Hack:
Leadership vs management

September 13, 2010 at 11:37pm

Summary

The conventional wisdom that states that good managers are good leaders actually places pressure on all managers to be good leaders. I believe this puts pressure on managers to be leaders, and increases the likelihood that managers force their leadership onto the team. By breaking the conventional and making managers responsible for team facilitation we can stop this. The team can then determine which members are the most appropriate leader or leaders for any given challenge. This enables the team to determine whoever is the most appropriate leader, and also ensures that the entire teams repertoire of leadership skills are used, giving the team more flexibility and abilities to draw on than one person could ever possess .

Problem

There is little distinction between the skill sets of leaders and managers. Most people accept that not all mangers are good leader, and that to be a good manager you must be a good leader. I believe this second assertion puts unnecessary pressure on managers to be seen as good leaders, increasing the likelihood that they fail to delegate authority/responsibility, even actively fighting against it.

It also means that managerial skills, which I think of more as facilitation skills that are very necessary to ensure high performance within any team, are given a back seat in training and education to leadership skills.

Solution

By viewing leadership and management as two very distinct skill set not only can we more effectively train managers to be facilitators who form the binding to hold a team together and get the highest possible performance from the team, whether they are the leader of the team or not.

For me management is the process of team facilitation/organizational performance. Making sure that people have the ability/forums to communicate effectively; understand the environment and constraints within which they work (obviously the fewer of these the better - but that is another topic); ensure the flow of vital information between hierarchy levels (even the flattest organizations have at least 2 levels); design and administer incentive programs and basically act as the glue that binds a team.

A leader (or at least a good one) is the person who will provide focus and inspiration to a team, ensuring the team has a purpose and enabling them to best drive towards that purpose. This does not have to be in an autocratic manner, it can be through the ideas, knowledge and risk taking of team members that this purpose is discovered or refined, but most would agree that a leaders job is to make sure the purpose is present and that the team has a method of achieving that purpose.

Whilst the two are not mutually exclusive, clearly separating the functions of manager and leader dispels the notion that managers must be leaders and vice versa. This then opens the door for managers to play a team facilitation role, and the team can decide who it thinks it should be following. If you follow this to its natural conclusion, the leaders of any given team will change as the teams faces different challenges and has different leadership needs, giving the team leadership that is far more dynamic and rounded than any individual can provide.

Practical Impact

It takes the pressure of managers to be leaders, and therefore increases the likelihood that they will allow, or even encourage, the emergence of more appropriate leaders from within the team, such as where the manager has insufficient technical expertise.

Reduces formality & structure within teams. Managers will become members of the team with a specific or unique skill set (facilitating), rather than the person with formal authority who chooses to defer and delegate.

Increases the leadership flexibility and capability of team as a whole. If the decision on who to follow in a particular situation is decided by the team, then it increases the likelihood that the leasers capabilities will match the challenges at hand (otherwise the team can replace a leader who is not working out). The ability to change leadership to someone with a more appropriate style or skills to the challenges faced allows for more flexibility than one person can ever offer.

First Steps

First step is for managers to yield authority and take a more of a facilitation style role within their teams. If it is done effectively, the view of managers being separate from leaders will be adopted by those within the team, and they will communicate to others or take this approach with them as they leave the team, creating a network effect.

You need to register in order to submit a comment.

Sort By: Latest Oldest Likes Replies

October 3, 2010 at 12:27am

Dhiraj Gupta

Hello Daniel,

May I point out that what you are proposing is the very antithesis of Systems Thinking, now a respected branch of Management philosophy and practice. One of its tenets says that you cannot divide a big System into smaller Systems and operate them independently. Important relationships between the Systems will be violated. Prima-facie, here you are assuming that one leader will not be politically related to another. Very unlikely. Politicians are forever trading points to emerge a compromise that favors their interests. I fear a similar game will be played here by the multiple leaders. The interests of the team, and multiple leaders were conceived to promote them, will be compromised.

Perhaps you have good reason to believe people in a group will remain sincere and committed over time. My experience is that the commitment cannot be taken for granted.

Regards,

Dhiraj