To me authority and leadership are related but orthogonal.
Authorities come from the ability to author. It is a creation right. The creation could be a story, a software and, probably what most most people have in mind about authority, a rule. On the other hand, leadership is the ability to, well, lead. You go where ever you want, but if you want people to follow, you need leadership.
One can be a leader without authority. Think of a manager, while it might not be obvious, it is ultimately up to the "managee" to decide whether to carry out what the manager requires. You may fire, you may hire, but none of those guarantee you things getting done. Manager has no authority.
Now, write a software. People wants to add a feature to YOUR software. You have absolute authority in deciding whether to accept.
Very much there is a delineation between authority and leadership.
Authority is the right to do work either formally through policy/power or informally through influence/trust.
Authority has to be granted whereas leadership is something anyone can take up regardless of role. Leadership is the ability to drive change, an act not a position. Just because someone has a lot of authority doesn't not mean they act as leaders, if they operate purely for individual means. In my eyes there is a morality, but that's my personal approach.
Thanks, I really connect with your point that it's the managee to decide whether to carry out what the manager requires. In the knowledge economy we work at will (though may be constrained by perceived needed.)
People follow those who are deemed legitimate leaders. The legitimacy may come from power (I can fire you if you don't do what I say), or it may come from any of a number of other things.
[edit]
I should also note that everybody has the authority to create rules, just not the legitimacy to get people to follow those rules.
Authorities come from the ability to author. It is a creation right. The creation could be a story, a software and, probably what most most people have in mind about authority, a rule. On the other hand, leadership is the ability to, well, lead. You go where ever you want, but if you want people to follow, you need leadership.
One can be a leader without authority. Think of a manager, while it might not be obvious, it is ultimately up to the "managee" to decide whether to carry out what the manager requires. You may fire, you may hire, but none of those guarantee you things getting done. Manager has no authority.
Now, write a software. People wants to add a feature to YOUR software. You have absolute authority in deciding whether to accept.