Transactional Approach For Transactional Leadership

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

Integrity and honor, servanthood, mentorship, professionalism, positive attitude, reinforcement and accountability, and proactive communication is what Jack E. Enter P.h. D states is the seven laws of leadership in his book, “Challenging the Law Enforcement Organization; Proactive Leadership Strategies.” Enter indicates the purpose of this book is to develop leaders whom are abnormal and different from most. This book identifies poor and successful leadership traits based on Enter’s education, his personal experiences in law enforcement, teaching, and from his personal life.

Over the course of my career, I have tried to model various leadership behaviors based upon successful leaders that I have worked with or for. This has led me to incorporate different styles into my own. Considering my current leadership strengths and how I view successful leaders I will use a servant leadership theory to analyze my own competencies. Servant leaders have 9 different aspects comprised of: emotional healing, creating value for the community, conceptual skills, empowering, helping subordinates grow and succeed, putting subordinates first, behaving ethically, relationships, and servanthood (Boone & Makhani, 2005, pg. 86). The aspects of a servant leader are those that I personally value and identify with. In addition to this, it is my belief that servant leaders, because they are people oriented, are more effective in a variety of environments and situations.

Leadership is a necessary component of any organization to include a criminal justice organization. In recent years, research has clearly indicated that leadership must be present in criminal justice organizations for a multitude of reasons. Leaders provide motivation and inspire their followers to progress while advancing toward a shared vision. This paper will discuss several different aspects of leadership and expand on the importance of having strong leaders in place. This paper will explain that there are different styles and theories of leadership which are utilized today. Basic principles of leadership as well as

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

Two of the most widely accepted theories of leadership within the law enforcement community are transformational and transactional leadership which are defined as follows:

“Transactional leadership is a style of leadership focused on contingent rewards of followers” (McGuire & Kennerly, 2006, p.180). Goals are set, directions are given, and rewards are used to reinforce employee behaviors associated with meeting or exceeding established goals. Followers are manipulated and controlled with rewards of praise and recognition, merit raises, and promotions, which can be given or withheld according to the employee’s performance. The outcome of such behavior is enhanced role clarity, job satisfaction and improved performance (McGuire & Kennerly, 2006).

Transactional Leadership was first described by Max Weber in 1947 and re-described by Bernard Bass in 1981. Recognized a traditional leadership, it focuses on the role of supervision, organization and group performance. Transactional leaders use an exchange model; they promote compliance of followers through both rewards and punishments. Not looking to change the future, transactional leaders are trying to keep everything the same (Odumeru & Ogbonna, 2013).

Finally, this paper will address how the practice of servant leadership would affect everyone from the lowest enlisted men to the most senior flag officer and everyone else in-between. Leadership goes well beyond the following definition: “Leadership is the art of influencing and directing people in such a way as to obtain their willing obedience, confidence, respect and cooperation.” In fact, when it comes right down to it, “there are no quick and easy answers to becoming an effective and efficient leader.” Leadership is difficult and enduring work. It is a lifelong process of building and molding not only your skills but also the skills of your subordinates. In a society of instant gratification, we look for the quick fix. Yet the problem is the quick fix or plug and play solution, rarely serves the long-term goals of an organization.

Are we capable, as paramilitary organizations, of defining ourselves by a concept of shared power and responsibility in order to provide quality development of our people, and quality service to our community? Servant leadership, as a concept, lends itself to the healthy growth of an organization by providing and environment where employees needs are paramount to the needs of the organization. While the world has changed around us, little has changed in the way that law enforcement leaders have guided their organizations. Most agencies have maintained the “do as I say” or, “because this is the way we have always done it” mentality. Servant leadership, by providing mutual respect and trust, could revolutionize the way we do business, and the way our employees provide service when their needs are being met. In February of 1955, the Los Angeles Police Department coined the phrase “To Protect and Serve.” (lapdonline.org). That being said, it would seem fitting that the leadership style in law enforcement today would have followed suit and produced servant leaders rather than autocratic leaders or authoritarian leaders. Does the servant leadership style allow leaders to do their job effectively while maintaining the authority and control

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

All organizations, especially law enforcement agencies, require leadership. Maintaining a dependable leadership structure is key to the success of any organization. The philosophy of the modern style of police leadership involves a leader who is strong, competitive and unreceptive to change. Police leadership is based from an autocratic style which is founded on integrity and courage, embracing teamwork, involvement and shared leadership (Cordner & Scarborough, 2010). This style of leadership works well in an emergency situation in which rapid decision making and strict control is needed. The negative aspect to this style of leadership is the inability of the organization to function with the absence of leadership.

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.

Transactional and transformational leadership differ. Ingram (2016) states “Different managers employ distinctly different management styles, ranging from relatively hands-off, facilitative styles to autocratic, micromanaging styles. Managers can also employ different motivational strategies and techniques to boost employee performance or accomplish internal change. Transformational and transactional leadership are polar opposites when it comes to the underlying theories of management and motivation. Understanding the difference between transformational and transactional leadership is crucial for anyone pursuing a career in management.” (Ingram, 2016). When I was a manager, I had to make sure my store operated properly and maintain sales. Sometimes I would hold contest for my workers to motivate them, Ingram (2016) states “Transactional leadership styles are more concerned with maintaining the normal flow of operations. Transactional leadership can be described as "keeping the ship afloat." Transactional leaders