One is an outstanding leader, the other a great manager. How are they different and which one is more important?
Meet Ken
The Manager
He sees himself as a coach. Ken’s mission is to help people discover hidden talents and achieve things they didn’t think were possible. He develops people. He spends a lot of time thinking about what his organization needs to achieve, the best approach to doing so, and how to develop his people to employ that approach.
Ken reads people well. He is deliberate and thoughtful (sometimes overly so) about what he says and does. He acts with utmost integrity and on the one occasion when I saw Ken catch himself not walking his talk, he suffered his own lecture and made immediate changes.
Ken coaches two children’s lacrosse teams. The players are delighted to develop skills they never knew they had. Unlike the other coaches, he does not yell at the children and doesn’t understand why anyone would do so.
Five Year Business Synopsis
Goal: Increase sales while positioning for long term growth
Approach: Develop entrepreneurial mindset. Position managers and front line folks to see themselves as running a new business funded by investors. Ask them, and have them ask themselves, whether the venture firm would continue to invest baed on their short term financial performance and longer term prospects.
People development: Identify criteria for entrepreneurial mindset. Assess each manager against these criteria. Coach/develop as needed. Invest time in people.
Results: Ken has turned even poor performers into winners. His territory exceeded revenue goals and expectations. Ken is promoted.
Meet Paul
The Leader
He is highly competitive and emits the scent of determination. In response to the question, “What is the worst thing anyone could say about you as a manager or a leader?” he responds, “That I don’t care and don’t have integrity.” He is personable and people want to follow him.
Paul has a quick sharp mind. He scans the environment, constantly. I imagine that he developed this habit and skill while playing high school football, scanning for the opening.
Paul is unclear on behalf of what he most wants to use his mind, his determination, his ability to garner followers. We talk. His purpose shows up. Here’s the bumper sticker version: “Innovation for better living.” He wants to change the way we think about, source and use energy. Think green.
Paul, like Ken, coaches children’s sports teams, but Paul wants to change the very nature of coaching. The chidlren he’s coaching are having the time of their lives. They win, but more importantly for Paul, they celebrate passing the ball to each other. He talks to the other coaches about change. Ken has a vision for improving just about everything in which he’s involved. He can’t seem to help himself. Innovate, change, improve.
Which One is Needed?
Two people.
One extraordinary leader – a visionary, determined to win. People follow.
On great manager – develops the troops to make the vision a concrete reality.
The business and the vision need both.
They need each other.
Sometimes the great manager and extraordinary leader come in one package.
Sometimes, not so much.
Have both… will travel…far… successfully.
Dear Anne ~ I like this post for two reasons. The first is that, in a world where leadership stories are so often negative, it is wonderful to read about two people who care so much about those they lead.
The second is, it affirms for me that there are a variety of ways to be successful as a leader, which means no one has to assume a leadership ‘style’ that doesn’t honestly reflect who they are.
In reading this, I see not one manager and one leader but two leaders. The difference I see between them is that one is revolutionary, an adventurer, explorer and visionary. He opens new doors. The other is more evolutionary, a builder, a grower. He sees what is needed for people to successfully pass through new doors and helps them prepare for it. Both are important.
Yes, I also see two leaders. To develop the skills & confidence in others & to harness their potential is a great leadership skill. Great post! Wish there were more of both!
Thank you Gwinnie. When I wrote the post I had in mind that Paul was more the leader as he has the vision in mind, and I believe the leader needs to know where he wants to take people. You and Gwyn are causing me to take a step back and consider that possibly both are leaders, or at least that they are different kinds of leaders. One leads the person to his/her best self; the other to work towards a vision beyond him/herself.
Anne, I think this shows the bias towards the aggressive type “A” profile we all stereotype as a “leader.” In fact, I’d say that Ken is a true leader – because he is focused on the “within” to enable the “without” – i.e. his team//his peers//his bosses even; That’s the true essence of leadership – can you enable others by your behavior? Leaders of causes of any worth – can’t really depend on their own egos to sustain the execution it takes to achieve common (and higher) goals. Nice profiling. Enjoy your tweets and posts. Cool stuff!
Vinay
Thank you for your comments Vinay. I agree with your points that both the cause and the capability are needed but don’t agree that one or the other is true leadership. Both are required and neither is sufficient without the other. Capability without a cause leaves a vacancy, and a cause without the capability is a pipe dream. I view leadership as a catalyst for the evolution of human kind. As such it requires a cause and a vision greater than oneself (beyond ego); as well as inspiring and helping people develop the capability to achieve that vision, beginning with a sense that they both can and want to do so.
There is a saying that I am guessing you may have heard: One manages things and leads people. I think the attempt at making a distinction in this article on “leader or manager” is problematic at best. The two responses from (Gwynn and Gwinnie) make the point. It seems to me that the stories describe styles of leadership. Neither story illustrates management (or a manager) from my perspective. And I don’t understand why the question is posed: Which one is more important? From my experience, it seems evident to me that in any human endeavor leadership and management are needed. Success does not happen with one and not the other. So, what is it that underlies your question? Do we “humanists” consider the function of management as somehow less important than leadership (that’s the sense i got from your–Anne’s–comments)? From my perspective, the big picture on leadership is that we humans function best when leadership is a shared function that at times looks like visioning; at times managing; at times encouraging, etc. And leadership is never a one person thing–despite the tendency our culture has to focus on “the person in charge” or the “person at the top”.
Just some thoughts.
Yes David, exactly. both are needed. Sometimes leaders of people and leaders of ideas are contained all in the same package. Each of the two people described in this post are a piece of the leadership equation, but neither is the total. They need each other. One can bring the troops to realize the ideas of the other. The “other” can bring forward the ideas around which the troops will rally.
Thank you for your astute read of the situation.
[...] Perschel presents Manager or Leader – Which One is More Important? posted at Germane Insights, providing a case study and a story of two men, one is seen as a leader, [...]
[...] Perschel presents Manager or Leader – Which One is More Important? posted at Germane Insights, providing a case study and a story of two men, one is seen as a leader, [...]
[...] Read the full article, click here. [...]
[...] [...]