Leadership Vs Management Defined

Leadership and Management

Volumes and volumes have been written on the principles of management and leadership. But one needs to look no further than a basic dictionary to understand the most important principle -- the differences between the two. Webster’s Tenth New Collegiate Dictionary defines to manage as “to direct or carry on business or affairs” or “to exercise executive, administrative, and supervisory direction of.” The definition of management expands this some: “the conducting or supervising of something” and “executive skill.” Although often substituted for each other, management is quite different than leadership. Webster’s defines leading as “to guide on a way especially by going in advance” and “to direct on a course or in a direction.” To lead also means to set an example or to set a precedent. A leader is further defined as “a person who has commanding authority or influence.” One can manage either people or things, but one leads only people. Yet, managing people is very different from leading people.

A manager conducts, directs, and supervises. A leader commands, authorizes, and influences. These are subtle differences but important ones. Management demands attention to detail, diligence, time management, and organizational skill. Leadership benefits from these same attributes but places a higher premium on courage, fortitude, natural ability, and inspiration. Good leaders may not be good managers and good managers are not always good leaders. A leader’s authority precedes his decisions; a manager’s credibility is built from his decisions. A manager executes a given program; a leader devises the program. History provides the best examples.

General Dwight D. Eisenhower is considered a great manager. Ike conducted the greatest logistics operation ever. He assessed a strategic problem, collected inputs from those above and below and those of our allies, created a staff and