A useful distinction between managers and leaders

Citation

Ackoff, R.L. and Pourdehnad, J. (2009), "A useful distinction between managers and leaders", Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 37 No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1108/sl.2009.26137cab.002

A useful distinction between managers and leaders

Article Type: CEO advisory From: Strategy & Leadership, Volume 37, Issue 3

In business articles, the words manager, leader, executive, and administrator are often used as if they were more or less interchangeable. Yet people with business experience recognize the vast difference in talent implied between calling someone a “real leader” or “just a manager.” But what is it that determines such a distinction, and could it help identify critical competencies and clarify vital responsibilities? Based upon many years of observing management practice in a wide range of institutions, we believe there are some important and useful distinctions between the capabilities and talents needed by administrators, managers, executives and leaders in order to be successful.

• •

  An administrator is one who directs others in the pursuit of ends by the use of means, both of which are determined by a third party.

For example, those who supervise a group of clerks processing orders, bills, or payrolls, are generally administrators because a higher authority specifies what they are required to do and how they are required to do it. They are responsible for seeing that the job is done right, but not for doing the right job. They are the lowest level of management.

• •

  A manager is one who directs others in the pursuit of ends by the use of means that he or she selects.

Managers are higher in an organization’s hierarchy than administrators and often include them among their subordinates. Managers, of course, may also have subordinates who are not administrators. Managers who manage other managers are “executives.” Managers’ primary responsibility is to ensure that jobs are done right, but in a dynamic business environment they would be remiss in their duty if the didn’t call attention to emerging opportunities and discontinuities that could change whether their teams were doing the right job. Managers and executives lead the people who report to them and they need to possess and cultivate qualities and skills that foster a productive culture – collaboration, teamwork, ethical behavior, creativity, and continuous learning.

• •

  A leader is one who induces and guides others in the voluntary pursuit of ends by the use of means that they, the followers, select or approve of if they are chosen by another.

All four – administrators, managers, executives and leaders – may have authority which they can use to coerce others into doing what they want done. However, in the case of leaders who may also be managers, they use influence rather than authority to get others to do what they want them to if the followers do not do so willingly. Those who are directed by administrators or managers may not follow them voluntarily but out of necessity. The exercise of authority involves the ability to reward for compliance and punish for noncompliance to the authority’s will.

Administrators are responsible for efficient operations. Managers are primarily responsible for effective tactics. Leaders are primarily responsible for competitive strategy. The problem managers have when they try to formulate new strategy is that they must compete with existing operations for new resources and attention. Unless they can convince their organization’s leaders to invest in their proposals for new initiatives they must make do with current resources. In contrast, organizational leaders have full authority to develop a strategic plan and to dispense the resources to implement it. Unlike plans prepared by or for administrators and managers, strategic plans are more concerned with transformations – new business models, new competitive arenas, changes in scale, alliances, mergers and new product innovation – than reformations. Transformations involve a change in an organization’s function or structure. Tactical and operational plans do not. They can reform an organization but not transform it.

Leadership involves two functions: (1) the formulation of a vision that the organization is willing to pursue even if doing so requires short term sacrifices; and (2) a formulation of the way to pursue the vision that will be both rewarding and satisfying. A vision is a non-existing state of the organization that is strongly desired. It may or may not be attainable, but it must be approachable even if unattainable. Visions can change over time but they tend to have relatively long lives.

Administrators and managers require identifiable skills to be effective. Leaders require a high level of talent – qualities such as imagination, persuasiveness, integrity, adaptability, and collaborativeness – as well as skills. It is for this reason that leadership cannot be taught; many of the critical talents are innate. However, it can be enhanced. So-called “executive development” courses are generally devoted to developing managers rather than to enhancing leadership. Leadership skills can be transmitted but talent cannot be.

Russell L. Ackoff, John PourdehnadRussell L. Ackoff is the Anheuser-Busch Professor Emeritus of Management Science, and Distinguished Affiliated Faculty, Center for Organizational Dynamics (rlackoff@aol.com) at the Wharton School. John Pourdehnad is Affiliated Faculty, Center for Organizational Dynamics and also Associate Director, Ackoff Collaboratory for Advancement of Systems Approaches at University of Pennsylvania (JP2CONSULT@aol.com).