiency. But in waging war, the military's critical responsibility is to be effective and win the war regardless of the resources required. Getting a bargain does not reflect effective leadership if it means losing the war. 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 managers asks how and when; the leader asks what and why. Managers have their eyes on the bottom line; leaders have their eyes 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 own person. The manager does things right; the leader does the right thing.

COMPARISION OF MANAGER VS LEADERS: Manager: A company CEO directs Sarah, one of the companies up and coming managers, to hire enough new employees to provide the company with a state-of-the-art customer service department. Sarah undertakes her project with enthusiasm. She hires only those employees who can work the assigned hours, will accept the modest pay, and have experience working in customer service. She trains her new employees to perform the job to her expectations and assigns the employees to their new positions. Sarah measures her success in terms of efficiency, calls handled per hour, and cost effectiveness, i.e., did she meet her budget. However, Sarah did not anticipate that of the employees she hired, only a handful would remain working six months later. Leader: Rob obtains the same assignment as Sarah. Rob hires employees that he believes he can develop a working relationship with, versus just those employees who will worked the assigned hours and take the modest pay. Rob's goal is to hire a diverse group of employees, some of who do not have any customer service experience, who he feels he can develop a personal connection. A large part of Rob's training involves team building, telling successful stories, and listening to each employee's own desires for what constitutes a fulfilling job. Rob still assigns his employees their job duties and schedules at the end of training, and he also measures success in terms of efficient and cost effectiveness, but he also measures success in terms of low employee turnover, employee

morale, and employee development. Rob feels proud when one of his employees obtains an advance level position a year or two after being hired. Directs/oversee people or process Handles day to day functions Most concerned with efficiency The "how" structure(e.g.: policy, procedures, systems) MANAGERS VS LEADERS: ACCOUNTABILITY Manager--- I implement the rules Leaders-----I knw these rules seem arbitrary but they actually serve a good purpose Let me show you how you can use them to your advantage MANAGERS VS LEADERS: POWER Manager----positional over people Leader----power with people MANGERS VS LEDERS: CONTROL Manager---directs the doing Leader---provides tools and training, then allows employees to "do it" by letting go MANGERS VS LEADERS:PROBLEMS Manager-----solve problems Leaders---facilitates employees in resolving problems MANGERS VS LEADERS: GOALS Mangers---arise via necessity Leaders----arise via desire, proactive MANAGERS VS LEADERS:RESPONISBILITIES Managers---limitation focused on present vs, new possibilities Leader---growth-"the sky is the limit" New possibilities MANAGERS VS LEDERS:FOCUS Manger---concerned with efficiency-sets objectives and focuses on achieving goals(e.g: increasing productiviy) Tells employees: work smaerter not harder" Leaders----concerned with effectiveness-Are we doing the right ting ? Leads their followersd to the fulfillment of teir potential:from where they are to where they could be MANAGERS VS LEADERES: HOW VS. WHAT, WHY AND WHO ? Manger----understand how things work and how to accomplish the work Leader---detemines what needs to be done and wehy (sets the vision) Is open to how those goals are reached

Managers and Leaders - Comparison of Traits Definition: Managers . . . are analytical, structured, controlled,

Leaders . . . are experimental, visionary, flexible,

deliberate and orderly

unfettered and creative

Primary Problem-Solving Method: Managers . . . Leaders . . . Use the power of the logical mind use the power of intuition Competitive Strategy/Advantage Focus: Managers . . . Leaders . . . Concentrate on Strategy Nurture Culture Consider Dangers Sense Opportunity Follow Versions Pursue Visions Isolate Correlate Determine Scope of Problems Search for Alternative Solutions Seek Markets Serve People Think Rivals / Competition Think Partners / Cooperation Design Incremental Strategies Lay Out Sweeping Strategies Correct Strategic Weaknesses Build on Strategic Strengths Organizational Culture/Capability: Managers . . . Wield Authority Seek Uniformity Administer Programs Formulate Policy Instruct Manage by Goals / Objectives Control Easily Release Employees Employ Consistency

Leaders . . . Apply Influence Pursue Unity Develop People Set Examples Inspire Manage by Interaction Empower Would Rather Enhance Employees Elicit Creativity

External/Internal Change: Managers . . . Yearn for Stability Duplicate Fasten Things Down Drive Toward Compromise See Complexity React

Leaders . . . Thrive on Crisis Originate Unfasten Them Work to Polarize See Simplicity Proactive

Plan Reorganize Refine

Experiment Redevelop Revolutionize

Individual Effectiveness Style: Managers . . . Ask How (Seek Methods) Think Logically Perpetuate Hierarchies Are Skeptical Plan Around Take Charge Like Formality Venerate Science Perform Duties

Leaders . . . Wonder Why (Seek Motives) Think Laterally Strive for Equality Are Optimistic Confront Encourage Delegation Prefer Informality Revere Art Pursue Dreams

Bottom-Line Performance/Results: Managers . . . Scrutinize Performance Are Dependent Compensate People Conserve Assets Pursue the Tangible Inhabit the Present Concentrate on Short-term Results Want Good

Leaders . . . Search for Potential Are Independent Satisfy Them Risk Them Seek the Intangible Reside in the Future Seek Long-term Results Demand Better

Examples: Managers . . . Henry Ford, Ford Motor Company Harold Geneen, ITT John Akers, IBM Tom Landry, Dallas Cowboys Charles Knight, Emerson Electric George Bush, President of the U.S.

Leaders . . . Ray Kroc, McDonald's Walt Disney, Disney Studios Ross Perot, EDS and Perot Systems Ted Turner, Turner Broadcasting Steven Jobs, Apple Computer Bill Clinton, President of the U.S.

Can a Manager be a Leader and a Leader be a Manager? The answer to the question is "yes." The skills to be a leader or a manager are not exclusive in nature. A leader who only displays leadership skills will be ineffective when it comes to checking time cards, completing employee reviews, and scheduling employee vacation time; things that employers require their managers to do on timely bases. Similarly, a manager who spends all his/her time completing paperwork and reading reports; only creates more problems for him or her because they lack a developing relationship with their employees.

Leaders or managers? How do leaders differ from managers? • • • • • • • • • • •

• • •

Leaders direct, managers execute. Management is like investment - getting the best return from all resources - your own energy, talent and time plus all other resources at your disposal. Management requires efficiency, profitability, depends on minimal inputs for maximum returns. To manage well, regularly review your priorities, just as you would your investments. The same person can both lead and manage - they are different functions. Managers are like sports coaches - they inspire and develop people to get the best peformance out of them. They also provide structure and meaure output. Leaders champion change. They may or may not manage people. Management is a role, a set of responsibilities. Leadership is not a role. It is an occasional act, like creativity. Managers can be inspiring, empowering, nurturing, supportive and encouraging. An inspiring leader moves us to change direction. An inspiring manager moves us to work harder. Managers use open questions to draw solutions out of others as a way of reaching better decisions, fostering broader ownership and developing people. By contrast, leaders propose novel solutions. They want to persuade prospective followers that they know a better way of doing things. Managers occupy a role of responsibility for people. They may show leadership too, but leadership can also be shown by non-managers.

Changing Styles for the New Millennium Quality: Empowerment Moving from Management: Punishment

Moving toward Leadership: Reward

Demands "respect" Drill sargeant Limits and defines Imposes discipline "Here's what we're going to do!" Bottom line

Invites speaking out Motivator Empowers Values creativity "How can I serve you?" Vision

Quality: Restructure Moving from Management: Control Rank Hierarchy Rigid Automatic annual raises Performance review Mechanistic Compartmental

Moving toward Leadership: Change Connection Network Flexible Pay for performance Mutual contract for results Wholistic Systemic

Quality: Teaching Moving from Management: Moving toward Leadership: Order-giving Facilitating Military archetype Teaching archetype Quality: Role Model Moving from Management: Moving toward Leadership: Issues orders Acts as role model Demands unquestioning obedience Coaches and mentors others Quality: Openness Moving from Management: Keeping people on their toes Reach up/down Information control

Moving toward Leadership: Nourishing environment for growth Reach out Information availability

Quality: Questions and Answers Moving from Management: Moving toward Leadership: Knows all the answers Asks the right questions Not interested in new answers Seeks to learn and draw out new ideas