There is a big difference between being a leader and being a manager!!! I have been foolish over this time to believe that they are both similar although this isn't the case. As such I wanted to see how different leadership and management really are so I managed to get a image which highlights this.

The comparison has made me really think about both roles and as such I am including my own comments about each of the points which have been raised: 
  • Origin - A person becomes a leader based on his personal qualities (I can't say that this is correct. Especially because there is more to being a leader than just personal quality, there is also the skill set and unique personal development.)

  • Followers - The group of leaders whom the leaders leads are his followers (In a business sense I would agree with this statement however not in another way. Leaders can lead people who are not there own employees, i.e. people following presidents.)

  • Formal rights - A leader doesn't have them (I can't say that I agree with this. In essence everyone has some form of rights.)

  • Functions - leader influences people to work willingly for group objectives (I agree with this statement although a leader also looks after and protects his followers in the work which they choose to do)

  • Necessity - A leader is required to create cordial relation between person working in and for organisation (The leader should also bare a role of protecting and directing as well)

  • Stability - for a leader it's only temporary (I do agree with this, leadership positions are never permanent unless if one is a good leader)

  • Accountability - Leaders don't have accountability (I tend to disagree with this, leaders are always accountable for themselves and for others.)

  • Mutual relationship - Leaders are not managers but managers are leaders. (This explanation is quite confusing and as such I take it that it means that leadership is higher than management and once one assumes this position there is no going back?)

  • Concern - A leaders concern is group goals and members satisfaction (I agree with this however member satisfaction should be a necessity also as previously stated)

  • Followers - People follow leaders on a voluntary basis (This statement holds a lot of truth although sometimes followers are coerced to following based on others. This makes me think that leading can sometimes be false rather than pure.)

  • Role continuation - A leader can maintain his position only through day to day wishes of followers (I don't agree with this as most leaders are sometimes in place to serve x years such as ministers or presidents.)

  • Sanctions - A leader has command over different sanctions and related task records. These sanctions are essentially of informal nature. (Again I don't agree with the last part about command being informal. I would like to see leadership in this way but I think it is assumed when one has command who is in charge of it. This was the case for me just recently for a group assignment whereby I prepapred the presentation and my other group members did nothing. There response was we acknowledged that you were in charge and so you would take care of it. Essentially this was true I said I would take care of it but was hoping for some aid which never came through.)


Outright the list seems to be very confusing however it does confirm a lot of my own assumptions which were previously mentioned in other entries in that leadership is more of a concept than anything but having just listed my own assumptions about each of the attributes I am beginning to think that leadership is nothing more than managing just in a different context, a more glorifying way.



Leave a Reply.