Leadership vs. Management: Keys to Effective Project Management

Introduction

The many requirements placed on project managers demand a unique skill set, all underscored by the ability to lead project teams and continually produce results from diverse groups of professionals. Project managers are highly skilled at managing often conflicting tasks and alleviating resource constraints, all aimed at ensuring project objectives are fulfilled. The synchronizing of efforts across an organization is the catalyst by which project managers define their role, and while leadership attributes are not required, those who possess them find their daily accomplishments far more significant. If a project manager can emerge as a leader, their effectiveness will increase substantially from one project to the next. The intent of this analysis is to present the differences between leadership and management and examine the attributes of high-performing project managers who have attained leadership standing in their organizations.

Defining the Differences Between Leadership and Management

The differences between leadership and management are substantial. The consensus among many leadership and management researchers and theorists is that each role requires significantly different skill sets, and that leadership is centered on invoking and sustaining worker commitment, even in times of uncertainty. Bennis (1999), one of the world's foremost experts on leadership, has remarked that management and leadership share many similarities, yet the most differentiating element he has observed is the character of the leader. Winston and Patterson (2006) offer the following definition of leadership based on their extensive research:

"A leader is one or more people who selects, equips, trains, and influences one or more followers who have diverse gifts, abilities, and skills and focuses those followers on the organization's mission and objectives, causing them to willingly and enthusiastically expend spiritual, emotional, and physical energy in a concerted, coordinated effort to achieve the organizational mission and objectives. The leader achieves this influence by humbly conveying a prophetic vision of the future in clear terms that resonates with the followers' beliefs and values in such a way that the followers can understand and interpret the future into present-time action steps."

Other theorists, including Dansey-Smith (2004), have succinctly remarked that leadership is more about who you are, while management is about what you do. Dansey-Smith clarifies the distinction by stating that all leaders must first be good managers. In her observations, she notes that management is more concerned with the execution of tasks, short-term orientations, and operations; it is highly transactional and task-driven, and is characterized by a high level of monitoring and controlling activity. All of these attributes make management more focused on supervising than on collaborating or developing subordinates. In contrast, the role of the leader is more focused on long-term strategies, with an emphasis on transformational growth through building alliances and relationships. Also central to leadership is the cultivation of creativity and innovation, and the developmental role of excellent leaders is clearly evidenced by the subordinates they mentor into leadership roles of their own.

The traditionally defined managerial functions of planning, organizing, leading, and controlling — promulgated in hundreds of textbooks and articles — are further substantiated by the research of Nebeker and Tatum (2002), who argue that the role of the manager is to delve into the underlying ecosystems needed to fulfill these four functional areas. Kotterman (2006) has noted that each of these managerial functions has grown more complex by significant orders of magnitude. As a result, he concludes, the role of the manager in measuring processes and product characteristics is beginning to eclipse that of the leader. Given the complexities in which many managers must operate, their skill sets are daily pushed to the limits of their leadership abilities. It is too simplistic to say that managers merely manage processes, people, and products toward a goal while leaders inspire. The differences are more complex and require greater taxonomic frameworks to define each role clearly. Based on the research reviewed for this paper, it appears that approaches relying on trait theories alone to distinguish leadership from management are inconclusive.

What many organizations do, however, is have subordinates complete surveys in which they rate their superior's managerial and leadership qualities relative to an ideal score. Using factor and discriminant analysis techniques to identify significant clustering of attitudes and perceptions, researchers find that subordinates typically judge their superiors' managerial versus leadership ability based on only a few of the many decisions made during any given period. Additionally, ratings may stem from just one or more salient situations, the supervisor's outward behavior, his or her personality traits, or some uniquely subjective combination, according to Lord (2000). Further, the research shows that managing and leading often overlap and conflict in these statistical analyses of attitudinal variables. As a result, the methodologies used to quantify the differences between managers and leaders are frequently not extrapolated to broader organizational applications.

As Gordon and Yukl (2004) have noted, there is a lack of research rigor on the part of practitioners, a lack of empirical rigor on the part of academics, and differences in research goals — all of which contribute to the multiple taxonomies mentioned earlier. Gordon and Yukl (2004) also observe that in defining the roles of manager versus leader, neither can fully exist without the other. While psychographic research of subordinates reveals a tendency to form quick judgments about a manager's character, integrity, honesty, and skill set, those with leadership-like qualities are seen as far more capable of articulating a vision that is meaningful to their organizations. This dichotomy of time horizons, span of control, and ability to motivate through a compelling vision — rather than relying solely on legitimate authority — is what differentiates leaders from managers. The degree to which they inspire versus demand is the degree to which they accomplish their goals.

Essential Attributes for Project Management Leaders

Based on the research regarding leadership, a set of attributes emerges that is essential for project managers who aspire to lead. First and foremost, the ability to communicate and empathize with others is critical for success in project management. Communication skills must encompass verbal, written, and — as a project manager's career advances — public speaking as well. The ability to communicate is by far the most valuable skill a project manager can possess. Included in this attribute are the abilities to be persuasive and empathetic. This aligns with the research of Bennis (1999) and Winston and Patterson (2006), who illustrate how critical it is for leaders to be transparent and trustworthy, and to be consistent in their judgment and actions.

Second, a sense of urgency is critical, in conjunction with the ability to stay focused for extended periods of time on a single task until it is completed. Too often, project managers possess a strong sense of urgency but lack the ability to concentrate long enough to complete the most critical tasks. Project managers are often viewed as the critical link between senior management and highly complex, mission-critical projects. To be effective leaders, they need a sense of urgency regarding strategically important aspects of a project — whether or not those aspects appear on a formal critical path. As a result, project managers who attain leadership standing are able to harness a strong sense of urgency while simultaneously focusing their own attention, and the attention, resources, and support of others, for intense, short periods of time to complete complex tasks that require tight coordination and synchronization.

Third, effective project management leaders possess a strong sense of what is strategic versus tactical, both within their own projects and in the broader culture of their organizations. This is a skill that higher-performing leaders in project management develop over time. Such leaders are able to navigate the cultural biases and, in many cases, the limitations of their organizations to identify the strategic importance and contribution of their projects. Project managers who lack this unique ability to sense the cultural framework and strategic significance of their projects often grow frustrated with how slowly organizational cultures change. It is common for corporate cultures to embrace an element of complacency, which makes the project manager's job all the more difficult. Keeping these cultural limitations in check while delivering a project is what makes leadership-oriented project managers so valuable.

Fourth, successful project management leaders possess a strong sense of ownership for the projects they manage, along with a personal investment of passion in those projects most critical to the organization. This sense of ownership and passion communicates clearly to everyone associated with a project that accountability rests with the project manager. There is also an element of transparency inherent in strong ownership and passion that makes these project managers easy to work with, enabling them to gain organizational support quickly.

Fifth, leadership in project management is also evident in a strong commitment to staying current with operations research, statistical methods, and ongoing initiatives in one's area of expertise. Leaders in project management who possess genuine interest in their field often contribute their expertise and thought leadership through written articles and industry presentations, sharing lessons learned in the process.

These five essential attributes are consistently evident in project management leaders. The catalyst of excellent project management performance is a passion for the field and a genuine interest in applying project management techniques to accomplish complex development programs.

References

Aguirre, Calderone, & Jones (2004). 10 Principles of Change Management. Resilience Report, Booz Allen Hamilton. New York, NY.

Alstyne, M. V., Brynjolfsson, E., & Madnick, S. (1997). The matrix of change: A tool for business process reengineering. MIT Sloan School Working Papers.

Bennis, W. (1999). The leadership advantage. Leader to Leader Journal, No. 12, Spring 1999.

Caudron, S. (1999). Taking charge of change. Business Finance Magazine, January 1999, p. 27.

Dansey-Smith, F. (2004). Why "soft" people skills are key to leadership development. Strategic HR Review, 3(3), 28–31.

Galpin, T. (1996). Connecting culture to organizational change. HR Magazine, March 1996, pp. 84–90.

Gordon, A., & Yukl, G. (2004). The future of leadership research: Challenges and opportunities. German Journal of Human Resource Research, 18, 359–365.

Jenkins, R., & Oliver, R. (1998). The eagle & the monk: Seven principles of successful change. United Publishers Group.

Kotterman, J. (2006). Leadership vs. management: What's the difference? The Journal for Quality and Participation, Summer 2006, pp. 13–17.

Lord, R. (2000). Thinking outside the box by looking inside the box: Extending the cognitive revolution in leadership theory. Leadership Quarterly, 11, 551–579.

Miles, R. E. (2007). Innovation and leadership values. California Management Review, 50(1), 192–201.

Nebeker, D. M., & Tatum, B. C. (2002). Understanding organizational processes and performance. In R. L. Lowman (Ed.), Journal of Organizational Consulting Psychology, 12.

Razmi, J., Jolai, F., & Hezarkhani, B. (2008). Designing collaborative roles and responsibilities in supply chain. International Journal of Management Practice, 3(1), 96.

Smith, H., Smarkusky, D., & Corrigall, E. (2008). Defining projects to integrate evolving team fundamentals and project management skills. Journal of Information Systems Education, 19(1), 99–110.

Winston, B. E., & Patterson, K. (2006). An integrative definition of leadership. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 1(2), 6–66.