Management as a Liberal Art Research Institute

Leadership vs. Management: A False Dichotomy

Pooya Tabesh, Ph.D.

PUBLISHED:

April 8, 2022

A heated debate among some colleagues about the prominence of management or leadership in Peter Drucker’s writings pushed me to think about an important question that I have been struggling with for quite a long time: Do the differences between “managing” and “leading” mount up to a contradiction between them?


Later in another post, I will get to an in-depth analysis of Peter Drucker’s writings to shed a more definitive light on which one, management or leadership, has been at the center of attention for Peter Drucker. But in this post, I would like to write about what I refer to as the false management-leadership dichotomy in commentary about these topics. To this goal, I start by listing some of the alleged differences between leaders and managers noted by Warren Bennis (1987) in his famous book, On Becoming a Leader:


  • The manager does things right; the leader does the right thing
  • The manager accepts the status quo; the leader challenges it.
  • The manager administers; the leader innovates.
  • The manager maintains; the leader develops.
  • The manager focuses on systems and structure; the leader focuses on people. The manager relies on control; the leader inspires trust. The manager has a short-range view; the leader has a long-range perspective.
  • The manager asks how and when; the leader asks what and why.
  • The manager has an eye always on the bottom line; the leader has an eye on the horizon.


Looking at this list reminds me of the very many articles or blog posts I have read in which authors assumed an inherent contradiction between leadership and management roles. For example, in one of the chapters of the management textbook that I use for teaching principles of management, a manager is portrayed as a bureaucrat focused only on efficiency and short-term goals while the leader is glorified as a visionary architect of future goals and directions. The problem with a polarized conversation illustrated by this example, as well as the bullet points above, is that it creates a false dichotomy (e.g., either/or mentality) and implies superiority of one aspect over another.


I acknowledge the conceptual differences between these constructs of management and leadership, but I am bewildered by the false dichotomization of these concepts. In my opinion, contradicting the leadership and management roles is not productive and creates more harm than benefit to the public discourse about these important topics. Apart from the evident conceptual differences between the constructs of leadership and management, which understandably warrant scientific clarification, leadership and management should both be viewed as important skills greatly needed by those individuals in charge of any successful organization.


Instead of dramatizing the conceptual differences between “management” and “leadership” in the academic- or practitioner-based commentaries (i.e., either/or mentality), the focus should be on the integration of leadership skills in management (both/and mentality). Leadership skills form an important category of must-have skillsets for any manager. It is not imaginable for a good manager to only focus on efficiency or short-term goals while ignoring the purpose or long-term goals of her organization. Therefore, reducing management to efficiency/short-term view/control is not only unfair but misleading. A successful manager must be both efficient and effective. If management is “getting the work done through others,” leadership is an important function of successful management. A successful manager should have leadership skills to inspire and motivate others to achieve organizational goals.

By Karen Linkletter Ph.D. January 6, 2025
On December 13, 2024, we lost a seminal management philosopher and theorist: Charles Handy. Like Peter Drucker, Handy was a social thinker and management theorist who emphasized the human side of work as more important than profits and valued individual growth and development in organizations. Handy was born in Ireland and studied at Oxford. In 1956, he went to work for Shell, working in Borneo, where he met his future wife, Elizabeth Hill. Disillusioned by corporate life, Handy left Shell in 1962 to study management at MIT in their executive program. Inspired by their humanistic approach, he returned to London in 1967 to start the London Business School. Handy knew Drucker and was a regular keynote speaker at the Global Drucker Forum in Vienna. The two men had much in common in terms of their approaches to management and social theory. Like Drucker, Handy became an author (although, unlike Drucker, Handy was a corporate executive before he turned to writing). Handy wrote not just on business but also society, serving as much as a social ecologist as Drucker was. In his pivotal book, The Age of Unreason (1989), Handy argued for the disruption of discontinuity – resulting in a new world of business, education, and work that was highly unpredictable. He rejected shareholder capitalism and saw the organization as a place for human purpose and fulfillment, based on trust. Like Drucker, Handy advocated federalism in organizations, disseminating authority and responsibility to the lowest possible levels. He also saw “the future that had already happened.” Handy coined the term “portfolio life,” where knowledge workers would increasingly work remotely and for multiple organizations. In the 1980s, he posited that society consisted of “shamrock organizations”: those that had three integrated leaves: full-time employees, outside contractors, and temporary workers. Handy thus foresaw the new “gig economy” and increasingly autonomy of knowledge work. Finally, like Drucker, Handy had a life partner who not only supported his career but was an independent woman with her own interests. Liz Handy, like Doris Drucker, was an entrepreneur who ran an interior design business, and later was a professional photographer and Charles’s business agent.  Minglo Shao, founder of CIAM, remembers Handy as a warm man who made several important contributions to what we see as the fundamentals of Management as a Liberal Art. We are thankful for Handy’s contributions to management theory and social thought, and for his legacy at the Global Drucker Forum in the form of the Charles and Elizabeth Handy Lecture Series.
By Richard and Ilse Straub with the Drucker Forum Team December 29, 2024
For 15 years, Charles Handy did us the enormous honor of choosing the Drucker Forum as a privileged platform for delivering his message to the world, and particularly to the younger generation in which he had such faith. Following up on our initial announcement of Charles’ passing Charles Handy (1932–2024) , we are honored to share a selection of his key contributions to the Forum with our wider community. Charles’ brilliant keynotes at the Drucker Forum have become legendary. Normally accessible only to members of the Drucker Society, from today they are available as recordings to the wider public for a period of 30 days. At the first centennial Forum in 2009, Charles talked about his debt to Peter Drucker while outlining his own fundamental management concepts that he had developed over the years. Two years later, he touched on the ideas of Adam Smith and demonstrated how much more to them there was than the celebrated “invisible hand” of self-interest. In his landmark closing address in 2017, pursuing a thread developed in his 2015 book The Second Curve, he called for a management reformation that would turn it into a tool for the common good – thus drawing the first contours of what we would announce six years later as the Next Management . We took to heart his exhortation not to wait for great leaders but “to start small fires in the darkness, until they spread and the whole world is alight with a better vision of what we could do with our businesses”. Management’s "second curve" will be the focus of the “Charles and Elizabeth Handy Lecture Series” in 2025. Following the loss of his beloved wife Elizabeth in 2018 and a severe stroke, Charles was much reduced in mobility in his last years – but not in his determination to continue spreading his message of hope to the world. He couldn’t participate in person in the Drucker Forum 2022, but he participated in a moving online interview with his son Scott, who directed young actors in a short performance of Beckett’s Waiting for Godot by Beckett to illustrate some points.  Charles also contributed valued digital articles for our blog and for Drucker Forum partners. Even during the most difficult period of his life he continued to write and develop his ideas in weekly columns for the Idler magazine. This entailed first memorizing the article, then dictating it and finally reviewing it by having someone it re-read to him – a remarkable feat of memory and determination. The article is a jewel and most appropriate for Christmas and the season of self-reflection. Have a wonderful Christmas, happy holidays and a healthy and prosperous New Year.
By Karen Linkletter Ph.D. November 19, 2024
Interview with Karen Linkletter at the 16th Global Peter Drucker Forum 2024  Video Interview
Show More
Share by: