I Am: A Transactional Leadership Analysis

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

An NCO in my eyes is first most a leader, someone that has his soldiers back, there to protect and defend them, mentor them, and guide them into being NCO's themselves one day. As an NCO you need to be able to share your knowledge with younger soldiers, teach them the ways of the Army, let them not only learn from their mistakes, but from the ones we have made along the way as well. An NCO needs to be able to trust in his soldiers, but more importantly, soldiers need to be able to trust their NCO's. How can a soldier follow us into battle if they cannot trust us with the smaller things? How can a soldier turn to you in confidence with an issue that they have if they can’t even trust you, as an NCO, to have their back about something small

Transactional leadership styles are more concerned with maintaining the normal flow of operations. Transactional leadership is described as making contact with others for the

Devine and Winter (2012, p. 25) state, “there is nothing magical about leadership, and there is nothing magical about teaching it or learning it.” They go on to define leadership as the ability to influence those who work for you to want to accomplish and strive to reach organizational goals and objectives. Those who influence others must understand the theories of motivation so that these theories can be applied, communicated and taught in order to motivate followers (Devine and Winter, 2012). Different from supervision, leadership implores the desires of those around you to want to succeed in meeting a goal through you the leader’s motivational abilities.

Leaders can have various characteristics including being an “Ambassador”, “Advocate”, “People Mover”, “Truth-Seeker”, “Creative Builder” and an “Experienced Guide”. According to Galford (2011) website “Leadership Style Assessment Results”, my strongest three characteristics where the “People Mover”, the Creative Builder”, and the “Experienced Guide”. “People Mover is characterized as a Talent-spotter, career-builder, motivator, someone with parental, nurturing qualities. People Movers instinctively take the lead in building teams. They’re also instinctive mentors. They generally have large contact lists; they are always introducing new people to new ideas and new paths. They’re also generally mindful of their employees’ lives outside of work; they view performance

First question, what type of leader am I? I see myself as a transformational leader. I always enjoy seeing others improve. Whenever I get a chance to share my job knowledge with a new airman I take it. For instance, as a Fuels Lab Technician I am in need of a second man for sample testing. This gives me the opportunity to show new airmen that there is more to Fuels than just driving a truck. With me sharing my knowledge with others, this helps them learn more and me to be a better trainer and leader.

A leader type personality is great at organizing groups. On the playground as a child, a leader was the person who determined what games everyone would participate in. After deciding, everyone would follow his command. In business, these are the folks who now coordinate large groups of employees in a

In 1979, Burns identified the importance of the process by which an individual is able to influence a group to achieve a common goal. He identified two types of leadership - Transactional and Transformational.He believed that every leader can be classified by his leadership style according to their inclination for a transaction based interaction with the group members orpreference towards bringing transformation in their working approach as a whole.

As I have learned for chapter nine traits, skill, and behavior theories cannot fully define how effective a person’s leadership is but those theories still give us an outline of what leader’s style the person might possess. I think currently my leadership style is a transactional leadership. This means I often lead and motivate followers by offering deals. If the followers achieve a goal or task I would reward them. I levitate towards this leadership style because it’s simplistic and has a win-win situation for everyone. If I was leading a club or a team I would probably use a mix of transactional and transformational use. As a leader I would provide an incentive by offering a benefit for completing a task. I also would also provide support

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

Transformational leadership taps into the motives of followers in order to reach their goals, while transactional focuses on the exchanges that occur between leaders and followers (Northouse, 2013). The branches of the military in general would be considered transactional leadership organizations. This type of leadership encourages followers to perform tasks at a high level in order to achieve advancement or increase in pay or rank. Conversely, transformational leadership would be focused on creating a connection between the leader and the followers, in order to perform tasks in such a way as to increase the feeling of morality in both the leader and the follower (Northouse, 2013). Panorama did not exhibit any behavior that tried to motivate Bailey to feel a connection to him. Instead, Panorama tried to intimidate, coerce, and punish Bailey to execute the tasks he was required to perform.

The three types of leadership I will be comparing are Transformational, Servant, and also Authentic leadership. Authentic leaders are self-actualized individuals who are aware of their strengths, their limitations, and their emotions. They also show their real selves to their followers. They also don’t hide their mistakes or weaknesses out of fear of looking weak. Authentic leaders are able to put the mission and the goals of the organization ahead of their

4. Willfulness - striving to impose order and control on an otherwise chaotic and uncontrollable environment is a driving force behind transactional leadership

For this paper, we were asked if we saw ourselves as a transactional leader or a transformational leader. This was a tough question. When I held managerial positions, I would not have my worker do anything I would not do. I would work beside my workers and encourage them along with overseeing their work. Overall I feel I am a mixture of both leader styles. I will discuss why below.

In general, a leader should be someone who has their stuff together, a stable psyche, and an open mind. My leadership style is Change-Oriented (MBTI) meaning that I like to find alternative ways to do things and introduce creative solutions to problems. I always lead by example, which forces me to learn as much as I