The terms “management” and “leadership” have been used interchangeably, yet there are clear similarities and differences between them. Both terms suggest directing the activities of others. In one definition, managers do so by focusing on the organization and performance of tasks and by aiming at efficiency, while leaders engage others by inspiring a shared vision and effectiveness. Managerial work tends to be more transactional, emphasizing processes, coordination, and motivation, while leadership has an emotional appeal, is based on relationships with followers, and seeks to transform.
One traditional way of understanding differences between managers and leaders is that people manage things but leader, lead other people. More concretely, managers administrate and maintain the systems and processes by which work gets done. Their work includes planning, organizing, staffing, leading, directing, and controlling the activities of individuals, teams, or whole organizations for the purpose of accomplishing a goal. Basically, managers are results-oriented problem-solvers with responsibility for day-to-day functions who focus on the immediate, shorter-term needs of an organization.
In contrast, leaders take the long-term view and have responsibility for where a team or organization is heading and what it achieves. They challenge the status quo, make change happen, and work to develop the capabilities of people to contribute to achieving their shared goals. Additionally, leaders act as figureheads for their teams and organizations by representing their vision and values to outsiders. This definition of leadership may create a negative bias against managers as less noble or less important: “Leader” suggests a heroic figure, rallying people to unite under a common cause, while “manager” calls to mind less charismatic individuals who are focused solely on getting things done.
Management versus leadership. http://oer2go.org/mods/en-boundless/www.boundless.com/management/textbooks/boundless-management-textbook/leadership-9/defining-leadership-68/management-versus-leadership-338-3993/index.html Content and user contributions on this site are licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0 with attribution required.
To help distinguish between leadership and management, consider the following sets of terms associated with each category:
What is Leadership? Aaron Spencer and Lumen Learning.https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wm-principlesofmanagement/chapter/what-is-leadership/ License: CC BY: Attribution
Gender and the role it plays in management and leadership
Gender continues to play a role in workforce issues. Revolutions such as “Me Too” have offered women an avenue to speak up and out against injustices they face in the workplace. Aside from the looming and disturbing sexual assault parameters that “Me Too” is based on, this movement has granted women a larger, more unified voice to request equality in the workplace. The increased opportunities include, but are not limited to, the deterrence of wage differentials and receiving consideration for high-level positions based on their worth and not their gender.
Unfortunately, Gender roles continue to play a significant role in workplace positions, specifically when utilizing the differences between management and leadership. As outlined in the Cultivating Your Leadership Capabilities (2019, Ch. 2), the differences are that managers manage “things” while leaders lead people. These differences in management and leadership should apply to leaders regardless of their gender, but, according to historical context, the distinction is much more prevalent between male and female leaders and managers.
What’s it all about?
Throughout examining the role gender plays in the workplace, I have discovered that there is a distinction made in terms of characteristics of male versus female leaders. There is a type or “brand” put on each gender; that men are more rigid and agentic, while women are more communal and amiable (Carli, 2007, p. 66 para. 1). Using these characteristics, we can draw comparisons between the differences of management versus leadership. If these characteristics of gender roles in the workplace and differences in management and leadership align, we can then determine a causal connection as to why many women still fail to obtain equality in workplace statuses.
To understand fully the differences in observed characteristics between the genders, we can turn to Linda Carli and Alice Eagly’s research. In their article, the authors cite the differences between the genders by stating, “…the clash is between two sets of associations: communal and agentic” (Carli, 2007, p. 66, para. 1). Communal can be defined as one being based in a community, or more colloquially, a people person; someone everyone can turn to for answers. Agentic, on the other hand, can be defined as someone who is assertive, competitive, and attentive to the task at hand. Carli then goes on to explain, “Women are associated with communal qualities…being especially affectionate, helpful, friendly, kind, and sympathetic, as well as interpersonally soft-spoken, gentle, and sensitive. Men are associated with agentic qualities, which convey assertion and control” (Carli, 2007, p. 66, para. 1).
According to Spencer (2019), we can begin to base these distinctions in the characteristics of management or leadership by stating, “managers administrate and maintain the systems and processes by which work gets done…leaders take the long term view and have responsibility for where a team or organization is heading and what it achieves” (paras. 2 and 3). By using the definitions set in the paragraph above, we can draw parallels to the descriptions of management and leadership, and see the causal relationship each description brings in order to illuminate the differences between men and women in the workplace.
Is History the Enemy of Progression?
The distinctions between management and leadership can be experienced in most modern workplaces. We all have experiences where we can point to a certain supervisor and, using Spencer’s definition, determine whether or not they were more a manager or a leader. What is interesting about this is, we usually do not make those distinctions firmly on the gender of the supervisor. But, by utilizing intensive research, we are able to draw those parallels between management and leadership, based in gender.
Referring back to Linda Carli and Alice Eagly’s research, we can begin to understand the characteristics that lend themselves to a firm distinction between men and women in the workplace. Although we have discussed agentic characteristics as more rigid, unsympathetic, and “cold”, Carli and Eagly wrote, “the agentic traits are associated in most people’s minds with effective leadership – perhaps because a long history of male domination of leadership roles has made it difficult to separate the leader associations from the male associations” (Carli, 2007, p. 66, para. 1). According to Carli and Eagly, history of workplace norms can be blamed for the innate feeling most employees have towards male leaders; that they are effective because they are men. This gives women less “wiggle room” when vying for top tier positions. Carli and Eagly wrote, “Women find themselves in a double bind. If they are highly communal, they may be criticized for not being agentic enough. But if they are highly agentic, they may be criticized for lack of communion” (Carli, 2007, p. 66, para. 1).
Carole Elliot and Valerie Stead wrote, the “literature that does address gender and leadership specifically there has been a tendency to label leadership as either masculine or feminine in style” (Elliott & Stead, 2008, p. 163). Masculine and feminine leadership styles can be traced back to Carli’s interpretation (communal or agentic) but also connected to Spencer’s text about the differences in characteristics between management and leadership.
The history of men in leadership roles can be based in the patriarchal norms of society. Societally, men were expected to provide for families. This societal pressure to provide has allowed me to absorb both the communal and agentic tendencies for themselves, without leaving room for women to utilize either effectively in the workplace. Eric Arthrell wrote, in a report published by Deliotte Insights, that there are four themes that characterize men in the workplace; “It’s on me, I’m terrified, I can’t turn to anyone, and Show me it’s okay” (Arthrell, 2019, p. 10). These four themes help explain why men are thrust into an idea that they need to achieve leadership, or status in the workplace, in order to provide for their families. The theme of “I’m terrified” is particularly interesting because it is grounded in the historical idea laid out previously. In the report, it is explained that “men are afraid of failure, which leads them to overcompensate with hypercompetitive behavior to mask their insecurity and earn professional success” (Arthrell, 2019, p. 10). This innate insecurity stems from the “protector” and “provider” societal norms that were shaped early on in western civilization.
Knowing this historical and societal context, the differences between management and leadership as it relates to gender is prevalent in workplace equities. To reiterate the points made in Spencer’s (2019) article “managers are results-oriented problem-solvers with responsibility for day-to-day functions who focus on the immediate, shorter-term needs of an organization” (para. 2). Tying this to Carli’s (2007) work, we can deduce that managers most align with the agentic characteristics (i.e. directing, administering, result driven individuals). Leaders, as described by Spencer (2019), “take the long-term view and have responsibility for where a team or organization is heading and what it achieves. They challenge the status quo, make change happen, and work to develop the capabilities of people to contribute to achieving their shared goals” (para. 3). In alignment with Carli’s text, leaders can be described as more communal; focused on the health and strength of the team in order to ensure successful results.
According to Carrie Kerpen (2018), there was a simple reason why, in spite of being more aligned with the leader role, women were not considered to become leaders as frequently; she writes, “since men have been in charge of everything forever because they designed all the systems where people who were not men would contribute their labor either freely or for undervalued wages, its worked out really well for them to run everything” (Kerpen, 2018, para. 9). Utilizing Kerpen’s explanation, it is clearer to claim that Spencer’s (2019) highlights and Carli’s (2007) explanation of the characteristics of the modern workplace authority figure grant us insight into how gender can and does play a role in whether women or men are managers or leaders.
Time for much needed change
The research above shows that gender disparity in management and leadership will continue to exist due to historical context and stagnant organizational models. Kerpen’s statement that men control and created every institutional system in order to reap the benefits is disturbing yet historically accurate. Management and leadership, as defined through agentic and communal properties, can provide a rift between gender equalities in the workplace.
Throughout the research, I have made clear that the agentic qualities more aligned with the management, while communal qualities aligned with leadership. Those distinctions help explain that men are more agentic, and therefore managerial, which then prompts the response that women are more communal, and therefore more prone to leadership. It can even be argued that women would make even better leaders due to this distinction. But, as we have learned through historical context, the patriarchal societal norms constrict the growth in both gender equality and the foray into management and leadership. This explanation speaks to Eagly and Carli’s idea of a double bind that women face in the workplace (2007). Women who are more communal will not be considered strong leaders because of their “soft” persona or demeanor. Women who are more agentic are viewed as too harsh, and not communal enough. It is a struggle that continues in the modern workplace.
In order to fully understand why these distinctions have been made for so long, I turned to historical context to explain. Men have been considered the standard bearers in organizational management and leadership for so long now that society has come to expect men in leadership roles. There was never an opportunity for women to grow and climb in an organization because of the societal structures in place. Over time, the structures and parameters have slowly begun to break down, but we are still very far off from eliminating them completely. Until such a time, women will continue to have struggles in organizational structures.
Although I argue that this distinction between management and leadership, and men and women, is continuing to be a pervasive issue in the modern workplace, I am not ignorant to the fact that there are continued attempts to remedy gender inequalities across all workplaces. It is important to continue to aim towards gender equality in the workplace, especially when society has had these strict gender parameters for so long. There is much needed change that should happen, and as professionals, we need to continue to support the efforts to instill those changes.
Everything takes time, if we continue to make conscious efforts toward gender equality in the workplace, then our organizations will continue to grow and succeed and influence change in other organizations. History should not be the enemy of progression, but it can sometimes cloud the judgment of organizational leaders, allowing them to continue to operate as they always have. Breaking the mold is difficult, but, as mentioned, women are stepping up and fighting against these inequalities daily through movements such as “Me Too”. Change is good, changes to the norms of gender inequalities is even better.
Arthrell, Eric (April 2019). Status, Fear, and Solitude: Men and gender equality at the top. Retrieved August 12, 2019 from https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/topics/value-of-diversity-and-inclusion/male-perspective-on-gender-equality-and-leadership.html
Carli, Linda and Alice Eagly (2007), Women and the Labyrinth of Leadership. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved August 12, 2019 from https://learn.granite.edu/pluginfile.php/1828447/mod_resource/content/1/Women%20and%20the%20Labyrinth%20of%20leadership.pdf
Elliott, Carole and Valerie Stead (2008), Learning from Leading Women’s Experience: Towards a Sociological Understanding. SAGE Publications. Retrieved August 31, 2019 from https://learn.granite.edu/pluginfile.php/1828446/mod_resource/content/4/Learning%20from%20leading%20womens%20experience.pdf
Kerpen, Carrie (December 2018). How Will We Reach Gender Parity in Leadership? One Workplace at a Time. Retrieved August 12, 2019 from https://www.forbes.com/sites/carriekerpen/2018/12/11/we-need-more-women-in-charge/#64efc4123f52
Spencer, Aaron (2019). What is Leadership? Retrieved on August 31, 2019 from https://via.hypothes.is/https://granite.pressbooks.pub/ld820/chapter/2/#annotations:_7auYrFQEem7ycNn0CcHjg
Studies, G., & College, G. (2019). Cultivating Your Leadership Capabilities. Retrieved July 5, 2019 from https://via.hypothes.is/https://granite.pressbooks.pub/ld820/chapter/9/#annotations:kHP0yrtyEemlkvNgLYcxfg
Gender and the role it plays in management and leadership. By McKillop, D (2019) Content and user contributions on this site are licensed under : CC BY: Attribution with attribution required.