Compare And Contrast Transactional And Transformational Leadership

As Northouse (2015) explained, transformational leadership is a process that can change and transform the emotions, values, ethics, standard, and long term goals of the people. It also involves transforming followers to accomplish more than what is expected of them. The four factors that are closely associated with transformational leadership includes being an idealized influence or charisma leaders who act as strong role models, have a high standard of moral and ethical conduct, and deeply respected by his or her followers. A leader who can inspire and motivate their followers to be part of a shared vision of the organization. A leader who can also stimulate followers to become more creative and innovative, and provide the necessary coaches and advice to the followers (p.167).

Transformational leaders and transactional leaders differ from one another in the manner that they encourage and motivate those who follow them. Transactional leaders are defined as those who focus on monetary and tangible rewards as motivational tools for the daily operations (Marquis & Huston, 2015). Transactional leadership is associated with a clear organizational structure in which managers and subordinates understand their roles and know from whom to receive reward and feedback (Cherry, 2015). This type of leadership style focuses on motivation for the here and now to accomplish daily tasks at hand. This leadership does not focus on forward thinking or growth towards the future (Gellis, 2001).

Over the past twenty years, an abundant body of researches have been done to review transformational leadership and transactional leadership. Burn (1978) was the first person to introduce and conceptualize the concept of transformational leadership and transactional leadership. Bass (1985) based on Burn’s concept and deepen his notion with modifications, which stated that one of the best frameworks of leadership is transformational or transactional, but not opposing to each other. Followed by Bass and Avolio (1994), they provide the idea of these two leaderships and generalize them into the development of global economic world. Bass and Avolio (1997) also suggested that there was no need to view transformational and

Leadership has been an important topic in the social sciences for many years. Recently, renewed interest in the concept of leadership has been aroused. “The resurgence of interest in studying the topic of leadership appears to be accompanied by an acceptance of the distinction between transactional and transformational leadership.” (Den Hartog, Van Muijen and Koopman, 1997, P.41)

Transformational and transactional leadership are two forms of leaders that vary in traits and effectiveness within the business environment. In accordance to issues such as social corporate responsibility and dealing with the change of organisational structure within a business entity both forms of leadership provide different characteristics to provide varying results in dealing with these issues. Transformational and transactional leadership are polar opposites when it comes to the underlying theories of management and motivation. Understanding the differences between transformational and transactional leadership is crucial for anyone pursuing a career in management.

Transactional leadership on the other hand was first described in 1947 by Max Weber; he first coined "rational-legal leadership — the style that would come to be known as transactional leadership — as the exercise of control on the basis of knowledge” (Spahr, 2014). According to Spahr (2014), characteristics of transactional leaders include: focus on short-term goals, favor structured policies and procedures, thrive on rule following and doing things correctly, revel in efficiency, left-brained, inflexible, and opposed to change.

As the study of leadership has expanded over the past decades, a general shift in the paradigm of leadership style has begun to occur. The male dominated workforce has started to give way to a far more diversified workplace, with increasing numbers of women and minorities in leadership positions. This shift, resultantly, is causing a move away from the traditional leadership styles, with more focus given to contemporary leadership theories. For example, in a recent TED Talk Roselinde Torres discussed the shortcomings of leadership styles that were effective twenty years ago, but are now proving to be lacking (Horvath, 2014). In her speech, Torres suggests that a transition away from traditional leadership styles could increase the performance and diversity of organizations. The divisive effects of this transition is significantly apparent in the American fire service, as the profession continues to move from a homogeneous workforce into a culture striving for diversity. As more women continue to rise into leadership roles within the fire service, the influence and impact of transactional versus transformational leadership contributes to the effectiveness of minority leaders. This paper will reflect on how this influence relates to the effectiveness of female leaders within the fire service.

Discovered by Dr. James McGregor Burns, Transformational Leadership relates to engagement and connectivity. Dr. Bernard Bass expounded Burn’s work with transactional leadership in his publication Work Leadership. Burns and Bass suggest that leaders should raise consciousness to their followers by sharing the importance of the values and goals of an organization, in turn, motivating followers to address higher management level needs. In 1985, Bass released Leadership and Performance beyond expectation breaking down transformational leadership into four parts.

Leadership development is a multi-billion-dollar industry in the United States and Europe. This essay discusses the difference in transformational and transactional leadership styles and provide examples. Transformational leadership is developmental and usually begins with a transactional approach. First, transactional leader's behavior approach is management- by-exception. This leader puts out fires by taking corrective actions to solve the problem. Additionally, he/she uses contingent reward behavior: rewards an employee for doing a good job. Both concepts have proven to be effective. Something as simple as a pat on the back brings about a greater

According to Burns, a transactional leader was someone “who approaches followers with an eye to exchange one thing for another: jobs for votes, or subsidies to include for campaign contributions” (Klinsontorn, 2007, p.35). An example using Burns definition, it would be like a boss paying extra incentive for its employee who does the most sales. Thus, followers obtain rewards for job performance, while leaders benefit from the completion of tasks. Transactional leaders are good at traditional management functions such as planning and budgeting and generally focus on the impersonal aspects of job performance. The definition of Burns was expanded by Bass (1985). He said that a transactional leader must also

The organization that I am apart of requires both transactional and transformational leadership skills and traits. Throughout the paper I have explained the effectiveness of leadership for the purpose of organizing and influencing followers in order to achieve organizational goal. The theories of transactional and transformational leadership expounds on the aforementioned by further “ explaining the

The leader makes an agreement with the follower with outlined performance expectations, and the follower either rises to the expectations or not, each with a defined set of consequences. Bass (1997) wrote about two factors of transactional leadership; first this leadership style is contingent upon rewards. The next factor is management by exception, the leader intervenes if standards are not meet or if something goes wrong.

Transformational Leadership, is grounded on building relationships and motivating staff members through a shared vision and mission. Transformational leaders naturally have charisma to communicate vision, confidence to act in a way that inspires others, staff respect and loyalty from letting the team know they are important, and are masters at helping people do things they weren’t sure they could do by giving encouragement and praise.

As a result, they foster inspiration and anticipation to put extra labor to achieve common goals” (Zareen, Razzaq, & Mujtaba, 2015, p 535). Transactional leadership does not offer many opportunities to help bring along or promote others, but still has a meaningful place in certain situations. More transformational leadership is needed in my organization, my colleagues and I are seeing more of our leadership, saying many transformational taglines, but their actions are incongruent with their words. “Transformational leaders are not afraid to take personal risks; they emphasize progress, change, and innovation” (Hamstra, et al, 2014, p 644). I am hopeful that what I am learning and my gaining passion to become a more influential leader using transformational leadership techniques. Knowing where my strengths and preferences lie, will allow me show what can be accomplished with mutual respected and shared expectations rather treating people like they are unthinking unfeeling robots. Mixing multiple leadership styles depending on the situation the leader is encountering appears to be the most well rounded option, yet a leader still must have a base preference where they start and return, mine is clearly in the transformational leadership

Over the past twenty years, an abundant body of researches have been done to review transformational leadership and transactional leadership. Burn (1978) was the first person to introduce and conceptualize the concept of transformational leadership and transactional leadership. Bass (1985) based on Burn’s concept and deepened his notion with modifications, which stated that one of the best frameworks of leadership is transformational or transactional. Following Bass and Avolio (1994, p. 4) provided the idea of these two leaderships and generalized them into the development of global economic world. Bass and Avolio (1997) also suggested that there was no need to view transformational and transactional leadership as