Managers or Leaders

I've been in both position, a manager and a leader. The former is always in a secular work environment and the latter in a church environment (you don't really hear a church leader being addressed as 'manager').
I'm not sure if we should differentiate the 2 so clearly, but this article does point out that it plays quite a different role. It suggests

• The manager administers; the leader innovates.
• The manager is a copy; the leader is an original.
• The manager maintains; the leader develops.
• The manager focuses on systems and structure; the leader focuses on people.
• The manager relies on control; the leader inspires trust.
• The manager accepts reality; the leader investigates it.
• The manager has a short-range view; the leader has a long-range perspective.
• The manager asks how and when; the leader asks what and why.
• The manager has his or her eye always on the bottom line; the leader has his or her eye on the horizon.
• The manager imitates; the leader originates.
• The manager accepts the status quo; the leader challenges it.
• The manager is the classic good soldier; the leader is his or her own person.
• The manager does things right; the leader does the right thing.

Furrther down, it states that both roles are complementary to one another.

• “Leadership and management are two distinctive and complementary systems of action…… Both are necessary for success in an increasingly complex and volatile business environment.”
• “Most U.S. corporations today are overmanaged and underled.”
• “Strong leadership with weak management is no better, and is sometimes actually worse, than the reverse.”
• “Management is about coping with complexity….. Without good management, complex enterprises tend to become chaotic… Good management brings a degree of order and consistency…."
• "Leadership, by contrast, is about coping with change…. More change always demands more leadership.”
• “Companies manage complexity by planning and budgeting, by organizing and staffing, and by controlling and problem solving. By contrast, leading an organization to constructive change involves setting a direction (developing a vision of the future and strategies to achieve the vision), aligning people, and motivating and inspiring them to keep moving in the right direction."

With this, I believe that it's really down to the situation or position that I'm put in. For example, I've been in church situation where I'm not expected to lead, but just to manage and some higher leadership doesn't really appreciate if I try to stir the boat too much because we are not in a season of change (yes, some may dispute this but every church culture is different). I've also tried to be a leader in a work environment but it's not always appropriate (based on my own experience) or appreciated by my bosses. On the other hand, at times, I'm expected to lead at work beside just managing the team. I need to stir my colleagues to a different course because where we are is just not working.

No matter how, I just prayed that God will give me the wisdom to handle the roles that He's entrusted me with. Doesn't matter if it's work or church. In fact, there shouldn't be a difference because it's people we are dealing with.

Personally, I will like to lead more than to manage because I like to develop people that I'm working with. This article makes me believe that if we are genuinely interested in the developement of people, people will want to follow you. Before I move to New Zealand, I remember saying my bye bye in ECF, that I'm so thankful because the church took the time and effort to build me up. No matter how many mistakes I made, they've just continued to correct and support, not giving up on me.

What about you, manager or leader?