Difference between Management and Leadership? 10

[winpop123]

O.K. heres the question. Whats the difference between Management and Leadership? Not a trick question and I'm not looking for the Webster’s definition but something more practical and tangible.

The reason I ask is because my company has chosen to change its organizational structure. The old "classic" structure is a "silo" structure where each employee reports up through the organization chart to there functional manager. As an example, a drafter may report to his supervisor who then reports to the Chief Engineer. Tasks are handed down from Chief Engineer to various supervisors who in turn have their people perform tasks.

The change will be to a "Project" based management structure whereby people from various disciplines (QA, Eng, Production, and Purchasing etc) are assigned to a team or multiple teams. Project management will be the lead and everyone on the team is in essence "under their direction".

Since I supervised 5 engineers/designers in the past but will now no longer have to do that, what in the world does my manger mean when he states I will be in a Leadership role??

I mean really? If I have no direct reports and everyone on a team is equal, right!? Sounds to me as if it’s just a "if someone on your old team does something they shouldn't have then why didn't you catch it?

Am I missing the point?

Thanks

 

[kontiki99]

The way I see it;

Managers manage finite resources for effective utilization.

Leaders are those people that inspire you to perform to your limits and beyond.

 

[0707]

Leadership means to establish ambitious objectives in a team and keep the team motivated and involved in reaching the established objectives. Management is more related with the culture of an organization in what it concerns processes, quality, procedures and functions.

luis

 

[Senselessticker]

In my company (A/E world) we refer to leadership on a project by project basis. A common question from a Project Manager to, say, an electrical group manager is: "Who is going to be the electrical lead on this job?". The electrical manager then appoints an engineer to assume responsibility for the electrical portion of that project (design/budget/schedule/client interaction/scope/etc...). From that point forward the PM goes directly to the newly appointed "lead" engineer instead of filtering information through the engineer's boss. In most cases, a discipline lead for any given project does not have "authority" over designers/CAD operators/etc... the engineers/designers/CAD operators rather report to the same discipline manager and work together laterally. In my experience, such a system seems to work rather well.

You don't have to be a good leader to be a good manager, and you don't have to be a good manager to be a good leader. In my experience, "good" managers are often poor leaders, and "good" leaders are hard to keep around.

 

[waskillywabbit]

Not my thoughts...but I agree.

To survive in the 21st Century, we are going to need a new generation of leaders - leaders not managers. The distinction between a Manager and a leader is, to be understood clearly.

The Manager administers; the leader innovates.
The Manager is a copy; the leader is an original.
The Manager maintains; the leader develops
The Manager relies on control; the leader inspires trust.
The Manager has his eye on the bottom line; the leader has his eye on the horizon.
The Manager accepts status quo; the leader challenges
The Manager does things right; and the leader does right things

Warren Bennis
Managing People is Like Herding Cats

Brian

 

[TheTick]

Something a leader would never say, but I've heard from a manager...

Former boss told me: "I want to get rid of Bob. I don't like him. I can never tell what he's thinking. that bugs me."

Bob's work was fine, best in the group. Bob was just one of those guys with a perfect poker face. My boss found that unnerving.

 

[Heckler]

Seems like he should've gotten to know Bob then he would have had a change of opinion.

I always let peoples work performance make up my opinion. I have a meeting next week with the VP regarding a designers on the job performance or lack their of. My only compliant is the need for his on the job "clarity". He needs to know what is required of him and how to perform those tasks.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Never argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience every time.

 

[mkinnes]

If your'e responsible for the project and these people are on your team then this will be a good test of your skill with people.

 

[Impdrew]

Projects often have natural leaders that are right for the role. They often lead whatever. Some lead just by pure enthusiasm, determination and because they have what is missing in the rest of the team. Usually, they are good engineers and people you will follow.

Some good leaders just lead by example or "from behind"

I have known managers that have been threatened but dependant on natural leaders, hanging on for their own gains because they have to, but resenting it.
I can't remember a true leader feeling genuinely threatened (long term) by a manager.

The sad fact, and referring to your question winpop123, is that unofficial leading could be the route to your managers gains and you risking extra strain. Careful not to become an unofficial fall guy. Make sure people above your manager know you have been tagged to "lead" and keep a reporting route to higher management open.

What I guess though, is that you, like most engineers who would spend their personal time on this website, will do what you think it takes to get to a solution anyway, which I think means you will lead to some extent. And so you should. Anyway, who says this new structure will last, just do what you do best.

Hope you get some reward for it outside of the usual personal satisfaction.

 

[JMirisola]

For me, it's this:
Management is when you have someone who doesn't understand what it is you do, telling you what to do without providing what you need to get it done.

Leadership is when you have someone who knows you know what you're doing, telling you what needs to be done and letting you do your job while making sure you have the tools you need to get it done.

Jeff Mirisola, CSWP
CAD Administrator
SW '07 SP1.0, Dell M90, Intel 2 Duo Core, 2GB RAM, nVidia 2500M

http://designsmarter.typepad.com/jeffs_blog

 

[HgTX]

I agree with JMIrisola's definition of leadership, but management is not all bad; it shouldn't be used as a convenient term for everything someone in a position of authority does wrong. Leaders properly utilized are in management roles, and with that, at least at lower levels where there aren't a lot of underlings to handle these things, are lots of straight-up management responsibilities of a bureaucratic or disciplinary nature.

My first boss was someone who was EXACTLY like JMIrisola's "leadership" description. He is nationally recognized within his industry for his leadership abilities. I would go to the end of the earth for him and so would many other people who have worked with him. He is fantastic at creating new more functional organizational structure, seeing the bigger picture, and getting others to see the bigger picture with him.

However, as a manager, working near the bottom of the totem pole with employees who didn't always do the right thing, he had his flaws. He was incapable of dealing with an employee who wasn't doing what they should. But put him up at a higher level, where that kind of stuff goes away (it's the problem of lower management), where there's less "management" requirement and more pure leadership, and he shines.

As someone else in this thread said, they are separate skill sets but both are important. And different jobs require more or less of each.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[HVAC68]

Manager - Manages.
Leader - Leads and carries his team along.

HVAC68