Bass (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999) condenses many of the criticisms of transformational leaders, stating that they risk succumbing to the temptation of self-promotion, since the process sometimes revolves around impression management, or controlling the flow of information to influence people’s perceptions. He purports that this is incompatible to the maturation of collaboration, consensus-building and participative decision-making, and adds that self-promotion and a focus on self-interests can shift the culture of the organization into manipulation of followers to unethical ends (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999; Carlson & Perrewe, 1995). Bass also adds that followers can also be manipulated into losing more than they gain.
The consensus argument in favor of transformational leadership is that it supports continuous improvement and shapes organizational culture (Barnett, K. et al., 2001). In changing environments with often unstable consequences, transformational leadership is often seen as a useful style of leadership to rally differing opinions and search for common points of unity. However, many proponents argue that good leaders use a combination of transactional and transformational leadership styles (Bryant, 2003; Hoyt & Blascovich, 2003). Still, others suggest a new blend of styles, called “transcendental leadership” (Sanders, Hopkins, & Geroy, 2003), which both integrates and extends the transactional and transformational theories of leadership. This model describes
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).
Those that follow a transformational leadership framework believe that leaders possess many of the aforementioned qualities, but the focus is on one’s ability to inspire and empower others (Ross, Fitzpatrick, Click, Krouse, & Clavelle, 2014). These leaders literally ‘transform’ their followers by inspiring enthusiasm and performance towards a
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
One of the present and most widespread approaches to leadership that has been the focus of much research since the early 1980s is the transformational approach (Northouse, 20150211, p. 161). As its name infers, transformational leadership is a process that changes and transforms people. It is concerned with emotions, values, ethics, standards, and long-term goals. It includes assessing followers’ motives, satisfying their needs, and treating them as full human beings. Transformational leadership involves an exceptional form of influence that moves followers to accomplish more than what is usually expected of them;
For centuries leaders have been analyzed in order to determine what the traits and characteristics of a successful leader are. Leadership, as defined by Koontz and Weihrich (2008) is “the art or a process of influencing people so that they will strive willingly and enthusiastically toward the achievement of group goals” (p. 311). Leadership plays an important role in employee’s participation, creativity, recruitment to an organization, their commitment to the organization, and productivity levels. Over the years, there have been a number of theories surrounding leadership such as the “Great Man” theory, which, according to Riaz and Haider (2010), “assumes that leaders are born and have innate qualities, therefore, leaders
Throughout time, many books and papers have been written to study the birthplace of leadership failure, its causes, results, and ultimately, the best way to oversea these situations to avoid future failures. Some leadership experts, may argue that the best way to learn how to lead, is to study successful leadership outcomes and more importantly, how former miscalculations were committed and as a result, what gran plan was used that resulted in the leaders turnaround success. To be a great leader, the individual has to be cognate of what elements, including external and internal impact, resulted in their failure, as well as, how to avoid leadership oversight in the future. In this paper, I will attempt to do just that, as I will incorporate the transactional and transformational leadership theory from this course and apply them to the leadership failures of one of the most entertaining leadership failures of all time: the DeLorean Motor Company.
Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 8, 19-31.
The book The Heart of Change shows the practical side of the theories that are taught in the course textbook. It presents stories of successes and failures based in the application of concepts discussed in Organizational Behavior and Management and in class. Although we talked about several different concepts the ones that are evident in the examples in The Heart Of Change are the more progressive and individual centered approaches. The leadership characteristics that are important to successful change in an organization are those that are espoused in the transformational theory of management. It makes sense that ideals in line with the transformational management theory
In 1985, Bernard Bass expanded upon the work of Burns by attempting to determine and define how transformational leadership impacts follower outcomes. Bass postulates that transformational leaders are able to share their vision with followers and resultantly influence inspirational outcomes, and he identified four elements of transformational leadership: individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, and idealized influence (1985). In a departure from Burn’s belief that transactional and transformational leadership are mutually exclusive styles (1978), Bass suggests that truly effective leadership must demonstrate both transformational and transactional style (1985).
This paper summarizes the article written by Cam Caldwell, Rolf D. Dixon, Larry A. Floyd, Joe Chaudoin, Johnathan Post, and Gaynor Cheokas regarding the need for a new type of leadership in today’s social work environment, defined as Transformative leadership. The article itself varies in the definition, however in a broad sense Transformative leadership is maintaining good moral standing and sound business ethics among employees and individuals inside and outside the workplace. However, in order to reach this theoretical level of business related moral and ethical leadership known as
Bass, B. M. (1990, Winter). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, pp. 19-31.
Transformational leadership are classified into four components which are pointed out by Bass (1990, p. 28), ‘charisma, idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration’. Apart from these basic roles, charisma leadership, a collection of personal characteristics, has its own role of literature since it has similarity with transformational leadership and they are contribution to each other (Bertocci, 2009, p. 43; Judge & Piccolo, 2004, p. 755). Leaders’ behaviour reflects them being role models for their followers. Followers respect, admire and trust their leaders who have charismatic effect on their followers to an extremely high grade are willing to take risks
Describe the role of leadership types within teams. What are some of the primary reasons teams fail? What can be done to ensure team success? Give a personal example of team success. Support your discussion with appropriate leadership theories that apply.
Being able to lead a group or someone is a very powerful action. Being a leader in general is very powerful. Leadership is an art that is painted, sculpted, and displayed in all sorts of ways. There are many different styles of leadership that correspond with different tasks. From transformational leadership to laissez-faire leadership, there are various styles throughout the continuum. A transformational leader is one of the best, more successful leadership style. When going down the continuum, the leadership styles only become less effective. Everyone also falls in distinctive categories when it comes to leading others. The leadership style that is displayed depends on the person leading and those who are being led along with the task.
Yet, “pure” charismatic leadership can become an undemocratic form of leadership. Transforming leaders take account for public values that “embrace the supreme and enduring principles of the people” (34). These leaders mobilize people “for participation in the processes of change, encouraging a sense of collective identity and collective efficacy, which in turn brings stronger feelings of self-worth and self-efficacy, described by Bernard Bass as an enhanced “sense of ‘meaningfulness’ in their work and lives” (31). Therefore, by pursuing transformational change, it creates a positive change in the followers and potentially developing followers into leaders. They do this by empowering their followers. Burns states, “Instead of exercising power over people, transforming leaders champion and inspire followers” (32). However, tension can arise in the process of transformational leadership. As followers “rise above narrow interests and work together for transcending goals” leaders are then exceeded by their followers. This element is what makes transforming leadership participatory and democratic.