What do you consider the difference between a manager and a leader?

To nit-pick a little, really good generals are genuine leaders. Not-so-good generals can be be mere bosses. The best example? Perhaps WWII's George Patton, an inspiring leader, who let people know what had to be done, then got out of the way to let them be creative in reaching the objective.

The "boss" terminology is not helpful in posing thequestion; it is a generic word indicating someone somewhere in a reporting hierarchy. The difference is actually one of distinguishing between leaders and managers, both of whom are needed in effective organizations.

Problems can arise when a manager is placed in a position that demands leadership (and leaders don't often make great line managers). The real challenge lies in having managers who are in over their heads, and resort to bad behaviors (bullying, micro-managing, obsessive control, blame games, etc.) out of fear and insecurity.

There are plenty of good managers, who have excellent people skills ans can motivate for good performance

I picked this up somewhere but don't remember the source:

A manager ensures that the ladder is of the correct height, strength, and angle to climb.

A leader ensures that the ladder is against the right building!

Shooting from the hip... A boss is someone who tells you what to do. A leader is someone who empowers you to achieve a clear goal.

Hi Alicia Jones

Leaders are close to their followers,
Bosses are in their offices

Leaders lead by example
Bosses lead only with words

Leaders communicate instantly
Bosses need a special meeting to communicate something.

Leaders use the authority to lead
Bosses use their power.

This is from my point of view
Best Regards

A boss uses his position to get people to act. A leader uses their I fluence.

Leaders have a clear vision that others are inspired to follow. Bosses are like generals who are committed to making sure everyone stays on track.

In my humble opinion, leaders are thinking about the global aspects of the bsuiness, listening to the audiences around them, gathering the knowledge of their peers and staff and bringing it all together to provide a direction which is best for the business. A leader points the way and lets the tactical folks do their thing. A leader does course correction. A leader senese the pulse of the organization.

I think a "boss" is someone who describes the task at hand and determines what needs to be done regardless of the global picture. Don't describe why we are doing this, just do it.

A Boss is someone who believes that they must be in control and that people need to be told what to do and how to do it.

A leader is someone who understands that the best solutions can come from anyone. They encourage others to think outside of the box and empower them to solve problems and make decisions.

Great leaders are confident and understand that if they are doing their job correctly they will work themselves out of a job because they will train up the generation of leaders.

While a boss gives orders, a leader shows the way.

In the lean world the definition for Leader is one who "Has the ability to generate followers". However the use of the word boss (not a positive definition) usually is used to described one who is a manager. The definition of a manager (aka Boss) is one who is responsible for organizing people, processes, and technology (that is all we have to work with) to achieve intended results. One's power comes from, vision and inspiration - and the other's power comes from their postion.

When you say boss, I think of the word manager.
I think these are the differences. The manager administers, the leader innovates. The manager is a copy: the leader is an original. The manager focuses on systems and structure; the leader inspires trust. The manager has a short-range view, the leader has a long-range perspective. The manager asks how and when, the leader asks what and why? The manager has an eye always on the bottom line: the leader has an eye on the horizon. The manger initiates, the leader originates. the manager accepts the status quo; the leader challenges it. The manger is the classic good soldier; the leader is his or her own person. The manger does thing right, and the leader does the right thing.

The above paragraph comes from the online article, "Leadership in the Workplace," by Brooke Sheldon. You can see the entire articles by visiting txla.org/pubs/tlj75_4/work.html

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/1047476

Leaders help people see and do what they could not see or do by themselves. They inspire them beyond the previous limits they believed they had.

Managers help people do what they already know they're supposed to do.

Leadership without good managers is a daydream... management without good leadership is a nightmare.

Gone are the days when most organizations have the luxury of managers who can't lead or leaders who can't manage. If a leader can't manage, we say that he/she is an ineffective leader. The same holds for managers who can't lead.

Few leaders or managers are at the top of the tree in both; but in the new world of work, you are expected to be reasonably competent in both.

Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Managers deal with order, status quo, doing, business as usual and control.

Leaders deal with chaos, change, visioning, strategy and empowerment.

Boss like to tell you what to do all day of your 40 hours and career.
Leaders educate you in your career.
Look at BWW.

The terminoligy of saying Boss is slang - Manager would be a more appropriate description. Good leaders encompasses all aspects of their business/projects and challenges. Good leaders are people persons who inspire confidence and success to their managers and staff to accept responsibility to achieve the goals and challenges required. A very good leader creates leaders out of managers by example.

My feeling within this answer is that I will be repeating those answers given. So here it goes...

True leadership empowers, gains trust and confidence, gives trust and confidence, has the ability to mentor or point to proper mentoring for individuals and/or their organizations. They understand the capabilities of individuals, and then draws even more talent from them driving them to experience new frontiers of learning and success. A leader cares more about the people than the organization, and more about the organization than him/her self. It is never about what they do, but what other do for the company and how they can support the team.

This is a bad question. The non-academic business culture is attempting to steer word usage through through a misguided connotative sieve. Do not let the word BOSS be driven into the connotative dump. A good boss may be is a good leader. Not all good bosses are good leaders. Some great leaders are bad bosses. A boss runs a crew to accomplish a certain job. A leader commands a vision to accomplish a larger goal.

Managers are all about PEOPLE. Their job is to align team strengths with the needs of the origanization, to care for people, to show them he or she has their career in mind, to give them direction and resources and to cover their back.

Leaders are all about VISION. They have an ability to visualize a better future so clearly and they are so passionate about it, they can't help but do everything they can to make that vision possible. Their vision and passion make people follow them independently of their position in the org.

Manager Vs Leader
Managers tend to behave like overseers and become task focused.
Leaders understand what it takes to be successful in the work, they then begin to realize that they can be more effective if their people are more effective.

In brief:
1- Manager supervises people, a leader inspires people.
2- Manager solves problems, a leader eliminates problems.
3- Manager implements vision, a leader creates vision.
4- Manager responds to client needs, a leader anticipates client needs.
5- Manager is reactive, a leader is proactive.

The textbook answer is that a "Manager ensures things are done right" and a "Leader ensures that the right things are being done." My take? ... A Leader empowers people by helping them learn and removing roadblocks. A Leader has no fear of job loss or failure - he/she focuses on the people. Titles like Supervisor and Manager could go away. A good Leader gets extraordinary results out of ordinary people. Focus on Leadership. Stay clear of titles and keep close to results.

Managers are assigned. Leadership is a gift that others choose to bestow.

A manager can be judged easily by metrics. A leader can only be judged by their followers motivation.

People will follow a manager for job security, for a bonus, for a promotion or raise. They will also follow a manager out of fear.

People will follow a leader for no tangible reason at all, without any measurable incentive to do so. I would posit that people follow a leader primarily because they feel good about doing so.

Together, let's put the fun back into work!
Belldon Colme
belldoncolme@gmail.com

It's quite simple, you obey a boss with more or less pleasure but you follow a leader with no explanation just because... he's a LEADER

I interpret the term "boss" as someone who is directive and tells you what to do - at least that is what I think when I hear the term. So, in my definition, the boss endeavors to get things done by telling people what to do, while a leader inspires people to follow, simply because you are inspired to do so.

How many times can this question be asked? Sure, leader is preferred but what's material is how to be effective using both at the right time. Elements of being a boss (without being "bossy" or dictator-like) AND an inspiring leader make for a powerful combination. Case in point, when an individual is having difficulty clearing through an obstacle after proper leadership, it is the roll of a boss to come to the aid and assist in clearing those roadblocks with others.

Check out Situational Leadership Theory. There's a time for telling, selling, participating and delegating. All valid leadership methods for certain situations. While the idea of "telling" may be viewed as boss-like, it's needed sometimes. The key is to simply not be a jerk or throw around your bossy behavior. It doesn't work.

"Leadership must be based on goodwill. Goodwill does not mean posturing and, least of all, pandering to the mob. It means obvious and wholehearted commitment to helping followers. We are tired of leaders we fear, tired of leaders we love, and of tired of leaders who let us take liberties with them. What we need for leaders are men of the heart who are so helpful that they, in effect, do away with the need of their jobs. But leaders like that are never out of a job, never out of followers. Strange as it sounds, great leaders gain authority by giving it away."
— Admiral James B. Stockdale

Thank you to everyone for the responses!

As the semantics of boss vs. manager came up several times, I've changed the wording. Communicating clearly is an important skill in leadership and business and I appreciate the feedback.

A leader sees and sets a direction.

A manager figures out what has to happen,who needs to do what and when to get to the destination the leader has chosen.

I think a simple difference in the two concepts is that a manager tells people what to do, while a leader inspires them to do what needs to be accomplished by the team.

Managers generally operate in the more tactical, day-to-day aspects of the business. Leaders understand the present, have a vision for the future, and set the strategy to bridge the gap. To say that an individual is one or the other is simplistic. The most effective managers/leaders display aspects of both.

Leaders show people where to go, inspires them to go and then goes with them. Leaders also sell people on what to do and allow freedom on how to do it.

Managers make sure people keep going in the direction the leader visualized. Managers also tell people what to do and exactly how to do it.

Both are essential for bringing the best out of people in the workplace. It depends on the situation and the person involved.

Grind for Greatness!

Leaders:

•Accept the blame when inadequate or improper training results in mistakes and other problems;

•Allow subordinates to participate in the decision making process;

•Are cool, calm and collected under pressure;

•Are consistent;

•Are technically competent, but tolerant of employees who are not yet fully proficient at their jobs;

•Compliment in public, but criticize in private;

•Celeberate successes and milestones;

•Create opportunities for professional development, learning and growth for their team members;

Leaders:

•Accept the blame when inadequate or improper training results in mistakes and other problems;

•Allow subordinates to participate in the decision making process;

•Are cool, calm and collected under pressure;

•Are consistent;

•Are technically competent, but tolerant of employees who are not yet fully proficient at their jobs;

•Compliment in public, but criticize in private;

•Celeberate successes and milestones;

•Create opportunities for professional development, learning and growth for their team members;

In my opinion, managers should know how to successfully manage people. Give direction and make sure the necessary tasks are completed on time. Whereas, a leader is someone who brings all the best people together and empowers them to make decisions. A leader is someone that gives large scheme picture and allows the team to spear-head the project.

A manager does things right. A leader does the right thing.

Good leadership and good management share many attributes. There is not necessarily a clear line of distinction between the two. Moreover, both are essential and complementary. Recognizing that it's not black and white, here are some quick thoughts on a subject that rightfully takes books to discuss in detail:

Leaders - vision and values
Managers - policies and rules

Leaders - people focused
Managers - product and program focused

Leaders - energize and motivate
Managers - supervise and evaluate

Leaders - long-term strategy and direction
Managers - budgets and short-term implementation plans

Leaders – processes
Managers - procedures

Leaders: create something new
Managers: make what exists more efficient

One final note: Drawing these kinds of distinctions should in no way be construed as devaluing the role of managers. Without them, our "great companies" wouldn't exist, at least not in the form they do today.

What is the difference between management and leadership? It is a question that has been asked more than once and also answered in different ways. The biggest difference between managers and leaders is the way they motivate the people who work or follow them, and this sets the tone for most other aspects of what they do.

Many people, by the way, are both. They have management jobs, but they realize that you cannot buy hearts, especially to follow them down a difficult path, and so act as leaders too.

Managers have subordinates
By definition, managers have subordinates - unless their title is honorary and given as a mark of seniority, in which case the title is a misnomer and their power over others is other than formal authority.

Authoritarian, transactional style
Managers have a position of authority vested in them by the company, and their subordinates work for them and largely do as they are told. Management style is transactional, in that the manager tells the subordinate what to do, and the subordinate does this not because they are a blind robot, but because they have been promised a reward (at minimum their salary) for doing so.

Work focus
Managers are paid to get things done (they are subordinates too), often within tight constraints of time and money. They thus naturally pass on this work focus to their subordinates.

Seek comfort
An interesting research finding about managers is that they tend to come from stable home backgrounds and led relatively normal and comfortable lives. This leads them to be relatively risk-averse and they will seek to avoid conflict where possible. In terms of people, they generally like to run a 'happy ship'.

Leaders have followers
Leaders do not have subordinates - at least not when they are leading. Many organizational leaders do have subordinates, but only because they are also managers. But when they want to lead, they have to give up formal authoritarian control, because to lead is to have followers, and following is always a voluntary activity.

Charismatic, transformational style
Telling people what to do does not inspire them to follow you. You have to appeal to them, showing how following them will lead to their hearts' desire. They must want to follow you enough to stop what they are doing and perhaps walk into danger and situations that they would not normally consider risking.

Leaders with a stronger charisma find it easier to attract people to their cause. As a part of their persuasion they typically promise transformational benefits, such that their followers will not just receive extrinsic rewards but will somehow become better people.

People focus
Although many leaders have a charismatic style to some extent, this does not require a loud personality. They are always good with people, and quiet styles that give credit to others (and takes blame on themselves) are very effective at creating the loyalty that great leaders engender.

Although leaders are good with people, this does not mean they are friendly with them. In order to keep the mystique of leadership, they often retain a degree of separation and aloofness.

This does not mean that leaders do not pay attention to tasks - in fact they are often very achievement-focused. What they do realize, however, is the importance of enthusing others to work towards their vision.

Seek risk
In the same study that showed managers as risk-averse, leaders appeared as risk-seeking, although they are not blind thrill-seekers. When pursuing their vision, they consider it natural to encounter problems and hurdles that must be overcome along the way. They are thus comfortable with risk and will see routes that others avoid as potential opportunities for advantage and will happily break rules in order to get things done.

A surprising number of these leaders had some form of handicap in their lives which they had to overcome. Some had traumatic childhoods, some had problems such as dyslexia, others were shorter than average. This perhaps taught them the independence of mind that is needed to go out on a limb and not worry about what others are thinking about you.

Managers deal with resource allocation - funding, scheduling people's time, inventory, products, etc.

Leaders deal with people - setting direction/vision, motivating, inspiring, mentoring, etc.

Excelling at both should be the goal.

To me, the word "boss" means the person who is watching you to make sure you follow the rules. The word "leader" mean someone who teaches by setting an example for you to follow.

A boss wields power, where a leader shares their vision and inspires and empowers the team to want to accomplish the goals.

i can say a boss is chosen to be incharge of the people ,so with this he can control them and the people must abide to his rule but a leader is chosen to direct the people, listen to their opinion so with this they will achieve their goals.

i can say a boss is chosen to be incharge of the people ,so with this he can control them and the people must abide to his rule but a leader is chosen to direct the people, listen to their opinion so with this they will achieve their goals.

I have a different outlook. The boss is in charge and does indeed direct the people he/she is in charge of. It is a dynamic that is very much about command, control, and abiding because folks have to.

I see the leaders role as much different as a leader does present a way forward but does not direct in a 'command and control' way --- but leads. In this case followers follow because they are inspired to by a person who communicates the existence of a 'future desired' state - or vision - that followers willingly will follow. The difference between followers and leaders is like night and day. If you like I can share some 20 differences between managers and leaders - I am at dhogg@rogers.com

.... Leaders have said, "I must follow them because I am their leader"

John J,

Bravo! I couldn't say it better. You are so right in your comments. Thank you.

Hi Ramiro, I think there is some additional considerations for defining the difference between Leaders and Managers (Boss's). If you send me your email I will share it with you.
Dave

Hi John, that would be from Stephen Covey in his public presentations - I have always liked his straight-up ideas and ways of expressing things. His book "Principled Centered Leadership has a ton of good stuff around the Leadership vs Manager idea. Have a great weekend,
Dave

Manager is more scientific while leader is more instintive. I place leader at a higher level than the manager as leader should not only be able to lead but also manager otherwise how would he or she be able to manage an abnormal situation where leadership is demanded.

Good managers and good leaders both have a place. Verly large, ambitious projects need leaders with the vision and ability to inspire others to get the job done. Good managers, when armed with talented and motivated workers are needed "in the trenches" so to speak to accomplish the tasks assigned to their area of the organization. I believe I prefer a good manager, with some leadership skills to a good leader with some management skills.

Leaders do right things, manager set the things right.

Leadership means "the ability of an individual to influence, motivate, and enable others to contribute toward the effectiveness and success of the organizations of which they are members."
Management comprises directing and controlling a group of one or more people or entities for the purpose of coordinating and harmonizing that group towards accomplishing a goal.
Leadership is one of the several facets of management. Often the same people play wear different hats - both leader and manager - at different points in time. Although not essential, it certainly helps a manager if he/she is also a good leader. Conversely, leaders do well if they have some degree of management skills because it helps them envision the implementation of their strategic vision. Self-motivated groups may not need a leader and may find leaders dominating. Alternatively, small teams may find a natural leader emerge based on his/her specialized skills. But this leader may be subordinate to the team manager in the organizational hierarchy, which may lead to conflicts.

Leader: you follow them into battle (risk taking, innovation, out of the box,....)
Manager: you follow them into a meeting

When a manager speaks they'll stand and clap.
When a leader speaks they'll stand and march.

Leaders and managers should remember the essence of leadership is in the vision of the leader or manager but the substance of leadership is the value the leader or manager adds to their subordinates and their organization. There are five levels to management and leadership the top level being personhood or respect where people follow because of who the leader or manager is and what the leader or manager represent. The hold process is about ones influence on the people of the organization the greater the influence the greater the success of the organization or the
value added to the people of the organization and the organization

Management is a science, if you apply it as you should you'll succeed.

Leadership is an art, like music. (Even If I teach you how to read and write notes, you will never play good music unless you are music gifted.) Leadership comes from within.

Management includes: Design a process, Instruct an action, Control Activities, Schedule Activities, Create Budgets, Measure Quality, ...
Leadership includes: Motivate, Negotiate, Solve Conflicts, Control Emotions, Inspire, ...

Managers get in the way, Leaders clear the way.

I manager directs and manages work flow with the least negative impact on the process and outcome to get it done well.

A leader inspires people to do more, be more, go places they have not been to achieve what has not been done before that makes a great positive impact.

A manager is task oriented. Not necessarily a bad thing but the empasis is on what tasks need to get finished.

A leader is a dynamic force that people CHOOSE to follow. It's a way of being that is all about those they lead.

I read a book once about this exact topic and it pin pointed exactly the difference between managers and leaders. It's called "Tribes" by Seth Godin and I strongly recommend it.
It basically says that managers and there to do just that: manage. They are there to make sure everybody is doing their job and enforse the status quo, with little or no power of changing it or challenging it.
Leaders are there to inspire confidence in people and to lead them to something better. They take risks and challenge the status quo and always strive for something better. That's how companies evolve and reach hights they normally wouldn't under a management-type leadership.

Leaders act first - leaders by definition lead, which means that they take action first when a problem or opportunity arises. They decide on their own to go first but because they go first, there are no rules or benchmarks to follow.

Leaders lead by example -- leaders take observable and copyable actions because they know that others will follow their example.

Leaders get others to outperform - leaders direct, inspire, excite and develop their team, so that each team member and the team as a unit continually produce extraordinary results.

Leaders are open and direct in their communications and criticism – because leaders move fast, communications and performance feedback needs to be rapid, direct and constructive. Leaders use understandable language, so followers know precisely what a leader’s words mean.

Managers are not leaders, so if all managers do something, it is not a leadership action- if anything is used by “all managers” or “all employees” it cannot be a leadership element. Leaders use unique people management tools that managers do not generally use.

Leader uses his position to say and to do something to influence his followers.
Manager just uses his position to exercise his authorities.
Many times, a leader has to sacrifice or stand up bravely when things are not going very well.
I use to think I cannot be a leader, but now I realize that anybody who thinks he has the potential to be a leader should ask this question "Am I ready to serve the followers ?"

a manager moves people where as a leader is followed

A leader does the right thing and focuses on strategy and choosing the right targets. A manager does the thing right and focuses on resource efficiency and quality control. A boss is just an immediate supervisor. He or she may be a leader or a manager depending on the size of the company.

Then there is the question of power or authority. Someone with authority has position in the hierarchy. Having authority doesn't mean they've earned it. Someone with power has earned the respect of the followers and and has power because the followers have granted it.

I didn't see it referenced in any of the responses but one of my favorite books is "You Don't Need A Title To Be A Leader" by Mark Sanborn. Pretty much says it all.

Hmm, you are right - it is a bookish answer! The most of the talk is based on the textbooks – in real life it may be otherwise.

I would describe a manager as short term, strict rules, meet the quotas, make boss happy, afraid to implement ideas outside of the box.

Whereas a leader sets long term inspirational goals, instills support and confidence with the people around them and does not hide behind reality.

I don't delve deep on the issue. But I like your insight Robert Winslow.

Leaders have followers.
A boss can be a leader, or can be someone who drives their people forward like cattle.

A Manager is one who manages the things............. and a Leader is one who teaches Manager how to manage the things...............

Leader is more than Manager and has to establish vision and mission to be accomplished, for even a smallest work..... Leader should have the ability to become a ROLE MODEL for others.........

Manager is just like a Boss, who order the people and act as a Beaurocrate,,,,,,, a Leader is one who influence his team mates and convince them to do the job,,,,,, Leader sets clear direction and allign team and others around common objectives,,,,,Leader is innovative and creative etc..

We're all bosses/managers,we're all leaders at the same time, as we all manage our time,money,family,friends and people at work, if applicable.
ANY BOSS/MANAGER NEEDS TO BE A GOOD LEADER AND ANY LEADER NEEDS TO BE A GOOD BOSS/MANAGER.
In general, if one (MANAGER or LEADER) really wants to be successful in life he/she should know how to MANAGE and LEAD himself/herself well, so he/she can do the same to others.
(In business) A real good boss/manager should manage a business through WORKING and LEADING by good example, the best and the most effective strategy to motivate people to move and follow , likewise a real good leader should do the same...:-)
A REAL GOOD BOSS/MANAGER has the ability and willingness to create a good manager or managers out of himself without any hesitation, this should go the same with a REAL GOOD LEADER.

This discussion has caused me to ask the following "bonus" question. Should an exceptionally good Manager follow a bad Leader?

Being a supervisor does not necessarily mean that you are a leader. As a supervisor you must balance the mission of the organization; as a leader you must direct your team...

I wrote on post on this here: http://www.businesstransformationcoach.com/2011/10/7-ways-to-become-an-effect...

For me my opinion about is the following:
Manager is a doer and execute person.His targets are goals and objectives for to reach.
Leader will build change by creativity and innovation.Build Business Model and motive to his followers in his plan for change the corporate culture.Increase the employee value proposition.Also increase the employee brand and signature employees signatures.