You manage things; you lead people. —Rear Admiral Grace Murray Hopper
This is a curious debate. Many in academia use management as the title for business leadership programs. For example, a well-known large university in my town offers a degree in management in the business school and allows for a minor in leadership, which is under the college of life sciences and agriculture. Fortunately, the professor leading that program understands leadership and knows how to apply it in a practical way. I don’t feel that a degree in management qualifies a person to lead an organization, a team, or a project. Its basis is in other areas.
As Stephen Covey points out, we manage time and lead people…we manage money and lead people…we manage project implementation and lead people…we manage things and lead people. There is a distinct difference.
Managing people fits an autocratic leadership style and not a transformational leadership style. It can be a form of overfunctioning. Top down leadership that is autocratic minimizes the synergy of the team.
Here’s a simple chart of my thoughts on the differences:
|Concern||Helps others to be right||Being right|
|Horizon||Short-Term within Long-Term||Short-Term|
|Creates||Leaders on teams||Puppets|
|Rules||Uses principles||Uses rules|
|Pathway||Creates new||Uses existing|
|Persona||Focus on vision and values||Focus on self|
As you see, there is a significant difference in these two paradigms.
Effective leadership requires healthy self-esteem, confidence, and constantly evolving skills.
The Transformational Leadership Strategist TM