Dear Friends,
Recently, someone asked me about the difference between a leader and a manager. Unfortunately, I could not provide a satisfactory answer to the question.
Please share your views on this topic.
Regards,
Vikram Singh
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
108Recently, someone asked me about the difference between a leader and a manager. Unfortunately, I could not provide a satisfactory answer to the question.
Please share your views on this topic.
Regards,
Vikram Singh
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Vikram:
The difference between leader and manager can be summarized this way:“When you are a leader, you work from the heart. As a manager, you work from the head.” Although it is probably more complex than that, the point to remember is the difference between what you do as a leader and what you do as a manager—and the constant need to be able to do both. Furthermore, the head and heart need to be partners, not independent operators.
A manager focuses attention on efficiency, effectiveness, and making sure the right things happen at the right time. You are in a manager role when you set performance objectives with staff, prepare budgets, review cashflow projections, develop action plans, and evaluate programs or fund raising strategies or any other aspect of the company. Managing may also include doing hundreds of other tasks that require focused and logical attention to the good health of the organization.
On the other hand, a leader is a strategist, a visionary, and some-one who inspires others to greatness. You are leading when you share your vision for your organization, or when you bring staff and people together to design a program or develop a strategy or resolve a problem. Leaders motivate staff and people, serve as role models, inspire people to cooperate, build community and capacity inside and outside the organization, and create learning environments in which people can grow and develop themselves without fear.
Leaders follow their own intuition which may inturn be more benefit to the company. Their Followers are often more loyal to them. Managers do things by the book and follow company policy. Their Subordinates may or may not be loyal to them. A Leader in practical terms motivates others to do the task. A Manager in business terms ensures tasks are done through others.
I hope now you can give a satisfactory answer to anyone you want. :) Besides, other comments from CiteHR members are also welcome.
Regards,
Adnan
From Pakistan, Karachi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The difference between leader and manager can be summarized this way:“When you are a leader, you work from the heart. As a manager, you work from the head.” Although it is probably more complex than that, the point to remember is the difference between what you do as a leader and what you do as a manager—and the constant need to be able to do both. Furthermore, the head and heart need to be partners, not independent operators.
A manager focuses attention on efficiency, effectiveness, and making sure the right things happen at the right time. You are in a manager role when you set performance objectives with staff, prepare budgets, review cashflow projections, develop action plans, and evaluate programs or fund raising strategies or any other aspect of the company. Managing may also include doing hundreds of other tasks that require focused and logical attention to the good health of the organization.
On the other hand, a leader is a strategist, a visionary, and some-one who inspires others to greatness. You are leading when you share your vision for your organization, or when you bring staff and people together to design a program or develop a strategy or resolve a problem. Leaders motivate staff and people, serve as role models, inspire people to cooperate, build community and capacity inside and outside the organization, and create learning environments in which people can grow and develop themselves without fear.
Leaders follow their own intuition which may inturn be more benefit to the company. Their Followers are often more loyal to them. Managers do things by the book and follow company policy. Their Subordinates may or may not be loyal to them. A Leader in practical terms motivates others to do the task. A Manager in business terms ensures tasks are done through others.
I hope now you can give a satisfactory answer to anyone you want. :) Besides, other comments from CiteHR members are also welcome.
Regards,
Adnan
From Pakistan, Karachi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
The difference between a leader and a manager is the same as the difference between Mahatma Gandhi and Russi Modi, the Ex-MD of TATA Steel. Mahatma Gandhi never paid anything to his followers. Followers are not paid and cannot be recruited, whereas subordinates are always compensated for their services and can be recruited.
A Manager aims to maintain the status quo of the systems/process, whereas a Leader always seeks change for the betterment. A leader operates in a high-risk zone and avoids comfort zones, which is in contrast to a Manager's approach.
Regards,
VISHAL GUPTA
From United States
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The difference between a leader and a manager is the same as the difference between Mahatma Gandhi and Russi Modi, the Ex-MD of TATA Steel. Mahatma Gandhi never paid anything to his followers. Followers are not paid and cannot be recruited, whereas subordinates are always compensated for their services and can be recruited.
A Manager aims to maintain the status quo of the systems/process, whereas a Leader always seeks change for the betterment. A leader operates in a high-risk zone and avoids comfort zones, which is in contrast to a Manager's approach.
Regards,
VISHAL GUPTA
From United States
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I came across the article on the net
Leadership vs. Management
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.
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.
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.
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.
From China
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Leadership vs. Management
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.
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.
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.
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.
From China
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In order to retain one’s position, Manager has no option but to be a good leader ... this doesn’t hold good for a leader. He need not be a good manager to be a great leader.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi all,
A very interesting topic. This is actually the bane of today's management. I always look at the definition of leaders and managers as such: leaders SERVE the people they lead, while a manager EXPECTS to BE served by the people they lead. Two very different purposes and two very different outcomes. The higher we go, the more service we provide, not the other way around. Gandhi was one great leader. Why? Because he was a great giver and a great servant. Look at any characteristic of a great leader, and you will find them to be a great servant.
A very different definition from what we perceive leaders to be like today because they have forgotten that it begins with being a servant. In forgetting this, they become only a manager.
Cheers and smiles.
From Malaysia, Johor Bahru
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A very interesting topic. This is actually the bane of today's management. I always look at the definition of leaders and managers as such: leaders SERVE the people they lead, while a manager EXPECTS to BE served by the people they lead. Two very different purposes and two very different outcomes. The higher we go, the more service we provide, not the other way around. Gandhi was one great leader. Why? Because he was a great giver and a great servant. Look at any characteristic of a great leader, and you will find them to be a great servant.
A very different definition from what we perceive leaders to be like today because they have forgotten that it begins with being a servant. In forgetting this, they become only a manager.
Cheers and smiles.
From Malaysia, Johor Bahru
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi: To define it in one line " Leaders are born not Made" " Good leaders are great Managers, but Great Managers are not Good Leaders" Hope this helps Regards Radhika
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Radhika,
I'm not agreed with your views... "Leaders are born not made." I think and even many others will share my views that leaders can also be made. Situational Leadership is one example of such type of leadership.
Secondly, you have written that "Good leaders are great managers, but great managers are not good leaders." My views are that great managers may or may not be great leaders. Both leaders and managers are required for the success of any organization.
Thank you,
Vishal Gupta
From United States
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I'm not agreed with your views... "Leaders are born not made." I think and even many others will share my views that leaders can also be made. Situational Leadership is one example of such type of leadership.
Secondly, you have written that "Good leaders are great managers, but great managers are not good leaders." My views are that great managers may or may not be great leaders. Both leaders and managers are required for the success of any organization.
Thank you,
Vishal Gupta
From United States
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Vishal,
Here is my explanation. It's just my thoughts.
Leaders are born - Tell me, can everyone become the CEO of a company? If you say yes, then I agree that situational leadership training helps. Anyone could become a Manager but not the CEO. You need to have some inbuilt qualities to become a leader.
We had a set of managers undergo the situational leadership training, which included me too, but I do not think that we have become leaders. I agree with you that "Both leaders as well as managers are required for the success of any organization."
Regards,
Radhika
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Here is my explanation. It's just my thoughts.
Leaders are born - Tell me, can everyone become the CEO of a company? If you say yes, then I agree that situational leadership training helps. Anyone could become a Manager but not the CEO. You need to have some inbuilt qualities to become a leader.
We had a set of managers undergo the situational leadership training, which included me too, but I do not think that we have become leaders. I agree with you that "Both leaders as well as managers are required for the success of any organization."
Regards,
Radhika
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Vikram,
Some great responses to your post. For me, the difference is really basic. While you can add a number of variances depending on your background and experience, and who the current management guru is, it boils down to the fact that successful companies need both managers and leaders.
A manager manages the business processes, while a leader leads the people processes, and all that both entail... Perhaps oversimplistic, but my view nonetheless.
Regards,
Jo
[URL] www.jemmconsultants.com
From Canada, Ottawa
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Some great responses to your post. For me, the difference is really basic. While you can add a number of variances depending on your background and experience, and who the current management guru is, it boils down to the fact that successful companies need both managers and leaders.
A manager manages the business processes, while a leader leads the people processes, and all that both entail... Perhaps oversimplistic, but my view nonetheless.
Regards,
Jo
[URL] www.jemmconsultants.com
From Canada, Ottawa
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi: Just came across this quote: "A leader is one who knows the way, goes the way and shows the way". regards Radhiika
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Vikram,
In a line, it simply reads:
Leadership is by action and not by position. Managers manage and are led into delivering. However, leadership is truly situational and assignment-based. Leadership, in its true sense, can never be looked at merely from the standpoint of seniority.
Take the case of our own country, where when the time came for India to declare and announce its first President/Prime Minister, the great Mahatma Gandhi abandoned all such thoughts and pointed out Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru as the first Prime Minister of Free India. Gandhi knew that his duty was done in leading India to her freedom; however, Free and Independent India needed another person as the Prime Minister. He could hardly be the person for that role, regardless of the respect, love, reverence, appreciation, and regard his fellow countrymen had for him.
Consider Winston Churchill, Britain's greatest war Prime Minister. Post-war, he was hardly the man to drive or lead the British nation. During wartime, he was indeed the best man - Prime Minister the British could have ever had to lead them through the war.
In recent times, nearer home, Mr. Narayana Murthy of Infosys abandoned his position as the leader of his organization and allowed Mr. Nandan Nilekani to lead the organization.
Confident that this will help, let's bow in shame that we are still clinging onto the old leadership style, pattern, type when people all over the world are looking up to servant leaders like Mother Teresa, Narayana Murthy, Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, etc.
Thanks and regards,
www.peoplesskills.com
H/P: 9845622226
Email: p_agali@yahoo.co.in
From India, Tiruchchirappalli
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In a line, it simply reads:
Leadership is by action and not by position. Managers manage and are led into delivering. However, leadership is truly situational and assignment-based. Leadership, in its true sense, can never be looked at merely from the standpoint of seniority.
Take the case of our own country, where when the time came for India to declare and announce its first President/Prime Minister, the great Mahatma Gandhi abandoned all such thoughts and pointed out Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru as the first Prime Minister of Free India. Gandhi knew that his duty was done in leading India to her freedom; however, Free and Independent India needed another person as the Prime Minister. He could hardly be the person for that role, regardless of the respect, love, reverence, appreciation, and regard his fellow countrymen had for him.
Consider Winston Churchill, Britain's greatest war Prime Minister. Post-war, he was hardly the man to drive or lead the British nation. During wartime, he was indeed the best man - Prime Minister the British could have ever had to lead them through the war.
In recent times, nearer home, Mr. Narayana Murthy of Infosys abandoned his position as the leader of his organization and allowed Mr. Nandan Nilekani to lead the organization.
Confident that this will help, let's bow in shame that we are still clinging onto the old leadership style, pattern, type when people all over the world are looking up to servant leaders like Mother Teresa, Narayana Murthy, Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, etc.
Thanks and regards,
www.peoplesskills.com
H/P: 9845622226
Email: p_agali@yahoo.co.in
From India, Tiruchchirappalli
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi, There is no much difference between a leader & manager. If you want to be a successful manager, you should possess the leadership skills. Thanks, Bhagya.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Radhika,
I agree with you that all managers do not become CEOs. However, not all of them get a chance to become a CEO. Additionally, it's not only the student but also the teacher whose performance reflects when a student fails in the exam.
The same principle applies to the development of leadership qualities in any person. It's not only the person but also the conditions that affect their ability to become a leader. These conditions could be a coach or the situation. You cannot clap with only one hand; cooperation and understanding between both parties are crucial.
Anyway, these are my views, and you may or may not agree with them.
Thanks,
VISHAL GUPTA
From United States
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I agree with you that all managers do not become CEOs. However, not all of them get a chance to become a CEO. Additionally, it's not only the student but also the teacher whose performance reflects when a student fails in the exam.
The same principle applies to the development of leadership qualities in any person. It's not only the person but also the conditions that affect their ability to become a leader. These conditions could be a coach or the situation. You cannot clap with only one hand; cooperation and understanding between both parties are crucial.
Anyway, these are my views, and you may or may not agree with them.
Thanks,
VISHAL GUPTA
From United States
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think every manager has to be a leader, and every leader has to be a manager to be effective. Therefore, talking about the difference between them is just armchair intellectualizing and a waste of time.
Hanu
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hanu
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Friends, A leader will always want to lead you. Amanager , will try to make you a leader. Regards, Jitesh M Sethii
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
To be remembered before arguing on leader and manager:
There is no such notion of who is better or best. Both are different entities characteristically. They are not comparative.
"Leadership is action, not position." The perspective of a leader vis-a-vis a manager is larger, long-term, and visionary.
Hence, visionary managers become good leaders.
Managers fall into a context, a situation, a position, a role, responsibility, an incident, an accident, etc. Leaders have broader perspectives than managers.
"If you can manage managers, you are a good leader." Parents are leaders in a family, and children are their managers. Eventually, children become parents, and if they become successful parents, they become good leaders for their children and so on. Similarly, Dhirubhai had a vision for society. He was a leader for all the employees, investors, stakeholders, and his family. Likewise, Ratan Tata, Khomeini, Hitler, Napoleon, Farrakhan, etc.
Leaders drive and lead masses, whereas managers drive, manage, and lead situations and agendas, which are constrained by time and other resources. Managers manage with contingencies and contribute to the larger goals of their leaders.
JAI HO!
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There is no such notion of who is better or best. Both are different entities characteristically. They are not comparative.
"Leadership is action, not position." The perspective of a leader vis-a-vis a manager is larger, long-term, and visionary.
Hence, visionary managers become good leaders.
Managers fall into a context, a situation, a position, a role, responsibility, an incident, an accident, etc. Leaders have broader perspectives than managers.
"If you can manage managers, you are a good leader." Parents are leaders in a family, and children are their managers. Eventually, children become parents, and if they become successful parents, they become good leaders for their children and so on. Similarly, Dhirubhai had a vision for society. He was a leader for all the employees, investors, stakeholders, and his family. Likewise, Ratan Tata, Khomeini, Hitler, Napoleon, Farrakhan, etc.
Leaders drive and lead masses, whereas managers drive, manage, and lead situations and agendas, which are constrained by time and other resources. Managers manage with contingencies and contribute to the larger goals of their leaders.
JAI HO!
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Adnan,
I too very often face this question from my students and seniors.
In my opinion, the term "leader" is much associated with the task or mission to be accomplished. An effective leader should be able to communicate, guide, decide, and complete the objective. His direct involvement is essential at every node of the activity.
His decisions, and the good skill of lateral thinking, directly affect the task - the task only, in particular. His activities are flexible, leaving room for improvement or changes in decisions, etc.
A manager is a person much associated with the organization rather than a particular task. They are associated with multiple tasks and coordinate all these tasks towards the higher goals of an organization. It is obvious that a manager should first be a good leader. They spearhead the leaders with their leadership skills. Like any other good leader, a manager should possess good communication and decision-making skills, and apart from that, they should be a good listener.
A manager's decisions affect not only the particular task but also the whole organization. They cannot be as flexible as a leader, as a decision on one task should not hamper the objective of another task. They cannot prepare rules and regulations for a particular task only.
I hope my views might have cleared your doubts.
Regards,
karunadasp
From Oman, Muscat
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I too very often face this question from my students and seniors.
In my opinion, the term "leader" is much associated with the task or mission to be accomplished. An effective leader should be able to communicate, guide, decide, and complete the objective. His direct involvement is essential at every node of the activity.
His decisions, and the good skill of lateral thinking, directly affect the task - the task only, in particular. His activities are flexible, leaving room for improvement or changes in decisions, etc.
A manager is a person much associated with the organization rather than a particular task. They are associated with multiple tasks and coordinate all these tasks towards the higher goals of an organization. It is obvious that a manager should first be a good leader. They spearhead the leaders with their leadership skills. Like any other good leader, a manager should possess good communication and decision-making skills, and apart from that, they should be a good listener.
A manager's decisions affect not only the particular task but also the whole organization. They cannot be as flexible as a leader, as a decision on one task should not hamper the objective of another task. They cannot prepare rules and regulations for a particular task only.
I hope my views might have cleared your doubts.
Regards,
karunadasp
From Oman, Muscat
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
in a just a single sentence - a manager is a person who specializes in the org.'s nut and bolt stuff ... day to day running .... a leader would be a visionary with a tinge inspiring capacity.
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
I am Anantha, working as an HR executive in an MNC. I would like to add some more to the above topic apart from what Adnan has described.
"LEADERS ARE BORN, NOT MADE"
"MANAGERS ARE MADE, NOT BORN"
A manager may be task-oriented or people-oriented, but a leader will be both task and people-oriented. A leader thinks and implements from both the brain and the heart.
Regards,
Anantha
"Knowledge is power, Knowledge sharing is super power"
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am Anantha, working as an HR executive in an MNC. I would like to add some more to the above topic apart from what Adnan has described.
"LEADERS ARE BORN, NOT MADE"
"MANAGERS ARE MADE, NOT BORN"
A manager may be task-oriented or people-oriented, but a leader will be both task and people-oriented. A leader thinks and implements from both the brain and the heart.
Regards,
Anantha
"Knowledge is power, Knowledge sharing is super power"
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I don't really think a manager is different from a leader. A good manager has to be a good leader, and vice versa. Think about it... both may have some differences theoretically, but they are eventually the same practically. Of course, I can't imagine one without the skills of the other.
PS - I mean this from an HR perspective.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
PS - I mean this from an HR perspective.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Leader is someone who inspires and motivate others...manager is someone who is responsible for managing the available resourses..
From Kuwait, Kuwait
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From Kuwait, Kuwait
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Vikram,
It is a common belief that management and leadership are the same role with different functions.
Many times the manager plays the part of the leader, even though these two roles are truly separate in function and in a way they add to the success of any organization.
While a manager is to ensure that the given set of functions, people, and machinery are working in tandem with the vision of the organization, a leader makes sure that the path to achieve these corporate objectives and goals is going in the right direction.
As a leader, he or she should not be spending time only managing people but should be making sure that they are provided with the correct perspective to be more effective in their respective roles.
A leader normally has a clear vision and is willing to take the front row, while a manager has a clear mission to ensure the leader's vision is completely supported to spearhead the process.
A leader never manages people but inspires and leads them.
Regards,
Alexy Kuriakose
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It is a common belief that management and leadership are the same role with different functions.
Many times the manager plays the part of the leader, even though these two roles are truly separate in function and in a way they add to the success of any organization.
While a manager is to ensure that the given set of functions, people, and machinery are working in tandem with the vision of the organization, a leader makes sure that the path to achieve these corporate objectives and goals is going in the right direction.
As a leader, he or she should not be spending time only managing people but should be making sure that they are provided with the correct perspective to be more effective in their respective roles.
A leader normally has a clear vision and is willing to take the front row, while a manager has a clear mission to ensure the leader's vision is completely supported to spearhead the process.
A leader never manages people but inspires and leads them.
Regards,
Alexy Kuriakose
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Vikam,
Your question is good. Many people think managers and leaders are the same, but a lot of differences exist between them. I will share some of the differences I know.
Leaders do the right things, while managers do things right. All leaders are managers, but not all managers are leaders.
Thank you,
Maruthi Prasad Reddy
MBA (Fresher)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Your question is good. Many people think managers and leaders are the same, but a lot of differences exist between them. I will share some of the differences I know.
Leaders do the right things, while managers do things right. All leaders are managers, but not all managers are leaders.
Thank you,
Maruthi Prasad Reddy
MBA (Fresher)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
MANAGER Vs LEADER.ppt
Team leader-U-manage r.jpg
H.R.Manager - Job Chart.doc