Agreed. I suspect in this case it's his military background. That is, your immediate superior is your leader. Afaik, in that scenario you don't have much room for push back, etc.
Regardless, confusing leader and manager is going lead to both failing (or at least coming up very short). That is, if a manager is failing sonewhere there's a failing leader.
Put another way (as I already left in a free-standing comment): If management is failing...it's because leadership is failing. Whether that's culture that's lacking, or training and development given a back seat, failures - with rare exception - should be by definition owned by leadership.
A good manager can to some extent shield a team from subpar leadership. But not always, not forever. Eventually, poor leadership will tilt the game. That's not managers' fault.
Regardless, confusing leader and manager is going lead to both failing (or at least coming up very short). That is, if a manager is failing sonewhere there's a failing leader.
Put another way (as I already left in a free-standing comment): If management is failing...it's because leadership is failing. Whether that's culture that's lacking, or training and development given a back seat, failures - with rare exception - should be by definition owned by leadership.
A good manager can to some extent shield a team from subpar leadership. But not always, not forever. Eventually, poor leadership will tilt the game. That's not managers' fault.