To me it seems as if there is a lot of idealizing (moralising) attached to concept of Leader and leadership (see below for an example). If so, this is quite far from "technical definitions".
Kind regards
<st1:personname productid="Poul Poder," w:st="on"><st1:personname w:st="on">Poul Poder</st1:personname>,</st1:personname> Associate Professor, Sociology Department, <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Copenhagen</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype></st1:place>
I use the following anonymous quote in my lecture on leadership.
The boss drives employees;
The leader coaches them.
The boss depends upon authority;
The leader on good will.
The boss inspires fear;
The leader inspires enthusiasm.
The boss says "I";
The leader says "we".
The boss fixes the blame for the breakdown;
The leader fixes the-breakdown.
The boss knows how it is done;
The leader shows how.
The boss says, "go";
The leader says, "let's go''!
Dundar Kocaoglu
===========================================================
Dundar F. Kocaoglu, PhD; Fellow, IEEE
Professor and Chairman, Department of Engineering and Technology Management
and President and CEO, PICMET
<st1:placename w:st="on">Portland</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">State</st1:placetype> <st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype>, <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Portland</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">Oregon</st1:state>, <st1:postalcode w:st="on">97207-0751</st1:postalcode>, <st1:country-region w:st="on">USA</st1:country-region></st1:place>
+1 503-725-4660 - office
+1 503-725-4667 – fax
http://www.etm.pdx.edu/ and http://www.picmet.org/
============================================================
George,
I think a lot of this disconnect has to do with alignment.
As a leader, I see what needs to be done and allow my followers the freedom to accomplish the task. As a manager, I see what needs to be done, and then tell my employees how it needs to be done.
As a follower, I see what needs to be done and take the initiative to accomplish it. As an employee, I am waiting for direction before proceeding.
When a leader has employees, he/she may be forced to act as a manager to get his/her employees to act. When manager has followers, he/she may force them to act as employees to satisfy the control within the process.
Then again, that's just how I see it :0)
Rodger Adair
Project Director, Office of Institutional Quality
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Phoenix</st1:placename></st1:place>
Central Administraion | <st1:street w:st="on"><st1:address w:st="on">4605 East Elwood Street</st1:address></st1:street> | 7th Floor, MS AA-T710 | <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Phoenix</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">Arizona</st1:state>, <st1:postalcode w:st="on">85040</st1:postalcode></st1:place>
direct 602.557.7035 | fax 602.557.1854
email rodger.adair@phoenix.edu
Dear Colleagues,
If leading in an organization requires that a follower volunteer to be influenced without any mediated reward or punishment, what do we call a person in charge of others who does not do this? Perhaps, an administrator of human resources? The field of team leadership continues to be thwarted by the inaccurate use of the term leader to describe those in charge of a business unit containing employees. Clearly, employees conform to employment contracts, and followers conform to psychological alliances. Moreover, administrators control and command subordinate employees, and leaders influence volunteer followers. Why is this distinction so hard to keep straight in the field of team leadership? What do you think?
Cheers,
George Graen
/jag
This message is private and confidential. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and remove it from your system.