Leaders and Managers
Warren Bennis, in his book, On Becoming a Leader, says, "I tend to think of the differences between leaders and managers as the differences between those who master the context and those who surrender to it." (p. 39) He goes on to say, "No leader sets out to be a leader. People set out to live their lives, expressing themselves fully. When that expression is of value, they become leaders." (p. 104) I would add that when people fail to meet the mark of a leader, to master the context, as Bennis describes, they become managers. Ouch! This is not a 'dis on managers, per se. People can be and are very effective managers and serve in many capacities as a supervisor, a lead or a group manager. That's not what I'm referring to. It's the attitude of manager, not the function that is the problem. Check out the attached file contrasting the differences between managing and leading. There is a huge difference and it is all in attitude, not function. Download Contrast of Managers and Leader
A leader without the discipline of a manager introduces more chaos than direction. However a manager without the capacity to positively influence others to take risks, challenge conventional thinking, to push the rules and not be satisfied with compliance is a person way too comfortable with keeping order rather than pushing the ministry envelope.
One of my favorite memories is the reaction of a dear friend and pastor whom I've had the privilege of coaching/mentoring. Early in our relationship I was talking about the distinctions between managing and leading ministry when a sobering thought coalesced in his mind. Like Macauley Caulkin in the movie, Home Alone, he put his hands on his cheeks and exclaimed, "Good grief, I'm a freaking manager."
Managing is not bad, it's just that left to itself the ministry is neat but has no future. Left to itself ministry management degrades to being merely a custodian of ritual.
What is the difference between the attitude of a spiritual leader and that of a ministry manager? As Bennis has pointed out and as I've illustrated in previous posts, it is about having a distinctive voice speaking a clear vision for the future. The voice of the manager speaks to what must be done. The voice of a leader speaks to what can be done. Leadership is about a passion for what could be rather than than a manager's intention to achieve planning mileposts and program goals. It is about leaders who have the courage and conviction to do the right things rather than simply to do things right. And finally, for the leader, it is truly about pushing the envelope; getting people to take risky stretches of faith and to get those who follow to begin to wonder, "what if." The manager does his or her job well when risk is minimized, not enhanced; when people complete their planning goals and mileposts and stay on track. Leaders do their job well when the discipline of managing chaos is present and from that base of stability future vision is implemented.
You may have gained a misimpression. It sounds like the worst thing you would want to be is a manager. That couldn't be further from the truth. Managing is the hygiene of ministry and organizational process. Without it there is chaos, conflict and wasted resources. Every effective leader MUST be a disciplined manager. Where the problem lies is in having an ATTITUDE of a manager while thinking and acting as if you are a leader. It is about attitude, not actions.
Question for Reflection When I feel I've been successful is it because I met my goals and the plans of the ministry (usually measured in "nickles and noggins"--money and attendance) or is it because lives have been changed for the better because of my influence and the efforts of my team?
Recent Comments