Leadership and management have historically been differentiated by reference to style differences. This orientation implies that they serve the same purpose - to get things done through people. But a very different way of defining leadership and management emerges when we give them completely separate functions, one to promote new directions and one to execute them as efficiently as possible.

The conventional meaning of leadership is based on a single person occupying a role within a group. But leadership can be shown by outsiders, such as when Jack Welch's ideas had a leadership impact on businesses around the world. Such "extra-group" leadership is a one-off act, not a role. A full understanding of this type of leadership enables us to break the stranglehold of role-based leadership and develop a wholly new concept of leadership, one that is more appropriate for our knowledge-based 21st century.

If all genuine leadership is informal influence, then we need to revise the old fashioned concepts of formal and informal leadership. We need to say that these concepts are outdated and that there is really only formal and informal management. This article explores the relationship between leadership and influence, showing what forms of influence count as leadership and which types do not.

If  leadership means showing the way for others, challenging the status quo, and promoting new directions, then courage is the most important leadership trait

The meaning of leadership is changing. Once it meant providing direction. Now leaders are said to be facilitators who draw ideas for new directions out of others. This is a defensive move to preserve the status quo view that senior executives are the real leaders in organizations. It is time to question this outlook.

History has given us a number of leaders but not all of them have been necessarily good leaders. This article examines the styles of various leaders and how they have succeeded or failed and they reasons behind this.

Compared to leaders, managers have a negative image as robotic, controlling efficiency experts. We need to upgrade management so it can take its place alongside leadership as a vital organizational function. We need a clearer definition of management, one that clearly separates it from management and puts it in its rightful place.