Between Vision and Execution: Leadership and Management Deconstructed

John Kotter clearly distinguishes between the concepts of management and leadership, emphasizing their unique roles in orchestrating organizational success.

According to Kotter, the leader stands as the lighthouse, lighting the way with a clear vision and direction, and instilling deep motivation in his people, drawing them into the excitement of taking on new challenges aligned with that direction. The leader, in essence, inspires, mobilizes, inspires dreams and takes his team to distant horizons. This vision implies skills such as eloquence, clear and concise communication, the ability to stand back and project the path ahead. It also presupposes a charismatic, inspiring and magnetic personality, in line with Abraham Zaleznik's distinction between leader and manager, based on their distinct personalities.

For Kotter, the manager embodies more of an action-oriented, hands-on role, responsible for defining objectives, planning, budgeting and implementing the actions needed to achieve the set direction.

According to Kotter, although the roles of manager and leader can be dissociated or embodied by one and the same person, an organization imperatively needs both functions to operate effectively.

Echoing Zaleznik's perspective on personality, the manager, unlike the leader, adapts to his environment like a chameleon, without inner struggle. In Kotter's framework, where manager and leader can be one and the same person, this vision can lead to paranoia, entangling the individual in an emotional and mental spiral.

This vision seems somewhat obsolete to me, given the changing roles of leaders and managers in the company and the expectations placed on them. In my arguments, I differentiate between leaders, whom I call "Top Leadership", and managers, or "Middle Managers".

While I subscribe to the separation between leadership and management proposed by Kotter, I also align myself with Zaleznik's approach, which highlights the personality of the players. I would, however, like to qualify and clarify each notion, while sharing my own perspective.

separation between Leader & manager

On the one hand, it's essential to distinguish between the leader and the manager. The path to management is not innate; you learn to become a manager. Those who aspire to this role, because they want to and because it corresponds to their values and not because it's the only way to progress within the company, will acquire certain skills and attitudes. If this person wishes to progress towards leadership, he or she will follow a separate path. In my view, the leader and the manager should occupy separate functions, as their requirements and roles differ.

However, I firmly believe that a person lacking innate qualities such as charisma, the ability to communicate clearly and to mobilize, will find it difficult to evolve into a leadership role.

Different expectations and demands

The leader's role is to build and share a vision, an inspiring storytelling, and a global strategy that clearly explains how to reach the destination described in the vision. The leader is the one who has several departments under his or her command, with different objectives, different types of business, different profiles and different challenges. His role as Leader is to be able to step back and identify the interconnections between the different businesses, in order to identify the common and departmental objectives that will enable them to reach their destination.

Throughout the exercise, it's also his role to dezoom the situation and ensure that the boat is heading in the right direction without deviating. When the leader realizes that the identified strategy is not quite the right one along the way, it is his or her responsibility to recognize this and adapt the trajectory, while informing the teams and explaining the ins and outs. This behavior implies an emotional maturity and self-assurance that are unshakeable, but necessary for a leader.

The manager's role is to provide a vision of the field, to give the leader a clearer perspective, so that he or she can make measured decisions that are consistent with the challenges in the field and their capacity in terms of resources (human, energy, organizational, technological, environmental, etc.). The manager's role is to participate at his or her own level in the construction of the global strategy, and to translate this strategy into concrete streams that enable the identification of common and individual objectives. It's a team effort, and not all tasks can be performed by a single person, each with his or her own mission and job.

Leader initiates the change and manager leads the change

Leaders identify the need for change and initiate it. They must use their charisma, communication skills and commitment to explain the need for change, and the impact it will have on the company's employees and customers. The manager's role is to be the real agent of change. This doesn't mean he or she is at ease with change; that depends on personality and background. Generally speaking, any change is experienced with varying degrees of difficulty, giving rise to natural resistance.

Managers are being asked to play an increasingly active role in change, while they themselves are experiencing the inner turmoil of change. The leader is aware of the change and knows more or less what the consequences will be, and is better prepared for the change he himself has initiated. But this is not the case for the Manager, who has the difficult role of becoming an active player and taking responsibility for driving change in the field, setting an example while at the same time having to deal with his own emotional rollercoaster of change.

So, the manager can't let himself be carried along by the flow. He doesn't just define objectives and execute them, he has a more complex role than we give him credit for.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the role of leader is a demanding one, requiring human qualities such as empathy, charisma and the ability to influence, which are not innate in everyone. But it would be a mistake to see the manager's role as simpler. The manager's role has become more complex, requiring self-knowledge and resilience in the face of change. With a little luck, and a lot of hard work, the manager can evolve into an exceptional leader.

References :

• "Le leadership : une question de fonction ou de personnalité" by Eric DELAVALLEE

• "John Kotter : Leadership & Change" by Mike CLAYTON