Adapted from the upcoming 'The Wall Street Journal Guide to Management' by Alan Murray, published by Harper Business.

Leadership and management must go hand in hand. They are not the same thing. But they are necessarily linked, and complementary. Any effort to separate the two is likely to cause more problems than it solves.

Still, much ink has been spent delineating the differences. The manager's job is to plan, organize and coordinate. The leader's job is to inspire and motivate. In his 1989 book 'On Becoming a Leader,' Warren Bennis composed a list of the differences:

The manager administers; the leader innovates.

The manager is a copy; the leader is an original.

The manager maintains; the leader develops.

The manager focuses on systems and structure; the leader focuses on people.

The manager relies on control; the leader inspires trust.

The manager has a short-range view; the leader has a long-range perspective.

The manager asks how and when; the leader asks what and why.

The manager has his or her eye always on the bottom line; the leader's eye is on the horizon.

The manager imitates; the leader originates.

The manager accepts the status quo; the leader challenges it.

The manager is the classic good soldier; the leader is his or her own person.

The manager does things right; the leader does the right thing.

Perhaps there was a time when the calling of the manager and that of the leader could be separated. A foreman in an industrial-era factory probably didn't have to give much thought to what he was producing or to the people who were producing it. His or her job was to follow orders, organize the work, assign the right people to the necessary tasks, coordinate the results, and ensure the job got done as ordered. The focus was on efficiency.

But in the new economy, where value comes increasingly from the knowledge of people, and where workers are no longer undifferentiated cogs in an industrial machine, management and leadership are not easily separated. People look to their managers, not just to assign them a task, but to define for them a purpose. And managers must organize workers, not just to maximize efficiency, but to nurture skills, develop talent and inspire results.

The late management guru Peter Drucker was one of the first to recognize this truth, as he was to recognize so many other management truths. He identified the emergence of the 'knowledge worker,' and the profound differences that would cause in the way business was organized.

With the rise of the knowledge worker, 'one does not 'manage' people,' Mr. Drucker wrote. 'The task is to lead people. And the goal is to make productive the specific strengths and knowledge of every individual.'

领导和管理缺一不可。二者并不是一回事，却无疑是相互联系、互为补充的。任何将二者分开的做法都可能会造成事倍功半的结果。

不过，关于领导和管理之间区别的描述已有很多。管理者的工作是计划、组织和协调。领导者的工作则是激励人心、鼓舞干劲。华伦?班尼斯(Warren Bennis)在1989年出版的《领导者该做什么》(On Becoming a Leader)一书中列出了领导者和管理者之间的不同。

-管理者从事管理，领导者进行创新。

-管理者是“拷贝”，领导者是“原版”。

-管理者着重维护，领导者着重发展。

-管理者关注系统和结构，领导者关注人。

-管理者依靠控制，领导者激发信任。

-管理者看眼前，领导者看长远。

-管理者问的是“怎样”、“何时”，领导者问的是“什么”、“为何”。

-管理者关注利润，领导者纵观全局。

-管理者模仿，领导者创造。

-管理者接受现状，领导者挑战现状。

-管理者是标准的好兵，领导者自有主见。

-管理者把事情做好，领导者则做正确的事。

或许曾有一度管理者和领导者的工作可以被分开。工业时代，工厂中的工长或许不需要太多地考虑自己在生产什么或是考虑工人的情况。工长的工作就是听从命令、组织生产、让合适的人去完成必要的工作、协调结果、确保工作如指令的一样完成。他关注的是效率。

不过在新经济时代，价值越来越多地来自人们的知识，工人们不再是机器上一模一样的齿轮，在这种情况下，管理和领导不能简单地分开。人们看着他们的管理者，不光是等他交待工作，还等他给他们定一个目标。管理者们必须组织工人，不光是将效率最大化，还要培养技能、发展人才、产生结果。

已故管理大师彼得?德鲁克(Peter Drucker，又译杜拉克)是最先认识到这种变化的人之一，他还发现了很多其他管理真理。他确定了“知识工人”的出现，以及由此带来的企业管理方式上的深刻变化。

德鲁克写道，随着知识工人的崛起，一个人并不是“管理”其他人，他的任务是领导其他人，目的是充分发挥每个人特有的优点和知识。