Leadership Theory, Transformational, And Transactional Theory

Additionally, transformational leadership theory looks at leadership differently. It sees a true leader as one who can distil the values, hopes, and needs of followers into a vision, and then encourage and empower followers to pursue that vision. A transactional leader thinks of improvement or development as doing the same thing better: an organization that reaches more people, a company that makes more money. A transformational leader thinks about changing the world, even if only on a small scale (Community Tool box, 2016).

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

The transformational leader, according to Burns (1978), is one who” raises the followers level of consciousness about the importance and value of designated outcomes and ways of reaching them; gets the followers to transcend their own self-interests for the sake of the team, organization, or larger polity; and raises the follower’s level of need on Maslow’s (1954) hierarchy from lower-end concerns for safety and security to higher-level needs for achievement and self-actualization.” The transactional leader use rights a reward/punishment paradigm to entice meeting the agreements and standards. Transactional leaders emphasize the exchange between leader and follower (Bass) where reaching objectives are rewarded and failing to reach objectives are punished, which is then reinforced by the leaders. The two factors which emerged reflecting the punishment/reward is contingent reward and management by exception. This type of leadership was the core of leadership theory up until 1970’s when transformational leadership theory was introduced as different from transactional (Downton, 1973). In 1978, James MacGregor Burns wrote Leadership which contrasted these styles which was followed by Bass’s work in 1985 in which he empirically demonstrated the positively correlated dimensions which represented a shift in the study of Leadership. (Bass).

The domain of leadership theory and research has had many conceptualizations proposed over the last few years (Avolio & Bass, 2003). These conceptualizations seem to have generated recent interest in the distinction among transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership research (Bass, 1990). Yukl (1998) noted that transformational leaders get followers to do as they desire by transforming them or changing the followers themselves. According to Barlow, Jordan, and Hendrix (2003), a transformational leader generates an image that awakens trust from subordinates and develops relationships that enable subordinates to move toward goal attainment using their knowledge, skills, and material resources to accomplish that end. Unlike transformational leaders, transactional leaders pursue a cost benefit exchange approach that does not change subordinates and uses portion or organizational resources to meet subordinates needs in return for contracted needs rendered by the subordinates (Bass, 1990). Although these forms might appear diametrically opposed, most theorists agree with Bass that they are not mutually exclusive. While transformational, transactional, and passive/avoidant leadership are conceptually distinct, the same individuals on a continuum might display these leadership behaviors by different amounts and different intensities (Bass & Avolio,

Out of all the different leadership theories I learned about this semester I really feel that I best relate to transformational leadership and authentic leadership theories. During the development of my personal theory I found that these theories tended to list many similar traits, and values that aligned with my own. Additionally, both authentic and transformative theories place a significant amount of emphasis on the relationship between the leader and her/his followers. The success and influence of a leader comes not from herself but from her ability to create and invoke strong relationships with their followers. Given my character strengths of sociability, integrity, assertiveness, and my drive to connect to others on a deeper level, I value both the authentic and the transformative leadership theories.

Transformational theory: As it discusses how transformational leadership discuss and focusses on others, their needs and assists employees to reach their goals as a team.

Transformational leadership theory provides a solid foundation to address complex matters related to leaders and organizational leadership. As a reliable theoretical approach (Bass & Riggio, 2010; Judge & Piccolo, 2004), the theory’s historical and current applications in the workplace provide decades of support based on successful development outcomes of leaders and followers (Antonakis, Avolio & Sivasubramaniam, 2003; Bass, 1999; Bass 1997; Hatula, 2006; Hernandez, Long, & Sitkin, 2014; Mao & Chang, 2012; Malik, Javed, & Hanssan, 2017). One of the originating authorities of transformational leadership co-created the Multiple Leadership Questionnaire to quantitatively assess TL behavioral dimensions from multiple perspectives of leaders and followers (Bass, & Avolio,

This article aims to discuss the weakness of transformational leadership style. As we know there are two kinds of leadership styles namely the transformational and transactional leadership.

To use Transformational leadership theory we need to understand what it is. Transformational leadership theory is the process that transforms and changes people. In other words, this theory gives the leadership the ability to get his followers improve, and feel empowered to change, and to be led. The theory involves evaluating the associates ' motives, filling their needs, and appreciating them. So, a leader using the transformational theory could make their company more triumphant just by appreciating there associates.

5. Transactional leadership seeks to influence others by exchanging work for wages, but it does not build on the worker’s need for meaningful work or tap into their creativity.

Leadership is the process by which a person exerts influence over other people and inspires, motivates, and directs their activities to help achieve group or organizational goals (Jones & George, 2009, p. 415). A leadership theory is a discipline that focuses on finding out what makes successful leaders excel in what they do (Robertson, 2008). Recently, numerous leadership theories have been proposed with purposes that influence the effectiveness of leaders. Despite of the various leadership theories, the author of this paper will focus on how the transformational leadership theory is utilized to make a business firm known as Apple Inc. successful and discussing this theory’s contradiction to Joseph McCarthy’s transactional leadership theory. The second reason supporting this paper is identifying a leadership style the author is most aligned to and discussing how to practice this leadership style in a future job.

(2014). Situational, Transformational, and Transactional Leadership and Leadership Development. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 5(2), pp.117-130.

Several theories have been made and discussed and more are being put forward explaining the effectiveness of leadership. As described by Weihrich et al (2008) Leadership is perhaps one of the most important aspects of management. The most noticeable and proposed leadership theories are Transformational and Transactional Leadership theories, and since it has been formulated by Bass (1985) it attracted many experts and still has some issues and limitations that have been recognized. Being interested in those two theories and relating them to my personal experience and perspective, will go through the major discussions read and critiques made to compare and contrast the values of both theories.

There are many dissimilar leadership approaches leaders can employ when working toward meeting goals and in situations. But the two approaches, I will be discussing are the situational approach and contingency theory. These two approaches are the same, but yet they are dissimilar. According to Hanks (n.d), “the situational approach and contingency theory describes how different approaches to leadership can help owners and managers reach their goals.”

In practice, both the theories are effectively used and are seen to be beneficial for the organisations using them. Hence, both the theories are able to stand up for their own effective leadership styles. However, it questions whether leadership style is situation-dependent or universal across all situations.