Leadership and management are two distinct, yet often-confused concepts. In today’s working world, individuals often act as both a leader and manager, thus adding to the complexity and confusion of these two concepts. While the terms leadership and management may seem more similar than not, they are actually two distinct entities that serve separate roles and functions.
One of the most prominent differences between a leader and a manger is that of their following. Leaders have followers, and managers have employees (Kotter, 1990). With a leader, the team members will come to the leader for help, along with other members of other teams. Conversely, if one is a manager, the team under them is fixed and maintained at a set number. As situations arise, the assigned team members will report to the manager. While managers must support their team members, they are not as nurturing as leaders. Leaders must look to all team members to see that they are growing and filling the roles they currently have, as well as oversee their development into other, more complex roles. Managers will oversee the day-to-day performance of the team members, but the leader plans for the team members’ individual overall growth and development (Ghuman, 2010). Leadership also requires the creation of more leaders, and thus leaders must create distinct performance indicators, rather than simply giving instructions to team members. Lastly, leaders realize that team members’ growth will take time, and thus must have room for error (Kotter, 1990).
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Leadership vs. Management".
In high school, I worked at a local pharmacy store as a sales assistant and cashier. I had a manager that oversaw my day-to-day activities and supervised my work, and a regional leader that I saw less often, but on a consistent basis every 3 months. The manager was the one that I reported any immediate issues to, such as a lack of certain product availability, or problems with other team members. When I saw the regional leader, however, such issues and daily problems were not discussed at all. Instead, the leader allowed myself to ask him questions about possible careers and direction, and helped me to formulate a plan as to what I would strive to accomplish while working there, and also any personal development goals that I wanted to address. In this way, the difference between my manager and regional leader was drastic, as shown by their attention to differing issues, and the type of support they provided me with.
Another key difference between leadership and management is that leaders create teams, while managers manage groups. In this way, the management is responsible for managing the staff, but those in leadership roles are like a director for an orchestra. Each role, or instrument, is essential to the overall system, or performance. Managers must manage each sectional group (e.g. brass instruments) of the organization, while the leaders sees the larger picture. It is vital that the leaders see each area of their company as a pivotal facet of the company, so that the company is one unit, rather than just a varied group of individuals.
Another key point in distinguishing leadership and management is that leaders are proactive, while managers are reactive. When a manager is given instructions from a higher level, they must implement them accordingly. However, when something does not go to plan, a manager reacts quickly to either the good news or the bad news. In this way, managers are reactive (Ghuman, 2010). Leaders, on the other hand, must anticipate future changes or events, and thus must make the proper preparations for the team and company. Often, leaders must have a calmer demeanor and easy-going attitude when compared to a manger (Kotter, 1990). This creates a calmer, less stressful environment for all team members, particularly when considering the proactive versus reactive aspects.
When it comes to direction and implementation, it is important to note that leadership requires setting the direction, while management plans the details and execution style. For instance, the leader may have the vision and/or direction for the company, or perhaps an innovative idea, but the manager will need to think of all that the idea entails, and what must be done to go in the leader’s perceived direction (Kotter, 1990). Leaders may set additional meetings with other levels of management; however, it is up to the management to implement the idea.
Another experience I have with direction and implementation is also in regards to my job in high school at the pharmacy. In this instance, it was decided by the leaders of the company, the executives, that the pharmacy needed to become more involved in the local community, so as to foster better rapport with those who lived nearby. The leaders wished for the pharmacy to become a more active presence in the community, but left the details largely up to management. My manager, along with a few others, planned the details of this action, such as planning a local blood drive, a flu vaccination event, and other public events that involved the community more. Consequently, the vision transpired with the leaders, while the management implemented the vision.
In conclusion, management and leadership both entail very distinct roles, and thus possess different functions overall. In spite of this, the two terms are often confused, as both refer to places of authority and power. From my own experience, management is required for the smooth day-to-day operations, and thus is a more reactive force than not. While on the other hand, leaders are proactive and exist to provide a vision or direction for both the company and individuals. Together, both management and leadership areas heavily rely on each other, and thus are integral components to the overall success of the company or business.
- Ghuman, K. (2010). Management: Concepts, Practice, and Cases. New York City: McGraw Hill Education.
- Kotter, J. P. (1990). A force for change: How leadership differs from management. New York: Free Press.
