Managers and Leaders. Are they different?

[Analysis exercise conducted in the Leadership Module of the post-doctoral program in Integral Human Development. (CADOS, UCP).]

The following is a systematization and analysis of Abraham Zaleznik’s (1977) article. Zaleznik was an Emeritus Professor at Harvard Business School. In this article, the author examines the differences between managers and leaders based on a set of criteria.

From the outset, Zaleznik identifies a set of qualities that are “desired” in the best managers, such as resilience, persistence, intelligence, analytical thinking, and tolerance. However, it is not the managers who are responsible for fostering the passion and intelligence of workers. For this, leaders are necessary.

The first criterion of the author’s analysis is personality. Managers are recognized for a dominant managerial culture, where rationality and control are emphasized. Leadership, from this perspective, is merely a practical effort to guide tasks efficiently and responsibly.

On the other hand, Zaleznik attributes almost mystical beliefs to leaders, recognizing that leadership is attributed to a “brilliant” individual who must gain self-control as a prerequisite for leading others.

The second criterion of analysis, which also highlights differences in positioning, relates to attitudes towards goals. Managers tend to adopt an impersonal or even passive attitude towards goals. In this view, goals arise from needs, not desires. Consequently, managers are deeply rooted in the history and culture of their organization.

Leaders, however, adopt a personal and active attitude; they shape expectations and set desires and goals that will determine the organization’s direction. The net result of this influence changes how people think about what is desirable, possible, and necessary.

In terms of how each of these figures conceives work, there are also some distinctions. Managers tend to negotiate and balance different viewpoints, while leaders generally develop new approaches to problems, increasing the options available for their resolution. Moreover, leaders are often willing to take risks, depending on the opportunity that seems most promising. For managers, the survival instinct outweighs the need for risk.

The fourth point of reflection relates to relationships built within the work context. Managers prefer to work with people but maintain minimal emotional involvement and a low level of empathy. Leaders interact with others in a direct, intuitive, and empathetic manner.

The final point pertains to the sense of “self.” To this end, the author invokes the two types of personality that William James considered in the early 20th century: (i) once-born; (ii) twice-born. The former are those whose lives adjust simply, with more or less peaceful trajectories from birth. They tend to be more conservative and regulators of order. The latter are those whose lives are marked by continuous struggles for some sense of order. From this perspective, the author suggests that the manager tends to fit the ‘once-born’ profile, while the leader fits the ‘twice-born’ profile.

Attempting to transpose this analysis to the present day, particularly in the field of social intervention—and specifically that developed by Social Work—even though “being a leader” seems like a necessary and inspiring role for organizations, we witness the hegemony of management principles in this field. Indeed, risk assessment, goal setting, and the definition of indicators are used to regulate the professional’s power over their clients (Amaro, 2015; Dominelli, 2004). For all these reasons, this orientation diverges from the principles and values of Social Work, contributing to what Webb (2006) terms the “deprofessionalization” of practices.

References:

Amaro, M. I. (2015). Urgências e Emergências do Serviço Social: Fundamentos da profissão na contemporaneidade (2ª Edição). Lisboa: Unversidade Católica Editora.
Dominelli, L. (2004). Social work: theory and practice for a changing profession. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Webb, S. (2006). Social Work in a Risk Society – Social and political perspectives. Nova Iorque: Palgrave Macmillan.
Zaleznik, A. (1977). Managers and Leaders. Are they different? Harvard Business Review.

---

---