The world needs both.<p>Consider an expedition making its way through a jungle. There are a bunch of people hacking out a path with machetes. The manager makes sure the machetes are sharp, that everybody has enough food and water, and generally ensures that hacking continues unimpeded. The leader climbs a tree and makes sure the hacking is taking place in the right place.<p>Back to your point - yes, you&#x27;re partly right, but at its root it&#x27;s an agency issue -<p>Shareholder (owner) cannot or doesn&#x27;t want to run the company, and so employs someone (an agent) to do it on his&#x2F;her behalf. These agents are leadership roles (typically CEO, CFO, COO and CTO roles).<p>However, where these appointed leaders don&#x27;t have a large-enough financial stake in the organisation, they will do things to better their own financial interests, rather than the interests of the shareholders.<p>That disconnect is called agency cost. A side effect is that these leaders become managers because bettering your own interests requires finesse (aka management). Sh*t, of course, flows downwards, and needs more managers.