I was surprised when the HR director pulled me aside for a “friendly discussion” about my new role within the company. She was talking about “leadership skills” versus “management skills” and the need for a new approach on my part. She suggested I take a course on this transition so that I could adjust more “effectively.” As she spoke I began to realize that I was not cutting the mustard in my new, shiny position and could not help but feel deflated and a little nervous. Had I failed already? I was behaving in the same manner that had gotten me praise and this promotion, so what was the problem?
The problem was that I was under the impression that leadership meant the same thing as management. Through this personal experience and through my courses, I have come to understand that although leaders and managers share common attributes, they are distinctly different roles. The fundamental definition of leadership by Northouse (2013) is “a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal,” which on the face of it does not seem different from the definition of management (Northhouse, 2013, p12). Northouse acknowledges that influence, working with groups, and achieving a common goal are attributes of both management and leadership (Northhouse, 2013, p12). Many characteristics of leadership are needed to manage people, such as positively influencing subordinates. Great managers are good leaders in this way. However, managers spend most of their time focusing on micro level concerns of the company, such as “order and consistency” (Northouse, 2013, p. 12). An organization needs managers who can concentrate on running the day-to-day operations efficiently and effectively (Northhouse, 2013, p13). Leaders are those who need to move to a more macro level of “change and movement” (Northouse, 2013, p12). Leaders are required to focus on the big picture and to leave behind the day-to-day management of the organization.
I had to make this difficult adjustment when I first made the switch from manager to leader. I did not change fundamental approaches, such as positive influence, but I did have to remove myself from the day-to-day management functions and instead contribute from a broader organizational perspective. For example, I learned to direct my attention to strategy and future prospects for the company.
I believe that people should not attempt fulfill both roles at the same time because they serve distinctive organizational needs. In fact, these roles are, on occasion, in conflict – one brings stability and the other brings change. (Northouse, 2013, p 13.) They should provide a healthy balance and are interdependent. However, I believe that most people are better leaders when they have experienced the role of manager. Most have worked their way through the ranks and therefore have this advantage. However, some people are not prepared to release the management function when they are asked to lead and this can cause role confusion. In his article, How Managers Become Leaders, Michael Watkins says, “They must learn to move from specialist to generalist, analyst to integrator, tactician to strategist, bricklayer to architect, problem solver to agenda setter, warrior to diplomat, and supporting cast member to lead role.” In my own experience of being both manager and leader over these last twenty years, I would say that companies should guide their new leaders in order to make this transition a smooth one, as many people do not know the subtle but important differences between the two.
References
Northhouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice
(6th edition ed.). Thousand Oaks, California, USA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Watkins, M. D. (2012, June). How Managers Become Leaders.
Retrieved January 16, 2014, from Harvard Business Review: http://hbr.org/2012/06
/how-managers-become-leaders/