Leader or manager of change?

I have come to the conclusion over time that most of the definitions of leadership and management are confusing, rather than helpful. Dependent on which text you read you find elements crossing over from one to another of the two concepts. When we talk about change particularly the crossover is more evident. Is this important or even relevant to change? Well in my opinion it is, because of the recurring nature of change, the fact that it is never done and dusted for any length of time, means that people can quickly tire of it and therefore, for me, they need leadership more than they need management. Ahh, you say.. but what do you mean by leadership? Well rather than create a long list of attributes, traits or actions of leaders, I thought I would cut to the chase and give you the single most important issue for me…. People.

Most change management texts are about the process of getting change implemented, the systems, the plans, the stages and the methodology. All of the above are important but not as critical as the people element of change. Leadership for me is about helping people through change.

Therefore the term is about people more than about processes and tasks and systems. Leaders inspire others to follow and others to do something themselves. Again this is about personal change. You can manage others quite clinically, without getting emotionally involved by following the book and doing as policy says. You cannot, at least in my experience, lead without getting emotionally involved in how people react, without taking it personally, without having a real stake in the outcomes at heart.

Now a quick google will reveal lists of the difference and similarity between leadership and management, but for a quick definition, look to leaders lead people through change, managers ensure processes are followed.

Who do you want in these turbulent times at the top of your organisation, a leader of people or a manager of processes?