Q&A Management on LinkedIn

Sonia asked: "Can someone be a good leader but not a great manager?"

This is a question that is just as relevant to Recruitment Professionals in California, as it is to recruiters in London, Consultants in Brussels and elsewhere. So here's my answer:

I subscribe to many of the views presented above. Leadership and management call for very different skill sets, I find it to be a serendipitous occurrence when the ‘yin’ and ‘yang’ come together in the right proportions within one individual.

A leader is basically a salesman - able to project his passion unto others and garner their succour and support for his cause. He is a visionary and inspiration is his mojo. Great leaders lead by example.

A manager on the other hand is an organizer by nature - following a course already plotted by the leader is his primary function. His virtues are patience, consistence, prioritizing, etc.

A leader is typically brash, opting for high-risk/high reward plans, he is high in influence, initiative and dominance, he is an idea engine and a spontaneous strategist, whereas a manager is a level-headed executor that ensures the long-term goals are met and the wheels keep spinning.

So a leader with nil managerial skill is fire out of control that will eventually burn itself out, unless a manager steps in to harness the raw power and channels it productively, whereas a manager without a leader would have nothing to manage, as he is not the creative innovator/initiator, his gifts lie in organization and maintenance. A leader is focussed on the end goal, whereas the manager navigates all the hurdles on the way to it.

When the leader strikes a spark to light the fire, the manager takes over and maintains it, keeping the dream alive!

Read more business strategy and travel articles in our article section on The Cornerstones of World Business.

Oleg K. Temple, April 2011

SHE-E-Os

At a business forum a female user postulated an opinion “SHE-E-O's can you handle it! For a long time men have held the reins of the Board Room. The tide has turned and now women are taking over and taking charge. How will this affect the men?” Why should it affect ‘the men’ I thought, so I reverted thusly: “In my experience, sex of the individual is irrelevant after the initial tests of will and qualifications that come with joining any new team - the new guy or gal must prove that he/she is fit to lead and has got what it takes. Having said that, reverse discrimination sometime does come into play, as certain women feel threatened, expect preferential treatment and blame all mishaps and clashes on men "not being able to take direction" from a female colleague/boss. Basically, I feel that people of the right calibre (SHE-E-Os and HE-E-Os alike), who are worth their salt don't pay any mind to the issue of sex, as they are confident in their abilities and thus, successful. They weigh real achievements and results before deciding their position, whereas people who are emotionally fragile and insecure to begin with, look for excuses for their failure and of course, the easiest refuge is race sex or religion, i.e. personal bias. As long as women keep bringing the sex thing up it will continue being an overdramatized problem. As long as women keep bringing the sex-thing up it will continue being an overdramatized and overpatronized issue. One should take responsibility for their leadership skills and not blame the "tools”. Do you agree?