“Only three things happen naturally in organisations: Friction, confusion and underperformance; everything else requires leadership.” – Peter Drucker
Whether it’s a truism or merely tongue in cheek, there’s definitely merit in the statement. You don’t have to look hard to see what happens when there’s a lack of leadership.
Political instability, corporate greed, failed military operations, sexual abuse within religious institutions, environmental degradation…
There’s a mountain of evidence to confirm the failure of good leadership across organisations and institutions from the private to the public sector.
But what is leadership? And how is it different from management?
People often use the terms interchangeably, and many people confuse the two. This can be seen in the misrepresentation of leadership within position titles – one of the long-standing leftovers from Newtonian models of leadership – for example process lead, team lead, functional lead.
Of course, management and leadership are interrelated and must go hand in hand, yet they have some fundamental differences in the way they are applied. Both leadership and management involve influence, working with people and working to achieve common goals, yet management typically has a work focus whereas leadership has a people focus. Management has tended to be a unidirectional authority relationship whereas leadership is a multidirectional influence relationship.
“Both leadership and management involve working with people and working to achieve common goals, yet management typically has a work focus, whereas leadership has a people focus.”
A crucial mistake that people often make when it comes to leadership is that they use the term ‘leadership’ to refer to people at the very top of hierarchies. This implies that if a manager is the highest position within a specific branch of an organisation, they are a leader as well, but as I’ve explained previously (Why we need a new era of leadership) this isn’t necessarily true (and a reason why we need a shift in the way leadership is viewed in the 21st century). This lack of understanding can cause confusion when it comes to what is expected of the individual within a role of leader or manager.
Managers are often required to ensure the available resources are well organised and applied to produce the best results. If we use project management as a reference, management requires planning, execution, monitoring, control and review. As a manager, you can plan resources, equipment, timeframes and budgets and you can manage the systems, processes and functions yet the ‘action’ of management is often confused with leadership.
A good manager is not necessarily a good leader, although it’s ideal for the success of an organisation that an individual should be both.
You can allocate tasks, duties and responsibilities to optimise the resources available for your team but ultimately, the success of the team depends on good leadership.
Why?
Because you can manage systems, processes and functions but you can’t ‘manage’ people.
People want to be led as people, not managed as entities.
We are human beings – complex individuals, each with a unique set of characteristics and qualities that can only be empowered through leadership, not management.
This is where the leader shines. Rather than seeing individuals as a set of skills and the collective as a resource, leaders think beyond what each individual can do and they empower and activate them to become part of something bigger.
“Lead and inspire people. Don’t try to manage and manipulate people. Inventories can be managed but people must be led.” – Ross Perot
Having an understanding of the interconnectedness of everyone and everything and a deep knowing that the whole really is greater than the sum of its parts, the leader takes an interest in the development and growth of the person, rather than just what tasks and responsibilities can be assigned to each individual.
It sounds simple, yet so many people (and organisations) miss it.
In this new era we are seeing more and more that people are wanting leaders who share their vision rather than managers who are solely focused on the bottom line. We need leaders who can connect with their followers, who can BE role models and act with integrity, strength, courage and presence, not wield power from positions of authority and status.
Of course, I am not saying that leadership is required at the expense of management. As I alluded to earlier, they are interconnected and interrelated. Management and leadership have a shared set of skills and characteristics that are required for success across the two. Good managers like good leaders require good communication and delegation skills and they must be able to motivate their people to achieve results.
For any organisation to be successful it needs management that can plan, organise and coordinate its staff and it requires leaders who can inspire and motivate them to perform at the best of their ability.
A successful business owner needs to be both a strong leader and manager to get their team on board to connect with and follow them towards their vision of success. Leadership is about getting people to understand and believe in a vision and to work with you to achieve your goals while managing is more about administering and making sure the day-to-day things are happening as they should.
“Leadership is learning to let go and really empowering people at all levels of the organisation, and trusting them to do the right thing.” – Sundar Pichai, CEO Google and Alphabet
Ultimately leadership is about influence, connection and empowerment. It requires trust at all levels and a good leader encourages change, development and growth and operates in a proactive manner from principles and guidelines rather than in a reactive manner based on policies and procedures.
The manager might be able to ensure that processes and workflows are followed so that products and services are delivered on time but when leaders empower others through their connection, vision and trust, people thrive and performance follows.