A lot of discussion has gone out on issues that seem to have multiple definitions that have caused misunderstandings in some of the threads here on the forum. After we settled down to defining NSP's it became a bit clearer that the chasm we were peering over wasn't really as big as we thought it was.
Rememberschiff put out a quote from Gates' book on how he saw a difference between leadership and management, an issue I have struggled with because I do see a marked difference between the two. A lot of people I have met don't see much difference at all.
So I'd like to open up the discussion on exactly how do others see the difference.
I see it as: Leaders lead people and Managers manage tasks.
Still others see leaders as those who are good at convincing others to follow them and still others follow certain leaders because they are drawn to them by what they do. Managers focus on "getting the job done" and of course they delegate tasks to other people to get it done.
The flow of authority for me runs in opposite directions. Where as the authority of a Manager flows from the top down, thus all the conversation about who runs the show and who's the top dog. Leadership the flow of authority originates with the people who empower certain people to lead them for whatever reason.
Thus one can draw a strong distinction between even the phrases, boy-led and boy-run, where to me boy-led is leadership and boy-run is management.
So is adult-led and boy-run troop possible?
How about a boy-led, adult-run troop?
We all know an adult-led, adult-run is possible.
But is boy-led, boy-run an ideal that can never be attained?
I for one think there are a lot of adult-led, boy-run troops out there thinking they are boy-led. But just ask yourself, who do the boys look to for the final decision in any situation? Why is it the boys keep asking adults on every little issue? Who's really running the show? It would be interesting to hear everyone's thoughts on this.