Perhaps my study into the differences between Managers and Leaders has been more confusing than helpful. For sure I'm having trouble drawing any definite conclusions. And that makes some sense. If it was easy we would all be good managers, or leaders. Or maybe we would be able to switch between these modes at will, according to the situation.

And maybe the secret to all of this is that the best bosses, directors, managers, are both manager and leader. I'm reminded of a friendly disagreement I had with one of my direct reports. I contended that we have been trained to expect bad management by bad managers. My colleague believes that bad managers do not teach us anything. Which is it? I'm not certain that it matters. For my money I think that teaching is always taking place. Learning, on the other hand, depends on the perceptor.

Mike Vance teaches that the superlatvie manager and the superlative mother share the same skill set. And, in the final analysis, that may be the key to the whole Manager/Leader debate. A superlative manager/leader probably possesses the characteristics of both. The Manager/Leader has the ability to see when quick decisions should be made and when time should be allowed to pass. This same Manager/Leader knows that sometimes process is the key and at other times it's all about getting results now and process be damned.

Managers should possess Leadership ability and Leaders need to know how to manage. We are surrounded by too many bad manager/leaders. That's why Scott Adams is so successful. And it is almost certainly impossible to get a job where you can specialize in being either one or the other..........
9:40:22 PM    comment []