Dear Madeleine,
I am an executive coach. An interesting thing came up in a coaching session today: one of my clients has been tasked with defining the difference between a manager and a leader. There are some HBR articles on the topic and some different definitions, but I’m curious to learn if you have ever defined the difference between the two at Blanchard. It seems that most of the gurus in the coaching and training space talk about leadership and sometimes interchange the words leader and manager, but I don’t know if anyone has really distinctly defined the difference. How do those two roles manifest themselves at different leadership levels in a company?
My client and I discussed it and we agree on this: the closer a supervisor is to the individual contributor level (e.g., a frontline leader), the greater percentage of their time would be spent on manager-type tasks. The closer a supervisor is to the CEO level, the greater percentage of time would be spent on leadership-type tasks. In the middle levels, it likely would be a combination of both.
I’m curious, though, if we have defined the two roles in the past. I thought I would run this by you to see what you think.
Seeking a Distinction
_____________________________________________________________________
Dear Seeking a Distinction,
This is such a great question. I am curious to know what was behind the task request received by your client. You’re right—pretty much every place I’ve looked uses the terms manager and leader interchangeably. In fact, our flagship model SLII® is referred to as a leadership model, while I think of it as a performance management model. So there you have it.
The distinction we do make at Blanchard is between strategic leadership and operational leadership. This is outlined in our white paper The Leadership-Profit Chain, which details the research that reveals the critical importance of leadership capacity to the bottom line. Strategic leaders are responsible for articulating the vision, defining the culture, and clarifying the strategic imperatives for the organization. Operational leaders engage in disciplined management practices that drive procedures, policies, and behaviors to ensure people do three things: understand and align with the vision, choose behaviors that are aligned with the stated values of the organization, and deliver what is needed to achieve the strategic imperatives.
Does that mean strategic leaders don’t have to manage people? No. Almost all senior executives still have to manage a function and direct reports.
Does this mean operational leaders can’t have a vision for their business area and come up with their own strategies to deliver what is needed? No. The best mid-level managers are trustworthy humans and have vision and strategy skills.
But we know not all leaders know how to (or care to) manage people and take care of all the details associated with managing. And not all operational managers are leadership material.
I think what you and your client came up with makes sense. Here is the way I would define the two different things—and I hope it will add value to your conversation.
A leader, in my humble opinion, is quite simply someone whom others choose to follow. Leadership activities include inspiring others, developing a reputation for making sound decisions, defining reality, resolving problems created by complexity, role modeling the stated values of the organization, and building trust with those they serve at every opportunity and through every interaction. A leader sees the big picture of what’s possible and inspires others to jump in and help to create that big picture.
A manager is a person who gets things done. Management activities include setting goals, working with peers to define how groups can work best together, breaking goals down into activities, assigning those activities to the best available person, and tracking progress and accountability for their group. A manager has a decent idea of the big picture but focuses on the right details in the creation of it.
It’s tricky, isn’t it? It all depends on what one’s job is and knowing where to focus one’s attention and how to allocate one’s precious time. To be successful in one’s job, no matter what label is assigned to it, this is what counts: attention and time allocation.
One might say a leader who is also a great manager (or a manager who is also a great leader) can see the forest and the trees. I think we’ve all had bosses who are brilliant at seeing the whole forest but can’t see a single tree, or one who can’t see the whole forest because they are focused on a single cluster of trees. And let’s not forget the technical experts who understand the inner workings of an individual tree. One of the great challenges we help organizations deal with is how often technical experts are promoted to management roles. There is a natural assumption that people who are excellent in their job will be good at managing others doing that same job. Anyone who has suffered from that situation as either manager or direct report can testify that nothing could be further from the truth.
In the end, it is a both/and situation instead of an either/or.
I hope this is helpful. Let me reiterate that this is my opinion, not Blanchard’s stated point of view, or the Truth. I look forward to hearing what you think!
Love, Madeleine
About Madeleine
Madeleine Homan Blanchard is a master certified coach, author, speaker, and cofounder of Blanchard Coaching Services. Madeleine’s Advice for the Well Intentioned Manager is a regular Saturday feature for a very select group: well intentioned managers. Leadership is hard—and the more you care, the harder it gets. Join us here each week for insight, resources, and conversation.
Got a question for Madeleine? Email Madeleine and look for your response soon. Please be advised that although she will do her best, Madeleine cannot respond to each letter personally. Letters will be edited for clarity and length.
About the Author
Follow on Twitter More Content by Madeleine Homan Blanchard
