Differences Between Being A Leader And A Manager

Leadership is the New Face of Management


“Management is about arranging and telling. Leadership is about nurturing and enhancing.”  Tom Peters


Until now the coursework has indicated there is a difference between managers and leaders. The mindset of the leader is that of the visionary, big picture, future oriented, leader of followers. On the other hand, managers are the business stabilizers, the point person who seeks to set goals toward the execution of the leader’s vision. But is that the future for managers? The breakdown of large business structures into smaller, collaborative, changed, responsive organizations with flat structures led by teams puts managers in the unique position of setting visions and making decisions that formerly would not have been afford to them.  It seems to suggest that leaders will be managers and manager’s leaders. Is leadership then the new face of management?

Theme two examines the role functions of leaders and managers in today’s business.

Nov 15, 2016, 08:14am

9 Differences Between Being A Leader And A Manager

William Arruda Contributor

When you are promoted into a role where you are managing people, you don’t automatically become a leader. There are important distinctions between managing and leading people. Here are nine of the most important differences that set leaders apart:

1. Leaders create a vision, managers create goals.

Leaders paint a picture of what they see as possible and inspire and engage their people in turning that vision into reality. They think beyond what individuals do. They activate people to be part of something bigger. They know that high-functioning teams can accomplish a lot more working together than individuals working autonomously. Managers focus on setting, measuring and achieving goals. They control situations to reach or exceed their objectives.

2. Leaders are change agents, managers maintain the status quo.

Leaders are proud disrupters. Innovation is their mantra. They embrace change and know that even if things are working, there could be a better way forward. And they understand and accept the fact that changes to the system often create waves. Managers stick with what works, refining systems, structures and processes to make them better.

3. Leaders are unique, managers copy.

Leaders are willing to be themselves. They are self-aware and work actively to build their unique and differentiated personal brand. They are comfortable in their own shoes and willing to stand out. They’re authentic and transparent. Managers mimic the competencies and behaviors they learn from others and adopt their leadership style rather than defining it.

4. Leaders take risks, managers control risk .

Leaders are willing to try new things even if they may fail miserably. They know that failure is often a step on the path to success. Managers work to minimize risk. They seek to avoid or control problems rather than embracing them.

5. Leaders are in it for the long haul, managers think short-term.

Leaders have intentionality. They do what they say they are going to do and stay motivated toward a big, often very distant goal. They remain motivated without receiving regular rewards. Managers work on shorter-term goals, seeking more regular acknowledgment or accolades.

6. Leaders grow personally, managers rely on existing, proven skills.

Leaders know if they aren’t learning something new every day, they aren’t standing still, they’re falling behind. They remain  curious and seek to remain relevant in an ever-changing world of work. They seek out people and information that will expand their thinking. Managers often double down on what made them successful, perfecting existing skills and adopting proven behaviors.

7. Leaders build relationships, managers build systems and processes.

Leaders focus on people – all the stakeholders they need to influence in order to realize their vision. They know who their stakeholders are and spend most of their time with them. They build loyalty and trust by consistently delivering on their promise. Managers focus on the structures necessary to set and achieve goals. They focus on the analytical and ensure systems are in place to attain desired outcomes. They work with individuals and their goals and objectives.

8. Leaders coach, managers direct.

Leaders know that people who work for them have the answers or are able to find them. They see their people as competent and are optimistic about their potential. They resist the temptation to tell their people what to do and how to do it. Managers assign tasks and provide guidance on how to accomplish them.

9. Leaders create fans, managers have employees.

Leaders have people who go beyond following them; their followers become their raving fans and fervent promoters – helping them build their brand and achieve their goals. Their fans help them increase their visibility and credibility. Managers have staff who follow directions and seek to please the boss.

Are you a manager or a leader?

32,459 viewsMar 27, 2017, 06:46pm

The Future Of Leadership And Management In The 21st-Century Organization

Brent Gleeson Contributor

The leadership and management needs of today’s successful companies have changed. Here’s why.

In slower moving and less complex business environments the old hierarchical model that depended mostly on only a few people at the top for leadership simply doesn’t work anymore. In today’s more volatile, uncertain and ambiguous business battlefield, decentralized controls and leadership through networks of people at all levels is imperative for success.

One person — or a few people — simply don’t have the time or resources to sift through mounds of data about their company performance, industry, economic environment or competitors. Nor do they have the time to disseminate the right data to the right people in real time. Organizations move too quickly for that model to be effective.

In a recent article, I wrote about the fundamental difference between leadership and management as it relates to today’s organizations facing the need for significant change. So what does leadership and management look like in the successful, growing and innovative 21st century organization? One easy correlation I can draw is from experiencing the leaner structures we had in the Navy SEAL teams. When you think military, most would picture an extremely bureaucratic command and control environment, which of course does still exist in today’s armed forces. In some cases it’s absolutely necessary. But in special operations, the pace at which we must move, learn and even change moves far too quickly for a traditional hierarchy.

The Naval Special Warfare community, where regular military rank of course exists, is still a much flatter organization. Senior leaders do the leading, while most of the important managerial tasks are delegated to the lower ranks. Junior team members are empowered with great deals of responsibility and the autonomy to make decisions. Is it always perfect? Of course not. But with a culture founded on trust and extreme levels of accountability, this teamwork mechanism works very well.

The same applies to today’s business organizations. Especially in highly competitive environments. My previous company was a digital marketing agency. As the company grew rapidly, the industry continued to change due to technological advancements and the competitive landscape broadened, we knew our structures would have to evolve as well.

In some of the most successful start-ups and even large organizations that have evolved, you can visibly see greater levels of delegation and decision making at all levels. Leaders focus on guiding and communicating the vision, leading large client projects and finding new ways to develop their staff. Managers are taking on more leadership responsibilities and pass increasing amounts of responsibility to junior employees.

So what does this mean for leadership and management development? Management is more easily taught and learned in my opinion — planning, budgeting, staffing, quality control, processes, systems, etc. Leadership is a different beast and very few companies are designed for powerful leadership development. Their structures aren’t designed for it, they don’t invest in it or don’t see the need to prioritize it. Or all of the above. But if anything I have mentioned in this article is valid, then how can today’s fast-paced organizations not find better ways to develop their leaders.

Most of us spend the majority of the time we are awake working. Unless of course you are retired or have actually found a way to be successful working four hours a week. Personally, I would go nuts. So for the rest of us normal people, we spend most of our time working – and in large part in some sort of office environment. Which means that the time we have available to develop as managers and leaders is limited. Why? Because we are extremely busy and usually not being measured on some elusive performance metric related to how well we “lead.”

So that means that if companies really want to move more quickly, have a flatter structure and develop emerging leaders from within, a significant amount of time must be spent teaching team members how to lead.

Unfortunately, just having someone come in a do a keynote presentation on leadership at the annual sales kick-off meeting isn’t sufficient enough to immediately create an army of leaders who can effectively develop, communicate and execute a powerful vision —especially a vision for leading new changes. Nor is a two-day workshop. While these types of investments are important and should be made, the organizational structure and culture has to be one that empowers leaders. One that encourages people to take charge, attempt to lead, make mistakes and constantly learn.

Many newer companies and start-ups aren’t burdened by the old ways of thinking and operating like organizations founded fifty years ago. That said, many companies that have been around a long time have seen the light and are leading major transformations that improve culture, performance and leadership structure. The big ego bosses and dictators with an underserved sense of self-worth are finding it harder to exist in these new environments. A few 360-degree reviews and peer evaluations can fix that really quickly. The younger generations in the workplace today aren’t afraid to “share” their opinion. Especially when it’s anonymous. Trust me!

And frankly, leaders and managers with that mindset aren’t good for any organization. During SEAL training, peer reviews are a weekly event. We have a process called “top five, bottom five.” Every week you anonymously rank the top five performers in the class as well as the bottom five. Much of the time, those landing in the bottom five are star performers — from a tactical or physical standpoint. But they have character or ego problems. These classmates are organically purged. This system roots those issues out before a student ever gets close to graduating. It’s one of the many ways we protect our culture.

Nothing I have seen points to the fact that organizations will revert back to the old way of doing things — larger than life CEOs who single-handedly make a company great, thick layers of overpaid middle management, over-managed and under-led departments, and structures not designed to develop leaders.

Systems and cultures designed to develop new leaders and truly empower them is the key to success in any 21st century organization. The upside is almost endless. More people leading at a lower payroll cost. More people who feel connected to their work that are inspired by those around them. More senior leaders actually getting to focus on visionary leadership rather than management. Easier succession planning because you don’t have to spend months looking for one “Superwoman” who can allegedly do-it-all. The list goes on and on.

Does this easily apply to all organizations? Maybe not. But it does to any company I would want to build or work for.

The Real Difference Between Leaders And Managers: One Is Going Extinct

06/28/2016 07:02 pm ET Updated Jun 29, 2017

It’s popular to make a distinction between “managers” and “leaders.” For example, if you were to type “difference between managers and leaders” into Google, you’d get over 20,000 results. (Try it out.) People love to discuss and debate this statement.

It’s also one of those things consultant-y people like to say to sound a little smarter.

“Well, there’s a difference between managers and leaders, you know.”

As the traditional thinking goes, managers “manage” things. They tell people what to do, and when to do it. They insert themselves into the process to make sure everything works exactly they way they need to. They make sure tasks get done.

Without managers, presumably, the people being “managed” wouldn’t know what to do. They wouldn’t be able to figure out what things to work on, how to best spend their time, or when to show up at the office. (“Now where did I put my brain again? I know it’s around here somewhere… oh, that’s right; I leave at home.”)

Now admittedly, sometimes people use this distinction to illustrate some good points. But I’ve found myself bristling at this manager/leader contrast for quite some time without any sense of why it frustrated me so much. Recently I got some clarity, and it boils down to this: the duties we typically put on the “manager” side when we make the distinction between “managers” and “leaders” simply need to go away.

In the emerging economy, these “managing” activities don’t actually create any real value, and in fact, are costing you — quite a lot, it turns out.

Let me be very clear—the behaviors we associate with “management” aren’t just depreciating in value, they’re pushing your company in the exact wrong direction. Here’s why: in order for our organizations to be more competitive, they need to be increasingly quick to adapt, more creative and innovative, and better at engaging everyone’s brains in solving complex problems. “Managers” bottleneck a company’s ability to do all these things, because the whole philosophy of management is based on the terribly outdated notion that people are stupid and lazy and need to be monitored accordingly.

When managers try to “manage,” they are effectively in the way of enabling people to do the exact things you need them to do.

In other words, the technology of “management” is an woefully outdated operating system—it’s Windows 95 trying to compete in an iOS/Android world.

Leadership, on the other hand—this is something we need a LOT more of. We have always needed, and will always need, courageous people who are willing to stand up and boldly lead us somewhere important.

This is why it’s vital we start actively helping “management” die—so something dramatically better for your company can take its place.

What do these kinds of leaders look like? You’ve almost certainly seen them around, just maybe not as much as you’d like in your company… perhaps because we tend to be so obsessed with creating more “managers.”

Leaders don’t care all that much about specific tasks—they care about outcomes.

Leaders clear the cruft and cultivate clarity for everyone’s day-to-day work.

Leaders inspire others to become the best version of themselves.

Leaders remind us why our work matters deeply to our customers.

Leaders paint vivid pictures of the future and help us get excited to go there together.

Putting people in a box called “manager” makes them think they ought to do the opposite of all those things—that they should “MANAGE.”

The reality is that “managing” is going extinct—and it should. It’s costing your company (lots of) money, it’s costing you innovation, and it’s costing you engagement. It’s also helping you retain all those people you don’t really want to keep… but that’s an issue for another article.

Let’s let management go.

09/29/2016 10:00 am ET Updated Sep 29, 2016

The One Big Difference Between A Manager And A Leader

There’s one big difference between the two roles, says LinkedIn CEO Jeff Weiner.

Lisa Capretto OWN

As countless working Americans can attest, most companies and organizations are structured around hierarchy. Those at the top are considered leaders, but, according to LinkedIn CEO Jeff Weiner, many aren’t leading. They’re managing.

As Weiner explains to Oprah during a conversation that aired on “SuperSoul Sunday,” he believes there is a fundamental differencebetween being a leader and being a manager.

“Management is telling somebody what to do. Leadership is inspiring them to do it,” he says.

In his experience, Weiner has seen this inspiration come from three distinct areas. “It’s the clarity of one’s vision, the courage of one’s conviction and the ability to effectively communicate both of those things,” he says.

Historically, this hasn’t been something that a majority of companies emphasize, Weiner adds, often to their own detriment. “I’m not sure that organizations took the time to cultivate and develop those practices. It was more about, ‘This is the objective. You’re going to get this done,’” he says. “That’s not the way to get the most out of somebody.”

View: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/leader-vs-manager_us_57ec2ea8e4b082aad9b90448

Mar 23, 2014, 04:48pm

Successful Organizations Need Leaders At All Levels

Roger Trapp Contributo

Anybody who has ever watched interviews with managers or coaches of professional sports teams will have heard plenty of discussion of the need for leaders throughout the team. The same thinking is also increasingly a preoccupation of business people. Indeed, the need for “leaders at all levels” is one of the 12 critical issues identified in the Global Human Capital Trends 2014 survey published earlier this month by Deloitte University Press, the publishing arm of the professional services firm’s leadership center.

In a paper examining the findings, Adam Canwell, Vishalli Dongrie, Neil Neveras and Heather Stockton – who work for Deloitte in a range of locations  – point out that leadership “remains the No. 1 talent issue facing organizations around the world,” with 86% of respondents to the survey rating it “urgent” or “important.” However, the fact that only 13% say they do an excellent job of developing leaders at all levels means that this area has the largest “readiness gap” in the survey.

Finding good leaders has, of course, always been a crucial issue for all sorts of organizations. This is why the armed forces, for instance, put so much effort into training their officers and why business schools and other providers of executive development have thrived. But the Deloitte team argues that “21st-century leadership is different”. Canwell and his colleagues write: “Companies face new leadership challenges, including developing Millenials and multiple generations of leaders, meeting the demand for leaders with global fluency and flexibility, building the ability to innovate and inspire others to perform, and acquiring new levels of understanding of rapidly changing technologies and new disciplines and fields.” No wonder organizations are coming up short.

Almost inevitably, the problem is felt to be especially acute today. This is a result of the strengthening of the global recovery, the desire on the part of the companies to expand in new markets and the growing numbers of older leaders choosing to retire.

A key part of the solution identified by the Deloitte team is for organizations to develop leadership pipelines at every level. At present, it says, companies are not only not developing enough leaders, they are also not equipping those they are creating with the critical capabilities and skills they need to succeed. “Today’s market environment places a premium on speed, flexibility and the ability to lead in uncertain situations. At the same time, the flattening of organizations has created an explosion in demand for leadership skills at every level.”

It appears that there is no avoiding spending money when it comes to dealing with this situation. The best performing companies already spend thousands of dollars each year developing each would-be leader on their staff, with the figure for senior leaders in the tens of thousands of dollars. Creating strong leadership programs for leaders at all levels – as advocated – requires sustained and substantial investment. At the early stages in the leadership pipeline, potential leaders need to acquire core skills in supervision and management, with frequent assignments to build on this base. Later on, they need to understand all the business functions before becoming executives, when business and product strategy will be central, along with experience of driving change within large teams. Companies need to understand that there are no shortcuts to building broad and deep leadership teams. New leaders typically need 18 months before feeling fully comfortable in a new role, while for those in the mid-level the period is more likely to be two to three years.

The paper also calls for companies to be more flexible in terms of leadership paths. Some leaders will move into senior roles relatively quickly because of a particular situation, while others will develop more slowly.

Above all, though, organizations need to realize that developing leaders amounts to more than having a selection of training programs. “Senior executives should create a culture that broadens the opportunity for leaders to develop in new ways,” writes the Deloitte team. “This means putting potential leaders in positions that stretch them beyond their current skill sets, and continuously coaching and supporting leaders so they can build their capabilities as rapidly as possible.” This is increasingly well recognised, say the authors, but it is “simply not widely adopted and practiced”.

Where should companies begin? A few starting points include:

· Engaging top executives to develop leadership strategy and actively govern leadership development.

· Aligning leadership strategies and development with evolving business goals

· Focusing on three aspects of developing leaders – developing leaders at all levels, developing global leaders locally and developing a succession mindset

· Implementing an effective – and unique – leadership program.

But there is no time to delay. The best-performing organizations are already on their way.

Are you looking for a similar paper or any other quality academic essay? Then look no further. Our research paper writing service is what you require. Our team of experienced writers is on standby to deliver to you an original paper as per your specified instructions with zero plagiarism guaranteed. This is the perfect way you can prepare your own unique academic paper and score the grades you deserve.

Use the order calculator below and get ordering with idealtermpapers.com now! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.

Type of paper Academic level Subject area
Number of pages Paper urgency Cost per page:

Purchase Guarantee

Why ORDER at IdealTermPapers.com?

  • Educated and experienced writers.
  • Quality, Professionalism and experience.
  • Original Content writing.
  • Best customer support.
  • Affordable Pricing on orders.
  • Thorough research.
  • Ontime delivery of finished work.
  • 100% plagiarism free papers.

Reasonable Prices

  • To get the best quality papers isn’t cheap so don’t trust extremely low prices.
  • We can’t claim that we have unreasonably low prices because low prices equal to low quality.
  • Our prices are good and they balance with the quality of our work.
  • We have a Moneyback guarantee.

Original and Quality work

  • Our writers are professionals and they write your paper from scratch and we don’t encourage copy pasting.
  • All writers are assessed and they have to pass our standards for them to work with us.
  • Plagiarism is an offence and it’s never tolerated in our company.

Native Writers plus Researchers

  • Our writers are qualified and excellent and will guarantee the best performance in your order.
  • Our team has writers who have master's and PhD qualifications who can handle any assignment
  • We have the best standards in essay writing.

We have been in business for over 7 syears

  • We have always served our customers from all over the world and they have continued to order with us.
  • We value our customers since they have trusted us to do their assignments.
  • We are competent in our writing gained from experience over the years
  • Our company has 24/7 Live Support.

You will get

  •  Custom Admission Essay written by competent professional English writers.
  •  Free revisions according to our revision policy if required
  •  Paper format:  275 words per page, Times New Roman font and size 12, doublespaced text and1 inch margin
  •  On time delivery and direct order download
  •  Privacy guaranteed

We can help you:

  •  acquire a comprehensive professional presentation.
  •  get a unique and remarkable content as per your instructions.
  •  Get an additional portion that can be included to your existing presentation;
  •  turn your work in to an eyecatching presentation with well communicated ideas.
  •  improve your presentation to acquire the best professional standards.