difference between leadership and management research paper

Browse Econ Literature

• Working papers
• Software components
• Book chapters
• JEL classification

More features

• Subscribe to new research

RePEc Biblio

Author registration.

• Economics Virtual Seminar Calendar NEW!

Management Versus Leadership: A Key Theoretical Distinction

• Author & abstract
• Related works & more

Corrections

(CONSTANTIN BRANCUSI UNIVERSITY OF TIRGU-JIU)

Suggested Citation

Download full text from publisher.

Follow serials, authors, keywords & more

Public profiles for Economics researchers

Various research rankings in Economics

RePEc Genealogy

Who was a student of whom, using RePEc

Curated articles & papers on economics topics

Upload your paper to be listed on RePEc and IDEAS

New papers by email

Subscribe to new additions to RePEc

EconAcademics

Blog aggregator for economics research

Cases of plagiarism in Economics

About RePEc

Initiative for open bibliographies in Economics

News about RePEc

Questions about IDEAS and RePEc

RePEc volunteers

Participating archives

Publishers indexing in RePEc

Privacy statement

Found an error or omission?

Opportunities to help RePEc

Get papers listed

Have your research listed on RePEc

Open a RePEc archive

Have your institution's/publisher's output listed on RePEc

Get RePEc data

Use data assembled by RePEc

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Am J Pharm Educ
• v.81(6); 2017 Aug

Leadership and Management Are One and the Same

Neelam azad.

a Hampton University School of Pharmacy, Hampton, Virginia

H. Glenn Anderson, Jr

b Marshall University School of Pharmacy, Huntington, West Virginia

Amie Brooks

c St. Louis College of Pharmacy, St. Louis, Missouri

Oscar Garza

d University of Minnesota College of Pharmacy, Minneapolis, Minnesota

Christine O’Neil

e Duquesne University School of Pharmacy, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Misty M. Stutz

f Sullivan University College of Pharmacy, Louisville, Kentucky

Jenelle L. Sobotka

g University of Cincinnati James L. Winkle College of Pharmacy, Cincinnati, Ohio

Defining the attributes of change catalysts within high functioning organizations, including the academic enterprise, is desirable. An understanding of these attributes within our academy may foster faculty interest and engagement in seeking administrative roles and serve to bolster succession planning within our schools. On one hand, there have been numerous publications teasing out the purported differences between leadership and management. On the other hand, does segregating these important characteristics based upon arbitrary distinctions do more harm than good? This commentary represents the work of a group of academic leaders participating in the 2015-2016 AACP Academic Leadership Fellowship Program. This work was presented as a debate at the 2016 AACP Interim Meeting in Tampa, Florida, in February 2016.

INTRODUCTION

In 1977, Abraham Zaleznik 1 authored an opinion piece that became the first publication to describe leadership and management as two separate functions. Since then, there has been much effort dedicated to studying the differences between managing and leading, with more than 4000 documented definitions of leadership existing alone. Based upon the existing literature, leadership skills are generally glorified as being “visionary” and “doing the right thing,” while managerial skills are dismissed as being “task-oriented” and “doing things right.” However, no scientific evidence exists to support the described differences between leadership and management; what remains is an abstraction of two concepts with no consensus and little application. The authors of this paper are of the opinion that the terms leadership and management are arbitrarily and yet similarly defined. One of the classic leadership definitions often recited, “Leadership is the quality that sets great managers apart from good ones,” further validates this idea as it is simply an illustration of the lexical concept of polysemy. 2 That is, the practice of using words in one lexical context, in a different form, to describe a related concept, such that the word “leadership,” derived from the verb “leading,” acquires the meanings of those engaged in the activity “managing,” or as in the case above, as the result of performing the activity as a “manager” satisfactorily. Thus, leading and managing are not merely complementary, they are essentially the same concept used to describe different levels of a taxonomy related to performance or organizational effectiveness.

Together, the two terms “leading” and “managing” form the framework for skills and abilities that are necessary for an individual to drive team success. In fact, the concepts of leadership and management are transposable, especially in describing performance effectiveness within organizations. As shown in Table 1 , the functions of leadership and management flow in a continuum that are not separable. Many of these functions are used in describing the roles of both “leaders” and “managers,” causing the definitions and functions to blur as a continuum of one role. Over time, Zaleznik’s separation of these functions has been perpetuated as a false dichotomy through the continued ambiguous use of these words. For example, according to a 2012 Forbes article, 7 “leading” is described as who you are as a person, while “managing” is described as more of a craft, primarily skill-based, that may be learned, suggesting the former as an identity to be cultivated within the individual and the latter as a set of behaviors demonstrating a form of competency. Portraying leadership development as an internal process of self-reflection, in contrast to becoming a better manager through honing of a craft, provides a misleading understanding of purportedly different concepts and grossly oversimplifies human and organizational development.

Leadership and Management Continuum 1 , 3-6

Upon examining the academic environment, one will notice that successful administrators share the traditional qualities of leaders and managers. Therefore, in both the academic setting, and especially within high-performing organizations, leading and managing are not just inseparable, they are one and the same. Even if we entertain the possibilities that these are two processes for creating the same goal; a leader (eg, a school dean) who has the vision and plans for the school is ineffective if she cannot use the managerial skills to procure and efficiently allocate the resources to accomplish the vision. Conversely, a manager (eg, department chair) who can efficiently allocate resources is ineffective if she has no vision or sense of direction for how those resources should be utilized.

The two processes, even if differentiated theoretically, are not effective without each other working in tandem, and are thus inseparable. Continuing to differentiate rather ambiguously similar concepts, takes us away from being able to explain phenomena they were meant to address in the first place: how to leverage human capital as intangible assets toward accomplishing the organization’s mission. With the constantly evolving nature of today’s organizations, there is a need for adaptable individuals. Academic institutions, like many organizations, must rapidly adapt in order to survive. Within such structures, leadership and management are a continuum of a single construct. We have encapsulated this concept within a Venn diagram ( Figure 1 ), where the circle of leading is who you are, and the circle of managing is how you make use of resources. However, the two circles overlap in several key areas, including optimism, decisiveness, integrity, and open communications. Highly effective organizations require a culture of resilience with individuals demonstrating these core attributes.

Leadership and Management Continuum.

As an academy, we need individuals who can lead and manage simultaneously in their day-to-day activities. Every individual must act in a manner appropriate to the context of the situation and should be ready and open to lead and manage as necessary to be effective. To be successful, individuals must display a combination of strategic vision and tactical skills, which together serve as a powerful catalyst for performance improvements throughout an organization. We believe that leading and managing are one and the same and that developing the skills of both a leader and a manager are really the same way of developing individuals who can adapt to change and become a source of strategic advantage.

This topic was debated live at the 2016 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy Interim Meeting in Tampa, Florida, in a session titled, “Academic Leadership Fellows Program (ALFP) Debate #3: Leading and Managing are One and the Same.” This article represents the pro position affirming the statement.

The authors include a six-member team of fellows and their leadership facilitator completing the ALFP in 2015-2016 as part of the 12th cohort. The team began collaborating in September 2015 by performing a literature search using PubMed, EBSCO, Scopus, Emerald, JSTOR, Business Source Premier, Google Scholar, and ERIC databases. All searches were performed using several key search terms individually and combined. These search terms included: lead, leading, leadership, leader, manage, managing, management, and manager. Searches using these terms also were conducted in the Harvard Business Review archives and general, web-based search engines such as Google. Articles, book chapters, and passages were reviewed and used to identify additional relevant references.

Authors individually constructed primary claims in favor of the assigned position and discussed and debated to determine the three most compelling claims supporting the position. Analytical, empirical, and emotional warrants along with overall impact were developed for each claim. Finally, likely counterpoints were determined, based on the literature review, to develop evidence-based refutations for the opposing debate positions.

Point: The Definitions of Leading and Managing are Arbitrary and Similarly Defined

Leadership and management are both theorized to predict decision-maker behavior. 8 The theory that leadership and management are different is offered as a truth where the two are suggested as unique predictors of decision-making behavior.

Acknowledging leadership and management as unique requires our acceptance of the two, distinct definitions as truth. Defining “truth” in any situation is difficult. 9 This difficulty is influenced by our individually held perspective on what is true.

For example, suppose it is stated that a rose is red and smells good. Now consider a population of color-blind individuals or individuals who are anosmic. Would these individuals perceive a rose as red when the color red is unperceptive? Would they perceive the rose as aromatic when the sense of smell is absent?

Truth itself is dependent upon identification of propositions (ie, a non-linguistic representation of truth value that lead to beliefs – or an accepted world view). The propositions we perceive, or accept, as true form the basis for belief. This relationship between proposition, perception or acceptance, and belief can result in situations where what is accepted as truth may not represent reality.

The contention that leadership and management are different is an example of proposition and belief not representing reality. A clear, universal delineation of the skills believed to designate leadership and management as unique concepts or activities is lacking. 1,4,10 Without an existing standard, the expected set of abilities for individuals accepting positions termed leadership or management are irrelevant. Anyone can define the terms to meet the “truth” they wish to defend.

The truth of the relationship between leadership and management is difficult to ascertain because of the realities of practical application. The higher education environment is not conducive to hiring individuals who only manage or lead, as historically defined. Those assuming administrative positions within our academy must encompass abilities, skills, and attitudes attributed to both leading and managing. For example, all decanal deans have individuals who are direct reports. These deans have authority and responsibility for the activities and productivity of those individuals. Hiring individuals specifically to manage or lead would be cost prohibitive and impractical. Recruiting individuals with only management responsibilities is inefficient and would negatively impact an institution’s ability to grow and improve. 11 Managing is essential, and developing management-related skills is the first step toward developing leadership-related skills. 12

The idea that there exist employees who are excited by the concept of managing is unrealistic. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs 13 would suggest that if this were true, retention would be difficult to maintain, as people would have no ability to grow. Leadership and management being different may or may not be true, but the delineation of the two concepts within the work environment is meaningless. The idea that leaders and managers are two extremes of one continuum is more realistic and practically applicable.

Point: The Concepts of Leadership and Management are Transposable in High-Performing Organizations

The debate of whether leading and managing are different is certainly interesting and has sustained the academic and corporate careers of many. However, this is an exercise in futility. In an examination of high-performing organizations, it becomes clear that the concepts of leading and managing are interchangeable processes of change catalysts. A culture of organizational resilience is largely built upon change catalysts that increase group cohesion and dedication to the mission. 14,15

Highly effective organizations require a culture of resilience with individuals demonstrating critical attributes of optimism, decisiveness, integrity, and open communications, 15 among others. Yet these attributes have been described as discrete characteristics (leading or managing) of individuals at varying levels of the organization. It is time to abandon the idea that leading and managing are distinct responsibilities. This belief fosters self-delusion and irresponsibility in those who see themselves as leaders, and it can lead to inaction and dangerous forms of dependency in those who do not see themselves as leaders, but merely managers.

As many top consulting organizations and performance management scholars have concluded over the years, individuals at all levels of highly effective organizations must be able to communicate, motivate, inspire, and encourage other employees toward a higher level of productivity. These capabilities are foundational for anyone who wants to get results with and for other people. Such an understanding facilitates opportunities for organizational effectiveness that are more outcome-based when leading and managing processes are one and the same. Leading and managing being different makes for a great ontological discussion, but if we are striving for highly effective organizations, this distinction is meaningless. The reality is that leading and managing are one and the same within the spectrum of organizational effectiveness.

Point: In Academic Settings and any High-Performing Organization, Leading and Managing are Inseparable

In academia, faculty and administrators engage in knowledge management. As such, there is a need for individuals who can adapt to the evolution of our ever-changing academic organizations. Individuals who are champions in academic organizations must be adaptable and have visionary qualities as well as be able to organize and implement those visions. This “leading-by-example” style has been described by Harris 16 as “thought leadership.” The thought leader shows colleagues how a task can be done rather than just giving orders. The ambidextrous nature of such thought leaders has been supported by results of a Delphi study. 3 According to this study, when qualities of leaders and managers are assigned, these two traditionally separate roles share four critical features: learning from others, integrity, openness to new ideas, along with adaptability and flexibility. These are characteristics often associated with leaders, yet these are critical common features of managers. Thus, leaders and managers are one and the same.

As Alan Murray 17 has noted in The Wall Street Journal Guide to Management , “from Zaleznik, to Kotter to Bennis, much ink has been utilized to delineate the differences between leadership and management… Perhaps there was a time when the calling of the manager and that of a leader could be separated. A foreman in an industrial-era factory probably didn’t have to give much thought to what he was producing or to the people who were producing it.” The focus was on efficiency and getting the job done. However in the new millennium, value comes from knowledge of people, and when workers are not merely cogs in an industrial machine, management and leadership can no longer be separated. The late Peter Drucker was the first to recognize this truth and many others. He was the first to identify the emergence of the “knowledge worker” and the impact on organizational structure. According to Drucker, 18 with the rise of the knowledge worker, “one does not manage people. The task is to lead people and the goal is to make productive the specific strengths and knowledge of every individual.” Kent 4 also supports that the functions of leadership and management are inseparable. The functions of leaders and managers can be studied separately, but “in reality, they reside within and are practiced by single individuals.” Therefore, it is not only reasonable, but logical rather, to conclude that the roles of the leader and manager are one and the same.

We, in academia, undoubtedly engage in knowledge management. Knowledge management is concerned with three elements: creating repositories of knowledge that can be used within organizations; developing technologies and social networks that facilitate access to this knowledge; and creating culture and environments in which knowledge sharing is valued and expected. Power-added managers are essential in knowledge management. 19 Power-added managers are the strategic leaders of any organization and are described as managers with exceptional competence and expertise in their dealings with people and knowledge and, as such, are strategic leaders for any organization. Power-added managers approach their role as an equal within the team they manage and within other teams within the organization. Yet, power-added managers are able to accept leadership, when it is appropriate, and adopt different roles as the situation warrants. They know how to deploy their talents in whatever way necessary to complete tasks that add to the power and success of the organization and, therefore, illustrate that leaders and managers are one and the same.

Looking back at the academy, we find that these types of individuals are being sought after to lead and manage our organizations. Consider the following excerpt from a recent posting for an academic dean’s job description: “leads faculty and staff in planning, securing resources, implementing and evaluating activities related to academic operations, research, service and patient care programs; represents the school both internally to the university and externally to the various stakeholders; serves as part of the institution’s administrative team through active participation in various institutional planning, implementing and evaluating activities.” Are these the tasks of a manager or a leader or, rather, a power-added manager, an ambidextrous individual? While traditionally viewed as leaders, deans are both manager and leader – thus leaders and managers in academia are one and the same.

Through the exercise of a formal debate, our ALFP group was able to fully research the idea that managing and leading could indeed be the same. At first, it appeared that our opponents would have the advantage since the current thought is that these two principles are different. For those students of business education grounded in works from the ’70s, most would be of the mindset that leading and managing are separate. But what has happened since that first introduction of separate units, is that the lines are not delineated as clearly as first defined. So upon full review, we determined that the two thoughts were not as far apart as once thought. As such, we created the following three arguments: the definitions of leading and managing are arbitrary and similarly defined; the concepts of leadership and management are transposable in high- performing organizations; in academic settings and any high-performing organization, leading and managing are inseparable.

Terms, as argued, are defined to meet the truth they wish to defend. Upon seeing multiple definitions and variations of the skills of leadership and management, we determined that these definitions were created to fit the mindset of the individual creating that definition. What might appear to define a leader was often seen in another definition of a manager. And many of the skills of managing showed up in the skillset of a leader. At times, it was hard to discern which role the author intended the term to define. As such, we concluded that there is no clear definition of leader or manager.

During our research of this topic, what also became apparent was the role held by individuals in high-performing organizations. We saw that the qualities first categorized in one area, began bleeding into the other, and the roles of the leader and manager are entwined. In fact, based on our research, there cannot be effective leadership within an organization without the combination of the two, and each person titled with either leader or manager also must have the skillset of the other.

This thought of high performance and success in organizations is not autonomous. As we examine our own academy, we saw that these same principles hold true within the leadership of our academic institutions. Power-added managers are essential in knowledge management and confirm our belief that the roles of leader and manager are intertwined in our academic leaders.

It is for these arguments that we could defend our position and now believe that leadership and management are one and the same.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

A Theoretical Difference between Leadership and Management

2021, Journal of Social Sciences and Education

The concept of "leadership" and "management" is one area that has gained a lot attention in the management literature. This study aims at clearly examining the differences between leadership and management. Kotterman (2006) stated that, it is difficult to assert the differences that exist between two concepts because they are used interchangeably and sometimes create confusion. After existing literatures have been reviewed, the results found were that leadership and management are two distinct concepts even though they have similarities in their line of duties which involve working with people to achieve organizational goals. Management processes involve planning, budgeting, organizing workers to achieve a goal. Leadership on the other hand is concerned with setting direction, inspiring people, developing strategies to achieve a goal. There is the need for both strong leadership and management to work together to achieve the optimum performance of an organization.

Related Papers

International Journal of Management and Commerce Innovations

Bharath Kumar Reddy Chinta

Leadership is a responsibility with accomplishment toward the task and involvement with the teams preparing and guiding the team members to take on the same line of insight, vision, and achievement. The paper aims to explain how leadership is different from management, and how leadership is more focused on the vision compared to the manager's scope in the organization processes. Leadership uses the opportunities by capitalizing on the work. Mangers work on business implementation and decision-making. Leadership involves organizing and mobilizing the teams to achieve the desired task. Though the leaders and managers work very closely the differences vary on taking the responsibilities to lead the team forward for accomplishment. Managers can be good leaders when properly trained and provided the opportunity to achieve the ability to communicate, motivate and inspire the team members.

Procedia Engineering

Murendeni Liphadzi

alexius anggoro

The paper is intended to present an analysis of new theories regarding the leadership and the management and to promote a new concept, that of " Leadership in the mirror ". An organization that intends to " grow up new leaders " is good to hire managers according to the type of leadership they intend to implement. There is a great difference between manager and leader. The first one faces complexity and the second one faces changes, grouping characteristic activities of management and leadership. Every action system implies taking the decision about what has to be done, creating relations between people; relations that may lead to the fulfilment of a common plan, and then the essay to assure those people are doing their job. Every person realizes these three actions in different ways.

Aneta Stojanovska-Stefanova

Management and leadership are one of the most important factors for the efficiency and effectiveness of the overall business activities in the companies. Managers are planning, organizing, coordinating, directing, controlling. Leaders motivate people and help them in communication and cooperation with each other while working in teams, they innovate, create strategies and seek solutions in order to achieve certain goals. Effective management and leadership together with top quality skilled managers and leaders, will have positive impact for the success of the development companies in order to move forward in this modern world. Only with a proper understanding of management and leadership, the goals of the individual, the company and the social community as a whole will be achieved, because in that way an optimal modality can be found that will provide a competitive advantage to companies. Management and leadership seem to be very similar, but there are differences. The aim of this a...

Annals Economy Series

Virgil Popovici

Norma Ghamrawi

BULLETIN OF "CAROL I" NATIONAL DEFENCE UNIVERSITY

Elitsa PETROVA

This article aims to clarify the concepts of management and leadership, pointing out significant similarities and differences between the concepts themselves, both as theoretical terms and as actions, and on this basis to suggest assuming the concept of management through leadership as an adequate, efficient and effective option for managing an organization. The research methodology includes systematization of scientific statements about management and leadership; study and presentation of etymology, origins and meaning of basic concepts; consideration of the relatively new and modern integrated psychological theory of leadership. Demonstrating the logic of acceptance, building and introducing authentic and shared management through leadership in every organization and system, including the military one, is a result that the authors aim at. The etymological explanation of the basic concepts and terms, revealing their meaning and origin using emphatically authoritative literary res...

Uma Patwardhan

Joshua Fulmer

Transylvanian review of administrative sciences

Cornelia Macarie

The paper endeavors to offer an overview of the major theories on leadership and the way in which it influences the management of contemporary organizations. Numerous scholars highlight that there are numerous overlaps between the concepts of management and leadership. This is the reason why the first section of the paper focuses on providing an extensive overview of the literature regarding the meaning of the two aforementioned concepts. The second section addresses more in depth the concept of leadership and managerial leadership and focuses on the ideal profile of the leader. The last section of the paper critically discusses various types of leadership and more specifically modern approaches to the concept and practices of leadership.

RELATED PAPERS

Arik Alfatih

Jundishapur Journal of Microbiology

Mehdi Zarei

Jurnal Borneo Administrator

rivaldy hutauruk

International journal of …

Susanne Pedersen

Jurnal Sylva Lestari

Melya Riniarti

Frank Lindseth

Annals of Applied Sport Science

jean marie falola

Przegląd Prawa i Administracji

Michał Stępień

Danielle Miranda de Oliveira Arruda

Strategic Journal of Business & Change Management

josephine miyonga

Nika Slokar

Physical Review B

John Dobson

Psychological Medicine

Shahal Rozenblatt

International Journal of Social Science Research

TEMIDAYO O OLOWOYEYE

Miguel Taroncher

RELACult - Revista Latino-Americana de Estudos em Cultura e Sociedade

Giuliano Souza Andreoli

Clément Venco

2007 International Conference on Numerical Simulation of Semiconductor Optoelectronic Devices - NUSOD'07

International Zoo Yearbook

Tom de Jongh

Davide Arini

Radiologia Medica

Guglielmo Manenti

Adult Education and Empathy in Higher Education Institutions

Hece 265 Hikayenin Türkçe Sesi Ömer Seyfettin

Süheyla Yüksel

22nd International Symposium on High Voltage Engineering (ISH 2021)

Ahmet MEREV

Amit kumar keshari

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Business Essentials
• Leadership & Management
• Credential of Leadership, Impact, and Management in Business (CLIMB)
• Entrepreneurship & Innovation
• Digital Transformation
• Finance & Accounting
• Business in Society
• For Organizations
• Support Portal
• Media Coverage
• Founding Donors
• Leadership Team

• Harvard Business School →
• HBS Online →
• Business Insights →

Business Insights

Harvard Business School Online's Business Insights Blog provides the career insights you need to achieve your goals and gain confidence in your business skills.

• Career Development
• Communication
• Decision-Making
• Earning Your MBA
• Negotiation
• News & Events
• Productivity
• Staff Spotlight
• Student Profiles
• Work-Life Balance
• AI Essentials for Business
• Alternative Investments
• Business Analytics
• Business Strategy
• Business and Climate Change
• Design Thinking and Innovation
• Digital Marketing Strategy
• Disruptive Strategy
• Economics for Managers
• Entrepreneurship Essentials
• Financial Accounting
• Global Business
• Launching Tech Ventures
• Leadership Principles
• Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability
• Leading with Finance
• Management Essentials
• Negotiation Mastery
• Organizational Leadership
• Power and Influence for Positive Impact
• Strategy Execution
• Sustainable Business Strategy
• Sustainable Investing
• Winning with Digital Platforms

Leadership vs. Management: What’s the Difference?

• 31 Oct 2019

The terms “leadership” and “management” are often used interchangeably. While there is some overlap between the work that leaders and managers do, there are also significant differences.

In a keynote discussion at Harvard Business School Online’s annual conference, Connext , HBS Professors Nancy Koehn and Joe Fuller explored the interplay between leadership and management and shared how they define the two disciplines.

Koehn referenced the work of HBS Professor John Kotter, who she said aptly defined the “activity of leadership.”

Leadership vs Management: What's the difference?

“ Leadership , he wrote, is the creation of positive, non-incremental change, including the creation of a vision to guide that change—a strategy—the empowerment of people to make the vision happen despite obstacles, and the creation of a coalition of energy and momentum that can move that change forward,” Koehn said.

Fuller, who teaches the online course Management Essentials , relayed his thoughts on how management compares.

“ Management is getting the confused, misguided, unmotivated, and misdirected to accomplish a common purpose on a regular, recurring basis,” Fuller said. “I think the ultimate intersection between leadership and management is an appreciation for what motivates and causes individuals to behave the way they do, and the ability to draw out the best of them with a purpose in mind.”

Watch the full keynote discussion between Nancy Koehn and Joe Fuller below:

While these definitions draw parallels between the roles of leaders and managers, they also allude to some key contrasts. Here are three differences between leadership and management.

Access your free e-book today.

How Is Leadership Different from Management?

1. process vs. vision.

Effective leadership is centered on a vision to guide change.

Whereas managers set out to achieve organizational goals through implementing processes, such as budgeting, organizational structuring, and staffing, leaders are more intent on thinking ahead and capitalizing on opportunities.

“I think of management as working with other people to make sure the goals an organization has articulated are executed,” says HBS Dean Nitin Nohria in an interview for the online course Management Essentials . “It’s the process of working with others to ensure the effective execution of a chosen set of goals. Leadership is about developing what the goals should be. It’s more about driving change.”

2. Organizing vs. Aligning

In the book, On Becoming a Leader , scholar Warren Bennis presents a list of key differences between managers and leaders , including:

• The manager administers; the leader innovates
• The manager maintains; the leader develops
• The manager focuses on systems and structure; the leader focuses on people

Managers pursue goals through coordinated actions and tactical processes, or tasks and activities that unfold over stages to reach a certain outcome. For example, they may implement a decision-making process when leading a critical meeting , or when devising a plan for communicating organizational change .

Leaders, on the other hand, are less focused on how to organize people to get work done and more on finding ways to align and influence them.

“Your central function in a position of leadership is to mobilize others so they can execute a set of individual and collective tasks,” says HBS Professor Anthony Mayo in the online course Leadership Principles .

By developing a personal leadership style through self-reflection and honest feedback , leaders can learn how to empower their employees and inspire them to both believe in and pursue important organizational initiatives.

3. Position vs. Quality

The title “manager” often denotes a specific role within an organization’s hierarchy, while referring to someone as a “leader” has a more fluid meaning.

“Manager is a title. It’s a role and set of responsibilities,” says leadership coach Doc Norton in Forbes . “Having the position of manager does not make you a leader. The best managers are leaders, but the two are not synonymous. Leadership is the result of action. If you act in a way that inspires, encourages, or engages others, you are a leader. It doesn't matter your title or position.”

Leadership is a quality that needs to be shaped. Through developing emotional intelligence and learning how to influence others , professionals of all levels can build greater self-awareness and understand how to bring out the best in themselves and others.

For seasoned and aspiring managers alike, possessing strong leadership skills can not only lead to better job performance , but an improved knowledge of how to influence the context and environment in which decisions get made.

Related: How to Be an Effective Leader at Any Stage of Your Career

Unleashing Your Leadership Potential

Leadership skills can be developed at any stage of your career. By understanding the characteristics of effective leaders and how leadership differs from management, you can develop techniques for coaching colleagues, delivering feedback, and overcoming specific organizational challenges.

Do you want to become a more effective leader and manager? Download our free leadership and management e-book to find out how. Also, explore our online leadership and management courses to learn how you can take charge of your professional development and accelerate your career. To find the right course for you, download the free flowchart .

About the Author