Within an organization, you may see a manager who chooses to surround himself or herself with talented individuals and then allows them the freedom to perform at their best. This is the leader who’s not afraid of being placed in their shadow but rather supports their efforts and builds a team of responsible players. This leader hands out kudos, rather than blame, and corrects errors as a matter of avoiding them in the future. Credit is shared rather than hoarded.
There’s another kind of manager who wants to stand taller than his or her subordinates. Talent is viewed with suspicion, and workers are held on a short leash and often micromanaged. Scant praise is handed out – and when it is, there’s little reason to trust it. Fear and blame, especially, are the root of motivation, and maintaining a low profile and even doing as little as possible (to reduce one’s exposure) are inevitable consequences. These managers don’t want to hear your ideas, though they expect you to follow their orders.
One type leads to excellence; the other, to mediocrity.
I’ve worked for both – sometimes briefly in the same enterprise. But I know which one gets the most for the money. Not that money’s the top item when you’re working for them.
Jnana's Red Barn 
Excellent descriptions Mr. Hodson, I’ve worked for both too, in the same organization. And I can tell you which one inspires me to work because I WANT to do my job 🙂
I worked for a prime example of the first, immediately followed by a prime example of the second. Actually the second one was actually pretty judicious with me, but not with the rest of our staff – and these are high functioning people with Ph.D.’s. I can’t tell you how much this approach fractured our department.