Leaders in Name Only

I haven’t written about this topic in a while but it remains timely. Sadly, I’m afraid it will always be a timely topic because there will always be individuals who occupy positions of leadership with no clue as to what actual leadership looks like. 

They are managers who may or may not even be attempting to lead. So, before we go any further let me say loud and clear, with no doubt whatsoever, that managers and effective management are vital to any organization that hopes to grow or even survive in these times. 

However managers and management are vastly different than leaders and leadership. Both are essential for long-term success. The challenge for many managers and management teams is that they make the mistake of thinking that what they are doing is leading. It is often not. 

Sometimes, hopefully most of the time, good managers are good leaders and good leaders are good managers. Being effective at both requires that you understand the difference between the two. 

Managing and management is about a whole host of things. THINGS, as in inanimate objects and stuff. You manage things like property, inventory, buildings, plans, and budgets. If “it” can’t think for itself and is incapable of becoming emotional when you yell at it (a copier comes to mind) then you manage it. 

Leading and leadership is about people. Only people. All people. You lead people. You don’t even lead a company, organization, or team. You lead the people who make up that company, organization, or team. 

No, I’m not splitting hairs here. The difference in mindset between someone attempting to manage people and someone actually leading people is huge. Attempting to manage another human being as if they were an inanimate object is the cause of the vast majority of personnel problems within organizations. 

I’ve known very few managers who thought they were treating their people as inanimate objects. But how the manager feels they are treating their people is of little importance. How the people feel they are being treated will determine whether or not they have a chance to reach their full potential. If you’re not interested in helping people achieve their full potential that’s a sure sign you’re a leader in name only. 

Most people don’t read the owners manual that comes with the “stuff” they buy. That’s kinda how a manager attempts to lead people. “Seen one ya seen ‘em all” is a manager mindset. They manage all their buildings the same and they manage all their people the same too. 

Leaders read the owners manual for everyone of the people they lead. They know that every single person they lead is a unique individual with their own set of goals, objectives, hopes, dreams and yes, problems. 

They get to know their people because they care for them as people. They want them to succeed, they want them to grow. They know that their own success as a leader is completely dependent upon the success of their people. 

So while the manager may “spend time on” their people the leader “invests time with” their people. The difference in how people respond is like night and day. 

We could go on and on about the differences between managing and leader but I’ll spare you for now. Let me however leave you with a couple of questions to consider. First, do you understand, really understand the difference between the two? What would your people say if I asked them? 

The second question is key because when it comes to leading an Authentic Leader knows it is the followers who make the leader. If your people don’t see you as a leader then you have some work to do cause if you’re not leading they aren’t following. No matter what you tell yourself. 

People, Expense or Investment?

There are two distinct mindsets in business today with regards to the people who make up an organization. One mindset, the one I’ll call a managerial mindset says that people are an expense. The other mindset, the one I’ll call a leadership mindset says that people are an investment. 

The difference between those two mindsets is huge!

Let’s say you’re currently occupying a leadership position and you have a team member who isn’t quite getting the job done. If you think to yourself you’re going to have to “spend time on” that person to get them up to speed then you likely have a managerial mindset.

On the other hand let’s say you see that same person. If you think to yourself I’m going to “invest time with” that person to help get them achieve their potential then you have a leadership mindset. 

Your mindset will affect every single interaction you have with your people. 

That’s because we almost instinctively manage expenses. The thought “spend time on” indicates you see people as an expense. Even if only subconsciously. Your people will pick up on that mindset and respond accordingly. They will act as an expense, someone merely hired to be a cog in the wheel. They will resist being the asset that they could be, even if only subconsciously. 

If you see your people as an expense then you will try to manage them. That will cause YOU enormous issues. Do you understand what that means? It means if you have personnel issues then your mindset towards your people is likely the biggest cause.  

When you have a leadership mindset your thoughts regarding people tend to be much more on the “invest time with” side. You realize people can’t be managed, they must be led. That mindset helps you to care about your people. You realize that your success as a leader is completely dependent upon the success of your people. 

Your people will pick up on that mindset and respond accordingly. They will see themselves as someone who brings value to the organization. They will understand that what they do matters and they will commit to do it to the best of their ability. They will give a 100% effort because they know you are committed to them and they will respond with a commitment of their own. 

There are no documented instances of organizations that saw their people as an expense succeeding long term. There are however well documented instances of companies that were in business a long time “adapting” their thinking to one of “people are an expense.” Their demise soon followed. 

By the way, if you’re wondering why a company would suddenly change to a “people are an expense” philosophy I have a one word explanation for you. Consultant! Actually that’s not fair, most consultants are firmly on the “people are an investment” side. It’s the big consulting firms who promote the “people are an expense” concept. They encourage companies to save money by cutting people expenses. They also encourage you to pay them a substantial percentage of that “savings.” 

If you’re in a leadership position then you should know that your first investment must be in your people. New people, young people, experienced people are all worthy investments. Those investments provide a near guaranteed ROI for your organization. 

If your plan to make money includes cutting expenses by cutting people then you should know that’s very short term thinking. You should also know that short term thinking never leads to long term success.

No One “Needs” to be Micromanaged

I put a tweet out a couple of weeks ago that said something about the dangers of micromanaging. Almost immediately I received a response that said some people “needed” to be micromanaged. They were incapable of thinking or doing anything on their own. Some people they said wanted to be micromanaged so they didn’t have to think for themselves. They said thinking was too tiring for some people.

No. No. No. That’s wrong on every count.

There are 2 reasons why someone micromanages their people.

Sometimes they have so much passion for their business or organization that they want to be involved in everything. It’s still not good but I can cut those micromanagers a little slack because at least their intentions are good if not their methods.

The second reason is really multiple reasons in one. They don’t trust their people. They have knowingly or unknowingly put people into positions where they can’t succeed. They have convinced themselves that their people can’t think for themselves. They are know-it-alls. They think their people are lazy. They don’t like their people, or perhaps they don’t like people in general.

To sum all that up…they are exceptionally poor leaders.

You do not grow people by micromanaging them. If you are not growing your people you’ll find it very difficult to grow your business.

As someone in a leadership position your number one responsibility is growing and developing your people. You don’t do that by micromanaging them. You can’t even do it by managing them. If fact, most every “people problem” you think you have is likely a direct result of trying to manage them rather than lead them.

Micromanaging someone is like managing them on steroids. You hurt them, you hurt yourself and you hurt your organization.

No one needs to be micromanaged. No one wants to be micromanaged. No one benefits from being micromanaged.

Those are the facts. If you choose to dispute them you may hold a leadership position but I’m sorry to say that it’s almost certain that you are not a leader.

Managing vs Leading – Part Eight

Managing things is a critical function for any business or organization. It is equally critical for all managers and leaders within any business or organization to understand that they do in fact manage “things” but that the people of that business or organization require leadership.

Some of the things that need managing are capital equipment like copiers and computers. Vehicles, buildings, forklifts, and other similar types of equipment are typical of the type of things that get managed. Part of managing those things is putting them on a depreciation schedule for tax purposes. Each year a business or organization owns those “things” they are worth less. They depreciate in value.

No manager, no matter how bad at managing they may be, can cause the value of a human being as a person to depreciate. They can however cause the productivity and commitment level of that human being to depreciate rather quickly. All they need to do is attempt to manage that person as if they were a “thing” instead of leading them as if they are a person.

We have talked a lot in this series about the difference between managing and leading but here is the bottom line. If you’re in a leadership position and you’re attempting to manage your people as if they are co-equals with your “things” then you are creating the vast majority of the issues that you would describe as “personnel issues.”

Many people in leadership positions would say they have people reporting to them who have poor attitudes. They claim to have people who are often tardy and when they finally show up for work they are disengaged. Leaders in name only complain about low productivity people and people who show no initiative. The list of problems and complaints go on and on.

What these leaders in name only fail to understand is that the root cause of nearly 100% of these problems point directly to them. If you’re in a leadership position and you’re trying to manage your people instead of leading them then YOU are almost certainly the cause of every “people problem” you’re complaining about.

I know that isn’t easy to hear but it is a reality you must come to grips with if you’re ever going to become an Authentic Leader.

The good news is that you don’t need better people. There are no better people in the world than the ones you have now. If you think they need to change then you need to change.

You need to change from a person who merely occupies a position of leadership to an Authentic Leader. You need to treat your people like the emotional human beings they are. You need to tap into their hopes. You need to tap into their dreams. You need to tap into their natural enthusiasm. You need to tap into their goals, their needs and their good ideas.

If you don’t see those things in the people you have in your organization today then I’ll guarantee you that you’re trying to manage them instead of investing the time required to authentically lead them.

The fastest way to change anything is to change how you look at it. Do not look at your people as “human assets” or “Human Resources” or for heavens sake, things. See them as the special human beings that they are. Then treat them that way. Lead them!

Before you know it all those “people problems” will fade away. You’ll be tempted to think that your people have all changed but what they have become was always there. It’s is you who will have changed.

You’ll have changed from a person who merely occupies a position of leadership to someone who actually leads. You’ll have made a difference in the lives of your people and you’ll never attempt to manage your people again.

This is the final installment of the Managing vs Leading series. I hope you will take it to heart. The world has plenty of insightful and incredibly effective managers. What the world needs is more Authentic Leaders. Many many more.

Can you be one of those who decide to make a difference? You can if you make the decision to Lead Today. I hope you will!

Managing vs Leading – Part Seven

People in leadership positions who attempt to manage their people use their head to get good things done. They expect their people to use their head as well. They are more manager than leader.

People in leadership positions who actually lead use their head and their heart to encourage their people to accomplish great things. They are as concerned with their people’s heart as much as their heads. They are more leader than manager but they are often excellent managers as well. However, they do not manage their people, they lead them.

People in leadership positions who attempt to manage people are so focused on what needs to get done that they forget it is people, real life human beings, who will get that work done. That causes them to often treat their people as something rather than someone.

Leaders lead. The need neither a leadership position or title to do it. Their first priority is the people who will do the work, not the work itself. They invest the time required to understand how their people think and why they think that way. They know their hopes, their challenges and their goals.

They help them in any area they possibly can. They will compassionately confront them when that is what is needed for them to succeed. They coach them. They mentor them. They care for them.

They do not tell them what to do, they show them. They model successful behavior. They hold their people to high standards and hold themselves to even higher standards.

Leaders who lead earn the commitment of their people. That commitment leads to increased productivity and extraordinary results.

People have hearts and it’s those hearts that truly need leadership. If you’re in a leadership position and you’re not leading your people then don’t expect them to put their hearts into their work. They may indeed use their heads to do good things but greatness will elude them. It will almost certainly elude you as well.

Managing vs Leading – Part Six

There are several key differences between people who hold leadership positions and people who actually lead. As I’ve said frequently in this series people who hold leadership positions often attempt to manage their people. Leaders, whether they hold a leadership position or not, actually lead people.

Leaders who lead develop a Followership. Leaders who attempt to manage people hope to create subordinates. The difference is huge.

Subordinates comply with the demands, directives and requests of the boss. Sometimes they comply willingly and sometimes not. Sometimes they flat out resist the directives. In worse case scenarios they work against their boss and become a cancer to the entire organization. They frequently draw other team members into their sea of discontent.

At best a person in a position of leadership who attempts to manage their people can expect a mediocre level of performance. The development of their people is stunted and their potential is limited. Over time their people become disengaged. Even otherwise excellent people do not give the effort required for long-term success when they are managed.

When a leader leads they first work to create strong followers. Then they raise the bar to turn those followers into future leaders. People who are led don’t see the requests of their leaders as demands or directives. They do not comply with the requests because compliance isn’t needed. They are committed to the leader and they do whatever it takes to make certain they do not disappoint them.

Their level of work is frequently, almost always in fact, superior to managed people. They work with their leader to ensure all requirements for successful outcomes are met. People who are led instead of managed have a positive impact on the team by displaying both a more positive attitude and impressive work habits.

Leaders who lead help their people grow. Their people develop far faster than managed people. They also have a very good shot at reaching their full potential.

If you’re a person in a position of leadership who is attempting to manage your people you’re not going to like this next sentence. If you’re attempting to manage people then you’re causing an overwhelming percentage of the problems you would describe as personnel issues.

Subordinates will seldom help you grow as an organization because you’re not helping them grow as people. It may look as if leading people is harder than managing them and in fact it is…but only in the short term. In the long term the only way to eliminate personnel issues is to realize that your personnel are people. That is forgotten by far too many managers who occupy leadership positions. When you help your people grow, the rewards, both tangible and intangible far outweigh the extra effort required to truly lead.

People resist feeling managed. They respond to feeling led. Are the people you’re responsible for developing resisting you or responding to you?

The answer to that single question may hold the key to your future success and the success of your organization.

Managing vs Leading – Part Five

Solid management is essential for any organization with a desire for stability. Authentic Leadership is even more essential for any organization hoping to grow.

That’s one of the key differences between managing and leading. You can manage an organization to stay the course. You can hold it steady with basic management principles and hope your competitors are satisfied with only managing their organization too.

But if you want to grow your organization or stay ahead of your competition then you’re going to need to lead the people who make up your organization.

Managing is all about the policies and procedures of today. Leading is about the vision and strategies of tomorrow. Policies and procedures matter. They provide the stability that organizations need to accomplish day-to-day tasks. Without those policies and procedures chaos ensues and productivity stops. That’s why great management is every bit as vital as great leadership.

Leaders are responsible to shape, share and sell their vision to the people they lead. Asking someone to follow you and then not giving them any idea of where they are following you to does not work. A leader’s vision should provide a guidepost for decision making. When faced with a decision ask if whatever you’re deciding will move you in the direction of your vision. If the answer is no then your decision is made.

Leaders also determine the strategies used to achieve the goals required to make the vision a reality. The management team will implement the tactics required to achieve the goals but absent those goals there are no tactics that will result in long-term success. That’s why great leadership is every bit as vital as great management.

Now I need to ask the obvious question. Do the people you are supposed to be leading know where you’re going? Have you shared your vision with them and showed them where they fit in the vision? Do you even have a vision? Does that vision include the people who are responsible for the day-to day success of your organization?

If your answers are anything other than a very strong YES then you may be doing far more managing than leading. If that’s the case you’ve just discovered why your organization is struggling to grow.

Provide at least the same level of leadership as you do management and you’ll quickly notice the difference in your people, their productivity and the strength of your entire organization.