Comparatively, Laissez-faire leadership is a great contrast to transactional and transformational leadership styles as defined by Cherry, K. (2016) Laissez-faire leadership, also known as delegative leadership, is a type of leadership style in which leaders are hands-off and allow group members to make the decisions. Because of this, researchers have found that this is generally the leadership style that leads to the lowest productivity among group members. Laissez-faire is often characterised by: very little guidance from leaders, complete freedom for followers to make decisions, leaders provide the tools and resources needed, group members are expected to solve problems on their own and finally, power is handed over to followers, yet leaders still take responsibility for the group’s decisions and actions.
Strengths and weaknesses of leadership styles
Effectiveness is essential with leadership styles and theories, so knowing the strengths and weaknesses is of vital importance, this is why they have been thoroughly studied and tested by scientists and academics alike due to its importance in the success of the organisation. Bass and colleagues of his, have disputed that transactional leadership is a vital precondition if transformational leadership is to be effective (Avolio, 1999). By providing direction and focus, transactional leadership makes the use of transformational behaviors less confusing and ambiguous. From a somewhat abstract perspective, Podsakoff, Bommer and
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
The leader demonstrates to the followers loyalty, trust, respect and admiration, with these the qualities of the transformational leader, they tend to work harder than originally expected that tends to have a link between effort and reward. These outcomes occur because the transformational leader offers followers something more than just working for self-gain; they provide followers with an inspiring mission and vision and gives them an identity. They believe in the organizational culture they find and specific methods of performing tasks. Transactional leaders are effective in getting specific tasks completed by managing each portion individually. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, transactional leaders focus on the lower levels of the hierarchy that is the very basic levels of need satisfaction. One way that transactional leadership focuses on lower level needs is by stressing specific task performance (Hargis et al, 2001). They are more concerned with processes rather than revolutionary ideas hence under their leadership change is least expected. Unlike them, transformational leaders end up changing existing organizational cultures by implementing new ideas.
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
Organizational leadership builds on traditional theories in order to form new and exciting directions. Transactional leadership is a traditional theory, which has been used as a platform to understand leadership and further develop techniques for higher organizational performance. The three components of transactional leadership help shape and define the style, but are not always strictly adhered to. There are many advantages and disadvantages of transformational leadership. Knowing how and when to apply this style will prove useful for most successful organizational leaders. President Dwight Eisenhower was a good example of how transactional leadership could be used successfully.
Have you ever had a leader that inspired you to develop your own leadership traits? “A leader is someone who demonstrates what’s possible” (Mark Yarnell, 2015). There are numerous leadership styles. Each of the numerous leadership styles can be beneficial if utilized in an appropriate means. I have chosen three leaders and their unique leadership styles to discuss in this paper. The unique styles that will be discussed are situational leadership, transformational leadership, and laissez-faire leadership. I will also discuss each leader’s approach, their fundamental leadership principles, and how each leader used their style within their profession.
Two different leadership styles, which were first identified in 2004 by a noted scholar named Burns, are transactional and transformational leadership (Marquis & Hutson, 2009). Transactional leadership is a more traditional style of leadership and it is where the leader sets goals, gives directions, and uses a reward system to motivate employee’s behaviors related to
Leaders can chose to use transformational leadership and transactional leadership independently or a combination of both to achieve defined
Transformational and transactional leadership are two leadership styles have been identified that offer profound influence on employee’ perceptions and behaviors toward management and determine followership (Mosely & Patrick, 2011). These styles are polar opposites and span cultural and organizational boundaries. At some point in their career a leader
This source highlights the differences between transformational and transactional leadership styles. A laboratory experiment was undertaken to show the differences in three different environments; face-to-face, virtual
The third article discusses the idea behind transactional and transformational leadership and how they determine the ability of management to push and organization forward. Transactional leadership looks at how to keep the status quo or keep the organization afloat, while transformational leadership looks at ways to improve the organization and help it move to the next level. The authors discuss how important it is for successful leaders and organizations to employ a blending of the two styles to create the best leaders. Those managers that are concerned for the well-being of the company, as well as the well-being of the employees, are going to help the organization progress and be successful. This blending is also important with the advances in technology, globalization, policies and procedures, cultural competencies, structures, and role definitions. The more that we become a global community the more the blending of transactional and transformational leadership becomes necessary to stay abreast of the issues surrounding global diversity and global competition.
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
Bass, B. M. (1990, Winter). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, pp. 19-31.
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
Laissez faire is the absence of effective leadership (Yukl G, 2010). Laissez faire leaders ignore problems and follower (Yukl G, 2010) and they do not contribute to the growth of the follower ( (Northouse, 2007). Feedback, rewards and leader involvement are totally absent in this type of leadership hence reduced organisational commitment.