Fallacies of bumper sticker logic

Introducing the expression “managers are people who do things right, and leaders are people who do the right thing,” Bennis and Nanus (1985) argued that an individual cannot be both a leader and a manager because leaders and managers have fundamentally different values and personalities. This encapsulated the classic distinction that implies that leaders are inherently good, while managers are essentially cold-hearted (Zaleznik, 1977). This perspective sees the manager as stable, orderly, efficient, impersonal, risk-averse, and short-term focused. In comparison, leaders are flexible, innovative, adaptive, caring, and long-term focused.

Although scholars and professionals quote Bennis and Nanus's (1985) definition beyond the point of cliché, it is bumper-sticker logic with severe limitations, summarized below.

No research support

First, empirical research has failed to support the mutual exclusivity of leadership and management (Yukl, 2010).

Interdependency

Second, the perspective demonstrates ignorance of contemporary management writings, which almost universally consider leadership as one of the fundamental functions of management, along with planning, organizing, and controlling (Bateman & Snell, 2007; Nickles, McHugh, & McHugh, 2010). In other words, contemporary management literature presents leadership as a fundamental management function—not as a mutually exclusive concept. Meanwhile, leadership literature is also starting to recognize the importance of effective management as a component of effective leadership (Yukl, 2010).

Stereotyping

Third, Yukl (2010) asserted that Benis and Nanus presented “extreme stereotypes” (p. 7) that denigrate managers by implying that they are calculating and unethical fiends who cannot do the right thing. The same stereotype approach elevates leaders as effective, saintly beings who cannot do things right.

Logical flaws

Fourth, reversing the Bennis and Nanus logic exposes a fundamental flaw in their argument. If “managers are people who do things right and leaders are people who do the right thing,” then it follows that managers are people who cannot do the right thing. In contrast, leaders are people who cannot do things right [See Table 1: Interpretation of the Bennis and Nanus stereotype of leaders and managers]. Similarly, if leaders are people who do the right thing, and Hitler was a leader to the German people, then, according to Bennis and Nanus' reasoning, Hitler did the right thing.

Granted, some contemporary scholars hold the idealistic position that only a person who influences others to do good things can be considered a leader, so Hitler was not a leader; but this trivializes the effect that “good” and “bad” leaders can have on individuals, societies, and civilizations.

Complimentary roles

Finally, some authors propose that one is not better than the other; both leadership and management serve different roles for accomplishing the same purpose (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 2005). For example, considering a stereotypical leader may inspire and motivate people. Still, without the structure and process provided by the stereotypical manager, inspiration may not be enough to organize and focus collective energy toward common goals.

Table 1: Interpretation of the Bennis and Nanus stereotype of leaders and managers