© 2001 Sloan Consulting Services

  • HOME

  • ABOUT

  • SERVICES

  • BLOG

  • CONTACT

  • More

    Sloan Consulting Services

    • Wix Facebook page
    • LinkedIn App Icon
    • Wix Twitter page

    Power: The Interwoven Fabric of Leadership

    December 1, 2014

    Are managers and leaders really different?

    June 24, 2014

    Who is the Best Leader?

    May 16, 2014

    Consultant, Coach, Mentor?

    March 24, 2014

    The Irony of Emotional Intelligence

    February 15, 2014

    The Inner 4 P's of Leadership

    December 1, 2013

    Defining Moments

    November 12, 2013

    Diversity in Senior Positions Needs Progressive Leadership

    September 20, 2013

    New Words - Old Ideas

    August 30, 2013

    The Outer 3 P's of Leadership

    June 20, 2013

    Please reload

    Recent Posts

    The Inner 4 P's of Leadership

    December 1, 2013

    The Outer 3 P's of Leadership

    June 20, 2013

    Consultant, Coach, Mentor?

    March 24, 2014

    1/3
    Please reload

    Featured Posts

    Are managers and leaders really different?

    June 24, 2014

    When I taught Strategic Leadership, the students had to read John Kotter's 1990 article on "What Leaders Really Do. "  Kotter was very effective in setting out different functions for leaders and managers such as leaders align people as opposed to managers who organize and staff. Over the years, there has been debate on whether one can perform both roles as though they are two distinct types of people.  According to Kotter, the essence of the difference is managers deal with complexity whereas leaders focus on change. So on this basis one might think leaders and managers are different.   Over time, managers seem to have lost their gravitas as we deal in a world of accelerating change.

     

    Recently, I saw that the New Cambridge Advanced Dictionary defines a leader as "a person in control of a group, country, or situation".  Control is a rather funny word to use for leaders. Control is really more of a managerial notion on controlling resources including staff and not per se the foundation of leadership. We seem to be running amok on intermingling the concept of managers and leaders without a clear understanding of their similarities and differences.

     

    In my opinion, the concept of management and leaders are clearly different, but there is opportunity for significant overlap. This overlap corresponds to  some of the basic thinking of John Gardner outlined in his article 1990 "The Nature and Tasks of Leadership."  He has a very thoughtful delineation of leaders and managers and truly worth a read with a rather sophisticated analysis that I largely agree with.

     

    For me, the key is that managers are derived from organizations.  They are given a distinct role with certain responsibility and authority.  Leaders have followers.  People follow because they are inspired by the leader's vision and direction, which supports their needs in some meaningful way.

     

    Managers are given the authority and responsibility to achieve organizational objectives.  Likewise, people follow leaders to achieve envisioned results.  A manager can be a leader and vice versa a leader can be a manager.  If a manager in an organization has people following them because they are inspired by the direction, leadership is being demonstrated.  Likewise, if a leader exists in an organization, by definition followers have been inspired to pursue a course of action. Of course, a leader does not have to be part of an organization to have followers.  And a manager in an organization may not be exhibiting leadership skills.

     

    In today's dynamically changing world, to achieve great results, it is critical that managers be great leaders.  It is also critical that those not in positions with managerial authority also exhibit leadership.  Thus, I think focusing on leadership is a strong agenda for organizations seeking high performance.

     

    In previous blogs, I have outlined the construct of a leader's outer world with the 3 Ps of Leadership: People, Planning, and Performance.  Traditional leadership characteristics play a significant role on the People and Planning side.  A leader must understand the needs of potential followers and set out a direction and vision that reaches critical needs.  Of course, management functions also play a role with people and planning, but a real key to management is execution of the plan that leads to achieving the vision.  Thus, leadership and management occur simultaneously in these different phases with emphasis varying depending on the phase. 

     

    Thus, while there are meaningful differences in functions, activities, and perspective between the manager and leader role, achieving great results requires an orchestrated intermingling in a business setting.  The 3 Ps provide a highly useful framework that facilitates understanding this interaction of leader and manager roles.  Much more could be described on how on this interaction, but let's leave some of that for you.

    Tags:

    manager leader

    Please reload

    Follow Us

    best leader

    crisis management

    emotional intelligence

    leadership

    learning

    manager leader

    managerial grid

    mentor coach consultant

    progressive leadership

    servant based leadership

    world energy

    Please reload

    Search By Tags

    December 2014 (1)

    June 2014 (1)

    May 2014 (1)

    March 2014 (1)

    February 2014 (1)

    December 2013 (1)

    November 2013 (1)

    September 2013 (1)

    August 2013 (1)

    June 2013 (1)

    April 2013 (1)

    February 2013 (2)

    August 2007 (1)

    Please reload

    Archive
    • Facebook Basic Square
    • Twitter Basic Square
    • Google+ Basic Square