Leadership is often associated with authority and position. That can make many of us believe leadership belongs to someone else. A better view sees leadership as a practice that anyone can choose to develop.
On Leadership … with Christien Oudshoorn
| Joep C de Jong (source)
In this inspiring talk, Christien beautifully captures the essence of Leadership. She emphasizes how true leadership is not about power or status but about fostering genuine connections in a world full of noise and division. By encouraging us to slow down and reconnect with ourselves and others, Christien reminds us that leadership is about relationships—both with ourselves and with the world around us. This approach to leadership is rooted in empathy, gratitude, and a deep appreciation for human potential, making it a truly transformative and liberating experience.
Anyone can develop and exercise leadership skills, regardless of their formal role or title. By recognizing that each individual has the potential to lead and make a difference, we can foster a more engaged and proactive society where people at all levels contribute their unique perspectives and talents.
However, leadership also requires a strong moral compass and the ability to think critically. History has shown that influence without integrity can lead to disastrous consequences.
Ultimately, encouraging everyone to find their voice, take responsibility, and work towards meaningful change is crucial for addressing our time’s pressing challenges and building a more sustainable future.
The difference between management and leadership
Management is about persuading people to do things they do not want to do, while leadership is about inspiring people to do things they never thought they could.
It is tempting to draw a sharp distinction between managers and leaders, but the reality is more nuanced. It is more useful to distinguish between management and leadership as different but closely related practices.
Management focuses on getting things done. It involves managing resources, facilities, projects, processes, and people. It includes planning, organizing, coordinating, and meeting deadlines.
Leadership is more concerned with direction, possibility and people. It involves looking to the world for trends, opportunities and risks, helping make sense of what is happening, and inspiring and influencing people to give their best.
But these are not separate worlds. Managers need to exercise leadership, and those who exercise leadership often need to manage. In practice, the two are intertwined.
The relationship between management and leadership
Management and leadership are closely related, but they are not interchangeable.
Someone may be highly capable at managing projects, resources, and processes while being relatively poor at inspiring or engaging others. Equally, someone may have a powerful ability to influence, inspire and give direction while being a poor manager of projects, resources or detail.
The distinction is therefore not really between two kinds of people, managers and leaders. It is between two sets of capabilities that we all possess to varying degrees.
Formal managers usually need both. But management and leadership are not confined to those with formal titles. In everyday life, we all manage things, whether time, money, households, activities or relationships, and we all have the capacity to exercise leadership through the influence we have on others.
Some of us are stronger at management, some at leadership, and some are good at both. What matters is recognising that both are practices that can be developed and that neither depends entirely on position or title.
Leadership and formal position
Leadership can be exercised by both those in formal positions of authority and those who hold no such position.
First, senior managers are formally appointed to lead an organization.
In many contexts, such as business books or articles, the word leader is used as a synonym for top management.
These managers may or may not be good at leadership, but leading is part of their appointed role.
Second, leadership occurs naturally throughout organizations and society, regardless of position or title.
Anyone who has a sphere of influence can be considered a leader.
Anyone can lead; anyone can practice leadership. Leadership does not have to be bestowed through appointment. It can emerge through the influence we have on others.
Everyone has influence. For some people, their circle of influence is small; for others, it is substantial.
A blogger with a broad readership, for example, may exercise considerable influence and be regarded as a thought leader.
And in an organization, experts in their field may exercise leadership within their domain without holding a formal management position.
Most people think of leadership as a position and therefore don’t see themselves as leaders.
Leadership is a choice. We can choose to influence people positively, or we can opt to keep quiet and minimize our influence, but we can never not influence.
Anyone can develop their leadership capacity by speaking up, engaging in conversation, forging healthy relationships, and listening more. This is the essence of Conversational Leadership.
Leadership is a practice, not a position of authority | Ronald Heifetz (source)
What is the work of leadership? | Patricia Shaw (source)
From doing things to people to working with them
The interesting question may not be whether we need management or leadership. We need both. The more important question is how we practise them.
Both management and leadership can become ways of doing things to people. Management can become overly concerned with control, compliance and getting people to carry out someone else’s plans. Leadership can become concerned with persuading, motivating or inspiring people to follow someone else’s direction.
But neither has to work this way.
Management can be more participatory, involving people in decisions that affect them and giving them greater responsibility for how work gets done. Leadership can also be more participatory and conversational, with direction and meaning emerging through dialogue rather than simply being handed down from above.
This does not remove the need for authority, decision-making, coordination or influence. There will always be occasions when someone has to make a decision, allocate resources, set boundaries or give direction. The difference lies in how this is done and in the quality of the relationships involved.
The shift, then, is not from management to leadership, nor is Conversational Leadership an alternative to either. It is about moving from doing things to people towards working with people, and practising both management and leadership in ways that are more participatory, conversational and responsible.
We all have to lead at different times, we all have to contribute and find our voices and find what’s meaningful.
I think this world is in trouble in a lot of ways and we need smart people everywhere … we just need everyone engaged.
Credit: Eileen Fisher
What the Word Originally Meant
The word leadership feels modern, but its roots are old.
It comes from leader, which entered English in the fourteenth century from Old English lædere, linked to the verb lædan, meaning to guide, show the way, or bring others along. At its heart is a simple idea: going before and moving with others.
The suffix -ship, from Old English -scipe, refers to a state or practice. We see it in words like friendship and fellowship. These are not titles but ongoing ways of relating.
Taken together, leadership originally meant the practice or condition of guiding others. It described an activity rather than a position.
What We Added Later
What the word did not originally include is equally revealing.
There is no inherent reference to authority, hierarchy, or control. Those associations developed later, shaped by military, political, and bureaucratic traditions. Over time, leadership became tied to rank, power, and formal responsibility.
In many organizations today, leadership is still understood this way, as something conferred by appointment and exercised over others.
The earlier meaning is quieter and more relational. It assumes shared movement. It assumes others are present. It assumes that direction is being worked out together.
Leadership as a Conversational Practice
This older sense aligns closely with what I mean by Conversational Leadership.
If leadership is about guiding and moving together, then conversation is central. It is in conversation that direction is clarified, questioned, and reshaped. It is where people test assumptions, surface differences, and make sense of uncertainty.
Conversational Leadership treats conversation not as a soft skill or an optional extra, but as the medium through which leadership actually happens.
Leadership, in this sense, is not confined to role or title. It emerges wherever people help a group think clearly, decide wisely, and move forward together.
Closing Reflection
Resources
- Article: The Problem with Heroic Leaders by Mike Myatt
Posts that link to this post
- Practice Leadership A Conversational Leadership Practice Area
- The Four Levels of Knowledge Management The relation between Conversational Leadership and Knowledge Management
- What Is Communityship? Where everyone in a community practices leadership
Lead through presence and dialogue. This coaching helps you convene the important conversations others avoid—and grow your leadership by practicing, not just planning.