I have this problem.

Am I supposed to be a manager?

Or is it better to be a leader?

What's the difference?

My latest issue of "Harvard Business Review" arrived last week. It's filled with good ideas about management. The writers talk about how management was on the cusp of becoming a profession and then got side-tracked back in the 1950s. We just don't give management the proper respect and we don't give adequate time, effort and education to our managers.

But wait.....

In my January special edition of HBR the discussion goes to the "mind of a leader". It's an issue that makes me uncomfortable. What does it mean to be a leader. Well, for sure it's different than being a manager. Is it more important? or less? I still don't know.

Oh, and my November Issue of HBR explores the "Five Minds of a Manager." Yep, in that issue the role of a manager is very important.

And Drucker, in my "Essential Drucker" is all over the management issue. To read it from Drucker, management is very important.

In the last decade it seems that the idea of being a manager has lost favor. Giving way to the chic of being a leader. But really, what is the difference? And what am I? Leader or Manager?

I've purposefully left out the links to my reading material on this post. Sure, you can do a little research and find these articles. And for sure you can find hundreds of other ideas about what it means to be a manager and/or leader. It isn't my purpose to feed you these readings. Go get 'em yourself if it interests you that much.

My purpose is to consider the differences between what it means to be a leader and what it means to be a manager. I want to know, formulate ideas at least, and I'm willing to share my thought processes and conclusions. It should be fun and something that I will be addressing over the next few days, weeks, months and probably for the rest of my life........
8:58:51 PM    comment []