Manager vs Leaders

I was so happy to be hearing from my friend that she has been raised as a Manager recently in replacing her former superior who had to resign in order to follow her husband in migrating to Dubai. In the event of that, we had planned to celebrate the good news blastly over a nice dinner at her own choice of eating place that is Victoria Station. Well, the steak was nice and it was a fun time we had for 4 of us on that dinner. The dinner was actually fully on her. "It’s for the promotion," she said as she insists of settling the bills. We had a good time celebrating and congratulating her all night. And all we could see was her face was shine with smile till the end. Well, she deserves the raise after all. With most of all hard her time and effort were dedicated to her work, who says she’s not the right candidate.

Out of the dinner we had last nite, I really would like to share on this topic. What does ‘Managers’ mean?

A manager has to perform all five functions to achieve goals, i.e., Planning, Organizing, Staffing, Directing, and Controlling.

What is the difference between management and leadership? It is a question that has been asked more than once and also answered in different ways.

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

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 of what they do.

A leader is one who influences the behavior and work of others in group efforts towards achievement of specified goals in a given situation. On the other hand, manager can only be a true manager if he has got traits of leader in him. Manager at all levels are expected to be the leaders of work groups so that subordinates willingly carry instructions and accept their guidance. A person can be a leader by virtue of all qualities in him.

Managers have subordinates
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.

Authoritarian, transactional style
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 (at minimum their salary) for doing so.

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

Seek comfort
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'.

Leaders have followers

Leaders do not have 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.

Charismatic, transformational style
Telling people what to do does not inspire them to follow you. You have to appeal to them, showing how following them will lead to their hearts' desire. They must want to follow you enough to stop what they are doing and perhaps walk into danger and situations that they would not normally consider risking.

Leaders with a stronger charisma find it easier to attract people to their cause. As a part of their persuasion they typically promise transformational benefits, such that their followers will not just receive extrinsic rewards but will somehow become better people.

People focus

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 (and takes blame on themselves) 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.

Seek risk
In the same study that showed managers as risk-averse, leaders appeared as 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. This perhaps taught them the independence of mind that is needed to go out on a limb and not worry about what others are thinking about you.

Leaders and Managers can be compared on the following basis:

Basis Manager Leader

Origin A person becomes a manager by virtue of his position. A person becomes a leader on basis of his personal qualities.

Formal Rights Manager has got formal rights in an organization because of his status. Rights are not available to a leader.

Followers The subordinates are the followers of managers. The group of employees whom the leaders leads are his followers.

Functions A manager performs all five functions of management. Leader influences people to work willingly for group objectives.

Necessity A manager is very essential to a concern. A leader is required to create cordial relation between person working in and for organization.

Stability It is more stable. Leadership is temporary.

Mutual Relationship All managers are leaders. All leaders are not managers.

Accountability Manager is accountable for self and subordinates behaviour and performance. Leaders have no well defined accountability.

Concern A manager’s concern is organizational goals. A leader’s concern is group goals and member’s satisfaction.

Followers People follow manager by virtue of job description. People follow them on voluntary basis.

Role continuation A manager can continue in office till he performs his duties satisfactorily in congruence with organizational goals. A leader can maintain his position only through day to day wishes of followers.

Sanctions Manager has command over allocation and distribution of sanctions. A leader has command over different sanctions and related task records. These sanctions are essentially of informal nature.

Many can be Managers but how many do really have the charismatic essence in becoming a good leader. This question keep coming in when we are heading a unit or group of employees in a department of workplace. And how do our subordinates really sees us or in fact in the eye sight of our Superiors to evaluate us. As a Manager? Or as a Leader. I hope by sharing slight info in this topic can just trigger out our mind to see ourselves, at what potential do we carries in sitting our executive chairs.

Leadership versus Management is such a popular topic in the Management School. Since lots of information possible read anywhere in the net or various management books by popular authors, therefore I shall not elaborate more. It just something that cross my mind again and again, especially after coming back from our celebration dinner last night.