Can you really separate and identify what is leadership and what is management objectively and empirically?
And as Mr. Warren Bennis (1989) further explicated his twelve distinctions between the two groups are:
1. Managers administer; leaders innovate.
2. Managers ask how and when; leaders ask what and why.
3. Managers focus on systems; leaders focus on people.
4. Managers do things right; leaders do the right things.
5. Managers maintain; leaders develop.
6. Managers rely on control; leaders inspire trust.
7. Managers have short-term perspective; leaders have long-term perspective.
8. Managers accept the status-quo; leaders challenge the status-quo.
9. Managers have an eye on the bottom line; leaders have an eye on the horizon.
10. Managers imitate; leaders originate.
11. Managers emulate the classic good soldier; leaders are their own person.
12. Managers copy; leaders show originality.
Accomplished Leaders do much more than manage.They inspire and create followers who will follow them into fire and ice and back.
Hence, Management seems to be considered more about organization, administration and execution; the ability to build a functioning organization that can execute the tasks, projects and processes needed to achieve the aim of the system.
A manager has quantitative capabilities to deliver timing metrics and KPI. His tools and only motivation is focused in actively deliver the mission and the strategy of the organization. Therefore:a leader hasqualitative capabilities to deliver vision and a manager has quantitative capabilities to deliver mission; Leader/Manager integrates the vision plus the mission of the organization to their teams and keep the culture within an organization functional and balanced.
Is leadership an art?
Some see leadershipas an art, but is that really so or we may well say that the leadership card in business is overstated and overplayed.
Overstated because business leadership definition tends to broad stroke a painting of employees portrayed as a collective of dysfunctional, disengaged, in desperate need of a messianic authority.
Overplayed because vision and goals are not based on the commons but more so on the imposition of a business cultural hegemony shift.
Transactional or transformational "leaders" in business are simply roles being played by people in authority, not to be confused with the fine art of leading people in a common pursuit. The executive team in place was not elected by the employees. Persuasive leadership is a just a coinage that implies accepted compliance or eventual termination.
Executives fulfilling the stockholder's desire to maximize profit are not true leaders “per se” but bosses who must exemplify great communication skills aside from administrative acumens to grow the businesses they manage. In today's business context, productivity is the singular mantra so what does this have to do with leadership?
What if the real question is not so much leadership vs. management but”Can a manager be a leader and a leader be a manager"?
Changing of / revision of which hat(s) to wear can happen within days, hours, minutes, seconds, etc... It depends on "who walks in the room next with what type of issue". Neither the leader nor his people know when the leader has revised current hat. A good leader never loses sight of their leader perspective while managing and vice-versa. Consistency! Whenever approached by any situation, whoever is involved knows what they are going to receive. The complete leadership package must include the characteristics of an effective leader who is only "influenced" to a certain degree by the manager perspective.