November 1996 - Management vs. Leadership

November, 1996 - Management vs. Leadership

Managers and Leaders - Comparison of traits

Executive Sponsorship - Tips for Successful IT Projects

Management Styles - personality affects management/leadership styles (w/cartoon graphics)

Resources on the Internet

Printer friendly page

Management vs. Leadership

The differences between Managers and Leaders are often subtle. The "best" learn to use management skills when appropriate and leadership skills when appropriate. Management skills are not limited to people with job title of "managers" nor are leadership skills limited to people with job title of "leaders." And, some portion of people who do carry those titles, do not have the skills implied by the title. Readers of the Dilbert comic series are very familiar with his poking fun at managers and corporate culture.

Many people in everyday circumstances use management skills, leadership skills or a combination of both. Learning the differences and how to use the skills appropriately is an art, as noted by Craig Hickman in his book Mind of a Manager, Soul of a Leader.

Managers and Leaders - Comparison of Traits

Definition:
Managers . . .	Leaders . . .
are analytical, structured, controlled, deliberate and orderly	are experimental, visionary, flexible, unfettered and creative
Primary Problem-Solving Method:
Managers . . .	Leaders . . .
use the power of the logical mind	use the power of intuition
Competitive Strategy/Advantage Focus:
Managers . . .	Leaders . . .
Concentrate on Strategy	Nurture Culture
Consider Dangers	Sense Opportunity
Follow Versions	Pursue Visions
Isolate	Correlate
Determine Scope of Problems	Search for Alternative Solutions
Seek Markets	Serve People
Think Rivals / Competition	Think Partners / Cooperation
Design Incremental Strategies	Lay Out Sweeping Strategies
Correct Strategic Weaknesses	Build on Strategic Strengths
*Organizational Culture/Capability:*
Managers . . .	Leaders . . .
Wield Authority	Apply Influence
Seek Uniformity	Pursue Unity
Administer Programs	Develop People
Formulate Policy	Set Examples
Instruct	Inspire
Manage by Goals / Objectives	Manage by Interaction
Control	Empower
Easily Release Employees	Would Rather Enhance Employees
Employ Consistency	Elicit Creativity
*External/Internal Change:*
Managers . . .	Leaders . . .
Yearn for Stability	Thrive on Crisis
Duplicate	Originate
Fasten Things Down	Unfasten Them
Drive Toward Compromise	Work to Polarize
See Complexity	See Simplicity
React	Proactive
Plan	Experiment
Reorganize	Redevelop
Refine	Revolutionize
*Individual Effectiveness Style:*
Managers . . .	Leaders . . .
Ask How (Seek Methods)	Wonder Why (Seek Motives)
Think Logically	Think Laterally
Perpetuate Hierarchies	Strive for Equality
Are Skeptical	Are Optimistic
Plan Around	Confront
Take Charge	Encourage Delegation
Like Formality	Prefer Informality
Venerate Science	Revere Art
Perform Duties	Pursue Dreams
Bottom-Line Performance/Results:
Managers . . .	Leaders . . .
Scrutinize Performance	Search for Potential
Are Dependent	Are Independent
Compensate People	Satisfy Them
Conserve Assets	Risk Them
Pursue the Tangible	Seek the Intangible
Inhabit the Present	Reside in the Future
Concentrate on Short-term Results	Seek Long-term Results
Want Good	Demand Better
*Examples:*
Managers . . .	Leaders . . .
Henry Ford, Ford Motor Company	Ray Kroc, McDonald's
Harold Geneen, ITT	Walt Disney, Disney Studios
John Akers, IBM	Ross Perot, EDS and Perot Systems
Tom Landry, Dallas Cowboys	Ted Turner, Turner Broadcasting
Charles Knight, Emerson Electric	Steven Jobs, Apple Computer
George Bush, President of the U.S.	Bill Clinton, President of the U.S.

[ adapted from Mind of a Manager, Soul of a Leader by Craig Hickman, John Wiley & Sons ]

Executive Sponsorship and Business Process Re-engineering

Business Process Re-engineering is a hot topic in large companies today. Every list of "keys for success" advises "have an executive sponsor." What is often missing are instructions to the executive who find themselves in that role. Many project sponsors are unprepared it assume the role of Executive Sponsorship of a critical project. And, since they are "expected" to know what to do, they rarely ask for clarification.

As the Information Technology industry tries to keep up with Business Re-Engineering and the extremely high pace of technology integration into the fabric of our society, the pressure grows to bring in projects on-time and within budget - an almost impossible expectation, given the track record of most IT projects.

This article provides some tips for those IT folks to use as starting point in discussion with potential executive sponsors.

[Following is an excerpt from an article to be published in 1997 in Methods & Tools (the global newsletter for information systems development professionals), published by Martinig & Associates, Switzerland.]

How to Sponsor a Successful Project

Understand what makes projects succeed or fail (see Project Success Factors)
Know the danger signs of troubled projects
Appoint experienced project managers and team members, and keep them motivated
Use outside consultants to supplement internal staff
Enforce the ground rules of good project management
Provide leadership, guidance and support to the team
Help the team manage expectations
Conduct regular, productive committee meetings
Hold people responsible and accountable
Don't micro-manage the project
Stay out of the way most of the time
Know when to step in
Know when to ask for help
Don't accept guesses � make sure the facts support all project adjustments
Identify and solve small problems as they surface
Understand the dynamics of your organization's culture
Use your political clout, if necessary
Be the project's champion
Reward success
Set a good example

Project Success Factors:

There is massive research on what makes projects succeed and fail. Why then do projects continue to fail at alarming rates? Only 16 % of IS projects were completed on time and within budget, according to a 1995 Computerworld report. Obviously, there are a few folks who are not reading the research or have missed a few tips along the way.

Some projects start out doing all the right things, then get in trouble. Others simply meander along without any clear direction - "guided" by people hoping that things will somehow fix themselves. Leading projects run like a well-oiled machine - arriving on target, within budget and meeting user expectations.

What makes one project succeed ahead of schedule where another fails miserably?

Known success factors:

A project manager with comparable experience in large-scale endeavors
An experienced core team supplemented by outside experts
A well-defined project plan
A rigorous quality assurance process
Open, honest communications
A process for keeping the team energized and motivated
A committed executive sponsor with the time and energy to be the project champion.

Red Flags:

A key responsibility of the executive sponsor is to provide high-level guidance to the implementation team and to be the project's champion within the organization. The sponsor must be constantly encouraging the team, yet watching for potential bumps in the road that might de-rail a project.

Factors that lead to project failure:

Incomplete requirements
Lack of user involvement
Lack of resources
Unrealistic expectations
Lack of executive support
Changing requirements and specifications
Lack of planning.

Indicators of a high-risk project:

The project is the largest ever taken by an organization
The project is highly integrated (that is, interlocking systems depend on each other in order to function)
The software is new (or relatively new) and has not yet been proven in the market
The software needs additional modification to meet your organization's needs
The project uses leading edge technology (affectionately known as bleeding edge)
The project is out-sourced to consultants who are inexperienced with a project of comparable size and/or unfamiliar with your industry
Internal technical staff, key users and/or project manager have not successfully implemented a project of comparable size or complexity.

If any of the high-risk factors exist, the project starts with a considerable handicap. Obviously, projects with multiple high-risk factors have a higher handicap. The executive sponsor may have to supplement the project team (both technical staff and users) with experienced people - whether outside consultants or others in the organization - who have been through a major project similar in scope to the new project.

A key red flag: individual egos getting in the way of good teamwork. If this happens, the project may have to be stopped until either changes are made or sufficient training is done to insure that people can work together as a team. The most elegant hardware and sophisticated system cannot overcome people's resistance to accept the finished product.

Relationship of personality to management style

There are definite relationships between a person's basic personality and management style.

People�oriented people tend to have more team-oriented management styles.

Things-oriented people tend to have more process-oriented management styles.

Idea-oriented people tend to have more innovation-oriented management styles.

In a healthy company, it is important to have a mixture of people with different talents and skills. The challenge is finding ways for different people to work together while understanding and appreciating the uniqueness each person brings. Accountants may not understand marketing people, but without marketing there would be no need for accountants, so they must find ways to work together. Corporate training in 'team-building' exercises provides the ability for people to learn about themselves, and about others who have different personality or working styles.

The collective fabric of personality and management styles envelopes the corporate culture, interweaving with values, beliefs and ethics. (for more detail on this topic, see the June 1998 newsletter topic).

Understanding through archetypes and humor

Another fun way to characterize management/personality style:

Attenuator:

Overview: Someone who does not like conflict or trouble; indecisive and rarely takes risks.

Psychological needs: Need for Safety or Security.

Motivation: Fear of loss, minimize risk.

Participator:

Overview Someone who needs people; joiners, team players, dependent, followers, compromisers and must satisfy the people around them.

Psychological needs: Need for social contact; need to belong.

Motivation: Desire for immediate material benefits, recognition and acceptance.

Director:

Overview: Aggressive, must win, generally intolerant, strong ego; usually a leader; insensitive and does not like to share credit.

Psychological needs: Need for high self-esteem or ego.

Motivation: Desire for challenge, change and the opportunity to prove oneself.

Attainer:

Overview: Confident; short range, goal-oriented; independent, task-oriented, analytical, likes data.

Psychological needs: Need to be correct.

Motivation: Challenge and contribution to the team.

Adapter:

Overview: Strategist; opportunistic, persuasive, likes to influence people; oriented toward long range goals; sees the big picture; impatient with details; perceptive and reads other people well.

Psychological needs: Need for self-actualization.

Motivation: Personal satisfaction, contribution to society, maximum opportunity.

Source: System of personality/management styles developed by Dr. Michael Anthony