week 7 due Tuesday Evening PST
Arun1990
Mandatory-Assignment-Resources.zipMandatory Assignment Resources/Leadership approaches regarding the organizational change.pdf
The USV Annals
of Economics and
Public Administration
Volume 13,
Issue 2(18),
2013
146
LEADERSHIP APPROACHES REGARDING THE
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
Associate Professor Ph.D. Camelia BĂEŞU
Stefan cel Mare University of Suceava, Romania [email protected]
Assistant Ph.D. Ruxandra BEJINARU
Stefan cel Mare University of Suceava, Romania [email protected]
Abstract: The purpose of the present paper is to capture the readers’ attention towards the relationship between different
styles of leadership and the process of implementing organizational change. Throughout the paper we debate issues like the role of leadership in the moments the organization deals with radical changes; the importance of acknowledging the necessity of change for the organization; the presentation of phases and possible effects of change; the correlation between different leadership styles and phases of change. The paper approaches all issues systematically in order to create logical connection of ideas that should be easy to comprehend for all readers, specialists and non-specialists.
Key words: change; leadership; leadership style; organizational change; resistance to change;
JEL classification: M12; M13; M19.
I. INTRODUCING THE ROLE AND IMPORTANCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
Nowadays business trends are changing rapidly all over the globe and the organizations that
don’t change cannot survive. (Hage, 1999) Creating a change readiness climate within the organization is the leaders’ job. Not only managers have to be prepared for any change process but also employees. Employees’ readiness to accept and embrace change is critical for the process success. Even if managers lead the organizations the transformation power lies within the people that form the organizations and leaders may only try to stimulate and support the change. Employees decide whether to work towards change or against it. If leaders want the success of the organization then they have to prepare their employees for change. Leaders have to choose or re- create the wright means to prepare, implement and sustain change. Until now, theorists and practitioners have come with several methods, procedures, models and strategies applicable for various contexts but customization is absolutely necessary for each case.
Change means, in the first place, to alter the present shape/estate in order to become a better one. Change management is defined as the coordination of a structured period of transition from situation A to situation B in order to achieve lasting change within an organization. (Bartkus, 1997) In general, individuals focus more on what is that they have to give up when change occurs and not on what they could gain. This is the main factor for the resistance that individuals manifest towards change, which is rather paradoxical as any change is done for the good reasons.
A leader is a promoter of change that has to customize management styles according to the features and behavior of their employees. A leading style is influenced by numerous factors and may be analyzed from the managers’ position. The success of change depends on the way the manager cooperates with employees and various collaboratives, on the way he stimulates the employees to involve within the change process. (Bejinaru & Băeşu, 2013)
Organizational change refers to a set of actions that come to amend previous methods, procedures, organizational behaviors or something else, through assigning some directions. The organizational change consists in the set of different actions that results shifting in directions and/or processes that affect the way in which organizations worked before. (Hage, 1999) The author argues
The USV Annals of Economics and Public Administration Volume 13, Issue 2(18), 2013
147
that successful organizational change indicates the enhanced learning capabilities of an organization which may lead an organization towards innovation. (Hage, 1999)
Questioning about what change is, what determines it and which are its purposes should make things easier to understand how to manage change and profit from it. “Change is a constant; has always been with us, and will continue to dictate reality. In fact change is reality.” (Beerel, 2009, p.6)
Discussions about change share different perspectives like whether change is internally determined or environmentally determined. In this sense Beerel (2009) argues that change should be environmentally determined which means that the factors generating change are external to the system changing. Other perspective useful to consider is whether change is a radical or an incremental phenomena. In this case the question is if change is rather transformational then evolutionary. A diplomatic and well-balanced answer is given by Beerel (2009) that “both types of change occur simultaneously in a far less definable and controlled fashion than we like to imagine.” (Beerel, 2009, p.8)
II. LEADERSHIP ROLE IN THE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE PROCESS Nowadays the interest is focused upon the effects leadership generates for the organization.
Today managers consider leadership as an instrument with great potential for shaping the organization, of course through directing the employees. Their attention turns toward the determination of that style/model/strategy of leadership that should lead to the wanted results in a certain context as in this case we refer to organizational change. (Bejinaru & Băeşu, 2013)
Leadership is a process of generating change, not maintaining the status quo. This change is not imposed by the leader, but it is a sharing process of the same purpose and values. (Brătianu & Anagnoste, 2011) Inside the organization, leaders must be promoters of change. Leaders have the power to influence others and motivate them in order to achieve certain goals. A leader of change is an individual with the ability to influence and ultimately change behaviors of employees, teams, and/or organizations; an individual who influences the commitment of any key group within the organization.
In many turns, we have observed that in practice leadership plays a central role when it comes to implementing organizational change. The arguments in favor of this statement are many, as it follows. According to Gardner (1993), leadership is the process of persuasion or example by which an individual induces a person or a group to pursue objectives held by the leader or shared by the leader and his or her followers. Considering this definition, then leadership style is the way in which that process is carried out. “Change is toward an outcome that leader and followers both want a desired future or shared purpose that motivates them toward this more preferable outcome. An important aspect of leadership is influencing others to come together around a common vision. Thus, leadership involves the influence of people to bring about change toward a desirable future”. (Daft, 2008, p. 5)
Reviewing specialists’ opinions becomes obvious that initiation and coordination of a change process always requires well developed leadership skills. Leading people through a change is an arduous process along which may be encountered various levels of resistance. People have a natural instinct to resist changes and especially they resist most to radical changes and it is only the leader’s ability to overcome this. (Reardon, 1998)
The immediate resistance to change is generated by the person’s instinct but the rejection aggressiveness is the result of taking things/change personally. The starting point to lower the resistance force towards change of employees is to depersonalize the problem. “Depersonalizing the problem decreases the emotional reactivity to the situation, which allows for, and even encourages, change. Once the emotional reactivity has dissipated, the firm and employees are able to move into the change mode. The ability to respond appropriately requires five essential skills: 1. Self- awareness, 2. Emotional maturity, 3. Self-motivation, 4. The ability to show empathy, 5. The ability to develop and maintain positive relationships.” (Balestracci, 2003 p. 42)
The USV Annals of Economics and Public Administration Volume 13, Issue 2(18), 2013
148
Nowadays, the leader’s effectiveness resides in the capability to manage employee resistance and mold their behavior towards the implementation of successful changes.
Even if this kind of process – change implementing- can be rigorously described, in practice it becomes a real hardship. Some changes, like incremental changes are easier accepted and implemented as these are gradually and informally applied. In time people get used to this kind of changes and become a routine, unlike radical changes. In contrast, radical changes are much more difficult to be accepted and resistance is stronger that is why are necessary true leadership competencies. Radical changes require a certain level of acceptance in order to create willingness to relinquish old styles of working in favor of new ones. (Reardon 1998)
In recent literature, specialists have extended the research and discussions about the leaders’ role in the organization to other in depth issues like the effects of different leadership styles upon the process of implementing organizational change. Different leaders will have different views about the innovation and will approach their role in facilitating implementation in different ways. The views, styles, and behaviors of individual leaders should be understood, and system support strategies should take these differences into account.
For example Higgs and Rowland (2000, 2001) have researched upon the link between several styles of leadership and organizational change. In accordance with their results we present five broad competency areas of leadership related to successful implementation of organizational change:
Creating the case for change – building awareness among employees regarding the imminence of change and its necessity;
Creating structural change – insistently working on people understanding the essence of the specific change phenomena and providing its support through consistent tools and processes;
Engaging other – getting people involved and committed to run along the change process; Implementing and sustaining changes – elaboration strategies and development of effective
action plans and supervising the progress towards the desired change; Facilitating and developing capability – sustain people to find their own motivation for
achieving change. There are some extremist theorists who argue that leading change is the fundamental role of a
leader and everything else is secondary. Yukl considers that a leader is only effective if he or she succeeds to adapt the organization to a changing environment through continuous revitalization. He emphasizes on understanding the reasons for resistance to change, the sequential phases in the change process, and different strategies to change will greatly enhance its likelihood of successful change implementation. (Yukl, G., 1998)
III.RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEADERSHIP STYLES AND IMPLEMENTATION
OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE We envision leadership styles like persons’ character styles or like personalities which in social
life design different behaviors. For this reason we shall further approach the relation between different styles of leadership and organizational change in order to observe the effects on each other.
There are two main leadership styles that literature refers to: transactional leadership and transformational leadership. Transactional leadership style is characterized by the fact that the leader acts like an agent of change and supports the employees through procedures of fundamental changes that improve productivity. Transformational leadership style implies that the leader empowers the subordinates to assume the organization’s vision which reflects into growth of productivity, of employees’ motivation, of work satisfaction and of individual performance. (Burns, 1978)
According to Bass’s (1998) research, a big issue about transformational leadership is whether it positively influences all organizational layers. In this case, the author suggests that it is necessary to
The USV Annals of Economics and Public Administration Volume 13, Issue 2(18), 2013
149
continuously supervise and support the development of human capital and the enhancing of key capabilities that will contribute to organizational success.
An important research instrument that was frequently used by specialists to observe the leaders’ style is the MLQ – Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire created by Bass and Avolio (1990). The authors reveal four competency areas that ensure the success for a transformational leadership:
Idealized behavior (IB) – it makes a leader to be trusted and respected; Inspirational motivation (IM) – the ability to stimulate employees to outrun themselves; Intellectual stimulation (IS) – leaders stimulate the employees to ask questions and to solve
old problems in new ways; Individual consideration (IC) – refers to the habit of listening the needs and wishes of
subordinates. In 2004 a Gallup survey revealed that the strengths and weaknesses for a group of 782 top managers were mostly the following:
- Strengths: integrity, ability to communicate, seriousness, intelligence, business knowledge, leadership skills and education;
- Weaknesses: limited perspectives, incapacity to understand other members of the team, incapacity of working with others, indecision, lack of initiative, lack of responsibility, lack of integrity;
Higgs and Rowland identified three distinct groupings of change leadership behaviors. These were: 1. Shaping Behavior: the communication and actions of leaders related directly to the change;
‘making others accountable’; ‘thinking about change’; and ‘using an individual focus’. 2. Framing Change: establishing starting points for change; ‘designing and managing the
journey’; and ‘communicating guiding principles in the organization’. And 3. Creating Capacity: ‘creating individual and organizational capabilities’; and
‘communication and making connections’ (Higgs & Rowland, 2005) Analyzing knowledge about leadership competencies, leaders’ strengths and weaknesses, and change behaviors will lead to identifying pragmatic strategies to be applied through the change process. The above observations built the conclusion that an effective leader relies on personal and behavioral characteristics and on fine abilities to relate with others. Thus, leaders have to be perfectly aware of the areas they are good at and the ones they have yet something to improve.
The standard structure of a change process is described through three main stages, well known as Lewin’s model: unfreeze-change-refreeze. The change process starts with “unfreezing”, that means the dissolving of existing systems. In a “fluid” estate, the organization may be easily modeled, as it is more flexible. When organizational environment becomes more relaxed any change will be assumed naturally, and shall not be perceived as something imposed. The third stage of “refreeze” has to be understood as an end of a certain change procedure and not as a return to the solid initial estate. This is Lewin’s approach to restructure one’s thoughts, perceptions, feelings and attitudes. Lewin’s model of organizational change may be associated to a spiral movement as the three stages infinitely succeed one another within the organization’s life.
Reardon and Rowe analyzed in more detail the phases of change, identified what effects each phase produces and associated to every set of procedures a specific leadership style. We consider, as the mentioned authors also did, that it is of great relevance and real help for promoters of change to know how to act each step throughout the change process. It is nothing to be strictly respected but leaders have at least to be aware of what might happen or should happen in order to successfully complete the change protocol.
Observing Figure 1, below, we can notice the division of the change process into five phases. For each phase there are emphasized the main actions and effects to be achieved and the third column suggests the appropriate leadership style to be applied for each set of actions.
In order to understand the association or the link between the leadership styles and the change phases we have to review and to point out each style’s specificity. We consider that these leadership styles were named after the effects they generate through the leaders’ behavior. Following we briefly describe what each style does. The commanding style – focuses on results,
The USV Annals of Economics and Public Administration Volume 13, Issue 2(18), 2013
150
persuades by directing, makes changes rapidly and applies the tactic learning by doing. The logical style – differentiates by its focus on innovation, persuades goals through pertinent explanations, makes changes with great cautiousness, and gathers knowledge by studying. The inspirational style – focuses on identifying and creating opportunities, achieves goals by growing employees’ trust, makes radical changes and learns by permanently questioning upon various issues. The supportive style – offers others consistently support and gets involved in activities, makes changes slowly and learns by listening.
As we previously mentioned we continue by associating to each phase of change the appropriate leadership styles and actions. Our work consists in the attempt to explain and match change phases and leadership possible initiatives towards the change process. The planning phase refers to: acquiring information, creating ideas, formulating strategy. For these phase should be applied leadership styles like: the inspirational and logical styles. The planning phase has to base on big doses of innovation and also on logic judgment. The planning phase is of fundamental importance for any process. When approaching change, it is obvious why the planning phase consists in innovation, explanation, studying, creating opportunities and permanent questioning. A good planning should be done in complete awareness of all factors and targeting towards important goals.
The enabling phase refers to: convincing employees, empowering employees, assisting employees, explaining the plans. This phase requires in different doses the following leadership styles: logical, inspirational, and supportive. Along each phase, these characteristics of the leadership styles combine in order to best accomplish the phase’s good progress.
Throughout the enabling phase there have to be found compatibilities between the existing procedures and the new tasks. The right combination of the three leadership styles should develop the expected results.
The launching phase refers to: implementation in steps, meeting goals, getting results, assessing the progress. The success of this phase must be ensured by mixing the commanding and logical style. This phase requires a more demanding approach as it represents the moment of launching the plans and strategies for change and these must have a precise debut. This phase has to be managed through the commanding and logical styles as they consist of directing and explaining, and of doing and studying.
The catalyzing phase refers to: inspiring, energizing, and assisting. For the activities in this phase should be applied the inspirational and supportive styles as these develop through exploiting opportunities of change in order to accomplish positive goals. The supportive style has the role to facilitate the work of employees and provide the necessary involvement of leaders by listening and cooperating.
The maintaining phase refers to: overseeing the progress, guiding others, energizing, and assisting. Leadership styles that give positive results throughout this phase are the logical, inspirational, and supportive ones. The maintaining phase is also a complex one and needs a mix of actions and tactics. The combination of the three styles provides the necessary guidance for employees to continue the good work and gain more confidence along the way. Even if it is the final phase, leaders have to continuously search for innovations. For this phase the style emphasis is once again on people. “Persuasion becomes crucial. Persuasion calls for an ability to listen well enough to know what matters to people.” (Reardon, K.K. & Rowe, 1998, p.139)
The above ideas form a consistent approach towards the relationship between the change process and various leadership styles. As Reardon & Rowe (1998) state, it is impossible for a leader to apply all leadership styles during implementing the change process but, in our view, is not impossible that more leaders to apply certain leadership styles in order to ensure the optimal match between style, skill, and capabilities and what is required by each situation. We consider that any leader who would pay attention to these observations could succeed to design particular strategies for implementing change.
The USV Annals of Economics and Public Administration Volume 13, Issue 2(18), 2013
151
Figure 1 - Relationship between phases of change and leadership style Source: (Reardon, K.K. & Rowe, 1998, p.134)
IV.CONCLUSIONS Throughout the paper we focused on the leadership concept and its role for the organization’s
critical moments, like implementation of organizational change. We have presented some details regarding the phases of the change process and argued about the necessary characteristics and competencies that leaders should possess in order to face any challenge of change.
Whatever the style, leadership of change in simple or more complex settings entails: building capability and capacity in a team through supporting employees to improve their talents; creating conditions for learning to occur by ensuring personal and team working time; creating a climate which encourages individual and organizational development through growing trust and confidence attitudes among employees; emphasizes collaborative working by appreciating results of teams; provides a focus for effects of innovation and change. Overall we consider that leadership styles which base on support, facilitation and collaboration appear to be more successful in case of change implementation. Leadership and change cannot be separated not in theory neither in practice as they are interdependent.
Though each leader is characterized by mainly a style it is important for him/her to be aware of all the other leadership styles. Even if it is difficult to switch from one style to another, being aware of each style opportunities it is a great step towards applying what is best for each phase of change. This final idea could represent a topic for another research work.
The USV Annals of Economics and Public Administration Volume 13, Issue 2(18), 2013
152
V.REFERENCES: 1. Balestracci, D. (2003) Handling the human side of change, Quality Progress, vol. 36(11),
pp.38-45 2. Bartkus, B. (1997) Employee ownership as a catalyst of organizational change. Journal of
Organizational Change Management, 10(4), 331-344 3. Bass, B. M. (1998) Transformational leadership: Industrial, military, and educational
impact. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum 4. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990) Training and development of transformational
leadership for individual, team, and organizational development. In R. W. Woodman & W. A. Passmore (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press
5. Beerel, A. (2009) Leadership and Change Management, Sage Publications Ltd., pp.6 6. Bejinaru, R., Băeşu, C. (2013) Approaches to organizational change within modern
companies, The USV Annals of Economics and Public Administration, Volume 13, Issue 1(17), 2013
7. Brătianu, C. & Anagnoste, S. (2011) The role of transformational leadership in mergers and acquisitions in emergent economies, Management & Marketing, Challenges for the Knowledge Society, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 319-326
8. Burns, J.M. (1978) Leadership, New York: Harper and Row 9. Daft, R.L. (2008) The Leadership Experience, 4th Edition, Thomson South-Western, New
York 10. Gardner, J.W. (1993) On Leadership. New York: Free Press 11. Hage, J. (1999) Organizational innovation and organizational change, Annual Review of
Sociology, Vol. 25, pp. 597-622 12. Higgs, M and Rowland, D. (2005) All Changes Great and Small: Exploring Approaches to
Change and its Leadership. Journal of Change Management, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 121-151, June 2005
13. Higgs, M. & Rowland, D. (2000) Building leadership change capability, Henley Working Paper Series, HWP 2000/04
14. Higgs, M. & Rowland, D. (2001) Developing change leaders: assessing the impact of a development program, Henley Working Paper Series, HWP 2001/06
15. Reardon, K.K, Reardon, K.J & Rowe, A.J. (1998) Leadership styles for five stages of radical change inventory, pp129-146
16. Yukl, G. (1998) Leadership in Organizations, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 4th Edition
Mandatory Assignment Resources/Role of Leadership in Change Management Process.pdf
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 111
Role of Leadership in Change Management Process
Sidra Ajmal 1
M. Zuhair Farooq 2
Noman Sajid 3
Dr. Sajid Awan 4
Abstract
The paper aims to explore the role of leadership in change
management process. The research is based on extensive
review of literature, in order to find out the leadership
factors that facilitate change in an organization. The
research reveals that that basic leadership and
management practices are associated with the core
competencies of an organization to achieve desired
outcomes. Many organizations are applying change
management practices to achieve organizational success
for long time survival. In our study we only focused on
Change-A planned activity, Leaders as a change agent,
Change as a process, Change management, and
Leadership style/leaders for change management.
Key words: Leadership, Change Management, Planned Change
1 Sidra Ajmal, MS- Scholar, SZABIST Islamabad
2 M. Zuhair Farooq, Hamdard Islamabad
3 Noman Sajid, MS- Scholar, SZABIST Islamabad
4 Dr. Sajid Awan, MS Co-Ordinator, SZABIST, Islamabad
Change is an ongoing natural process. For a successful
organization, change is meant to be implemented at three different
levels, i.e., individual, group and organization. At every level of
change, leadership plays different role as it’s the virtual duty of a
leader to manage the people and make their efforts to be at their
best in favor of change for an organization. Change management is
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 112
an essential area of concentration for the healthy growth of any
business, it is important even for the survival of any organization
in today’s business world. Successful change in any organization
is impossible without the active participation of management.
Every living creature is reluctant to change, whether it’s a
planned change or accidental change. Respondents of change are
affected by both external factors (outside the organization) and
internal factors (inside the organization); study reveals that internal
factors are actually the management style and leadership that
influence the process of change (Chirimbu, 2011). (Smith, 2005)
considered the inherent conundrum of organizational change: that
people, the human resources of organizations, are both an essential
factor in organizational change and, at times, the biggest obstacles
to achieving change. Therefore, it is concluded that important
element for a successful change in any organization is
“Leadership”. Leaders are known as “Champions of Change”- as it
is the top management of any organization who keep the process of
change going on and maintaining the operational reliability of the
organization (Nadler & Nadler, 1998).
Problem Statement
Most of the organizations are forced to construct changes in
order to survive for a longer period of time. They are required to
respond rapidly to the local, national and global uprising of new
technology and competition, if they want to survive. Everyone
knows that change is not going to take place at once. In fact, few
organizations meet their stated objectives (Anderson, 2011).
Change management has highly focused on people, identity and
the patterns of human interaction. Lack of leadership concentration
on the complexity of change, poorly developed strategy and
structures, last but not least attention towards people behavior
towards change make the process of change management
ineffective. For an effective change management process, it is
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 113
required by the leaders to pay notice towards identity formation of
the people in an organization (Karp & Helgo, 2008).
Aims of the Study
The aim of the study is to provide a clear understanding of
how leadership facilitates the process of change in an organization
and also the change management process.
Research Objectives
To explore the importance of leadership in an organization.
To identify leadership qualities for an effective process of
change.
To illustrate the significance of leadership for change
management.
Research Questions
How leadership facilitates the process of change and
change management in an organization?
Delimitations of the Study
Many organizations are applying change management
practices to achieve organizational success for long time survival.
In our study we only focused on Change-A planned activity,
Leaders as a change agent, Change as a process, Change
management, and Leadership style/leaders for change
management.
Literature review
Change is becoming a way of life for organizations,
employees and managers alike (Leanna & Barry, 2000). With
organizational change occurring at a more rapid pace than ever
before (Wanberg & Banas, 2000), the ability to identify, cope with,
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 114
and capitalize on organizational change is becoming a requirement
of effective managers.
Change - A Planned Activity
According to Ajay (2002), change is an illogical and
emotional process. Being a leader of change, one has to focus more
on human aspects of change as individuals are the main actors in
sphere of intellectual capital. Organizational change is a
multifaceted and long term task. A change management is actually
a vital plan in designing how the organization is to move from its
current state to a desired future state. Organizational change is a
planned activity as it serves as a linkage between the different parts
of a change process, setup priorities and timelines, assigning
responsibilities, establishing mechanisms for review and revision
where necessary. For an effective change management process, it
is required to be properly planned. Effective planning for change
must begin well before changes are to take effect and consultation
should be done (Smith, 2006).
For successful completition of any change management
plan, it needs to be properly planned and fully budgeted. Along
with these important constraints, leadership is also a spirit for the
manager to capture employee back into work and to produce
maximum benefits from change. This concludes that leaders are
more affective than managers during the process of change
(Bejestani, 2011).
Change as a process
Change as a process was being firstly conceptualized by
Lewin in 1947. He segmented the change as a process with three
phases: (1) unfreezing—it is about readiness to change means it
involves getting a point of an understanding that change is
necessary and to be prepare for leaving the current state of comfort
for the sake of future benefits; (2) moving—At this stage, people
have to move forward to adopt a new changed setup. People are
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 115
most fearful from this stage of change process as they have to
leave their current comfort zone; and (3) refreezing—At last,
change is accepted as a new norm in an organization and now the
change is a part of routine process. Lewin also suggested that
although common sense might bend toward increasing powerful
forces to persuade change, in many illustrations this might arouse
an equal and opposite increase in resisting forces, the net effect
being no change and greater tension than before.
An awareness of the need for change is the beginning of the
whole change process. A complete assessment of the current
situation is necessary to begin the process of implementing any
kind of change in an organization unfortunately this kind of
assessment may take longer time than management have
(Armstrong, 2003). Galpin (1996) has proposed the strategic steps
leaders necessitated to make use of the efficient change process.
These steps were:
Defining the need to change: At the initial step, it is
required to identify the need of change after the assessment
of current situation.
Developing a vision of the result of change: For an
effective change process, it is required to develop some
clear vision about the outcomes or consequence of the
change in an organization.
Leveraging teams to design, test, and implement changes:
To derive the best possible desired outcome, it is necessary
to empower teams that can design, test and implement
strategies through which change effectiveness can be
assured.
Addressing the cultural aspects of the organization that will
help and sustain change: The process of change must have
to incorporate with the culture of an organization as it will
facilitate change to strike up with the future challenges
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 116
Developing the essential attributes and skills needed to lead
the change effort: Last but not the least, for successful
completition of change process, certain attributes and skills
are considered necessary to be developed.
Leaders as Change Agent
Leader means someone who has the authority or power to
control a group of people and get it organized for a particular task
or goal. Leader has a clear vision for the welfare of his
organization and development of his organization. Leadership is
that quality of leader by which he leads the team or his group
(Bass, 1985). Leadership has six basic personality traits named as;
self confidence, ambition, drive and tenacity, realism,
psychological openness, appetite for learning, creativity, fairness,
dedication. To involve other members of team in decision making
is also the part of leadership
Senge (1990) illustrates three foundation characteristics for
a person to be in a leadership role in the modern day organizations
and they are of an architect, a teacher, and a steward. These three
qualities assist in clarifying mission, vision and values; identifying
strategies, structure and policies; generating efficient learning
processes; and facilitating subordinates to develop their mental
model continuously and think systematically. A well developed
leader Steve Job’s leadership style revolves around main two
concerns; (i) Persistence is the key, (ii) Innovation brings
leadership. Steve Jobs believes that persistence is the key towards
the successfulness of any leader. His attitude towards his work,
related Job’s leadership style as task oriented leadership. Whereas
his second belief indicates that his leadership style is also
comprised of people oriented leadership. Innovation brings
leadership means that the leader engages his team to be an
important part of decision making. This developed attitude of the
leaders creates a sense of belongingness in the members of team
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 117
and motivates them towards their assigned work or duty, which
ultimately increases the efficiency of the work.
For an effective change, the study reveals that charismatic
leadership and trust in top management both are important. They
are strongly correlated (positively) with change implementing
behavior, monitoring of anticipators, management level, and
department connection (Michaelis, Stegmaier & Sonntag, 2009).
According to Noer (1997), the leader, as a person, is the most
important tool for change. The leader's spirit, insight, wisdom,
compassion, values, and learning skills are all important facets in
the capabilities to lead others to embrace change and redesign. The
leader who prompts change within a firm is often subject to
approximate thought (Nadler & Nadler, 1998). It is the
leadership’s behavior that makes the change situations more
effective (Higgs & Rowland, 2005).
In response to today’s socioeconomic environment for
successful organizational development, the key defined by Darling
& Heller (2009) is embodied in the managerial leaders’ attitudes,
and the commensurate thoughts and feelings communicated
(vibrated) to the universe, both inside and outside of their
organizations. Study further reveals that leaders must have to
understand the reasons for the failure of change in any
organization. They have to develop capabilities to be a successful
change agent (Manikandan, 2010).
Change Management
Change management is an essential area of concentration
for healthy growth of any business, it is important even for the
survival of any organization in today’s business world. Change
management has highly focused on people, identity and the
patterns of human interaction. Change management will be the
core competency of the business leaders in twenty-first century.
Therefore being visionary change agents, leaders will be required
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 118
to be more skillful and motivational. Discontinuous changes make
worst affect on the capabilities of leadership (Nadler, Shaw &
Walton, 1995).
Even after implementation of change, the duty of leader
does not end. Change is the one constant, one can easily anticipate.
But in business, it’s vital that organizations build up a change
management approach through which they can rely on to diminish
both expected and unexpected changes. That way, they can meet
any challenges head-on and not be derailed by whatever changes
come their way (Gans, 2011). Nickols (2010), states that there are
four basic definitions for change management. These four
definitions are:
The task of managing change: Firstly the definition of
change management referred to the term, ‘the task of
managing change’. Managing change can be illustrated
firstly as making of changes in a planned and managed
way, secondly to manage the response to changes on which
organization have some control. It also includes managing
impact of change on people.
An area of professional practice: Change management is an
area of professional practice where organization is
managing the general process of change that is laid claim to
by professional change agents.
A body of knowledge: Change management is a body of
knowledge that consists of the models, methods and
techniques, tools, skills and other forms of knowledge that
go into making up any change practice
A control mechanism: Change management is about
controlling and monitoring the standards, requirements,
processes and procedures through which effective change
can be bought in the routine system of any organization.
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 119
Leadership Style
Important element for a successful change in any
organization is “Leadership” - leaders are the role model
personalities in any community. There are different styles of
leadership explained by theorists, and every style has its own
impact on change management. Lowder (2009) have discussed
Leadership Model for Change Management, he concludes that
Transformational leadership focuses on organizational
development where as servant leadership have concern about the
development of followers. In today’s dynamic business
environment, for developing best follower ship and change
management dealing – Transformational Leadership model is best.
Change management will be the core competency of the
business leaders in twenty-first century. Therefore being visionary
change agents, leaders will be required to more skillful and
motivational. Discontinuous changes make worst affect on the
capabilities of leadership (Nadler, Shaw & Walton, 1995).
Leadership style and employees’ trust in top management are
highly positively related to behavior involved in implementation of
innovations, for controlling individual differences and department
affiliation (Michaelis, Stegmaier & Stonntag, 2009). Nadler &
Tushman (1990) state that it’s only “Charismatic leader” that has
specialized quality to mobilize and sustain activity within an
organization through specific personal actions combined with
perceived personal characteristics.
At third phase of “Change Management Life Cycle” leaders
are the one who have to lead any change. They have to help the
person to develop skills that facilitates them to cope up with the
changes. Successful change leaders have to pay attention towards
the launch, implementation and sustaining of the particular change
effort (Herold & Fedop, n.d).
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 120
Change management is a process that includes various
skills i.e., leadership development (ability of top management to
get trust of internal customers in them), marketing and sales ability
(to make awareness about the consequences of change) and
communication skill (gather support for the decision to change
(Kaminski, 2000). Lack of any of these skills may have bad impact
on the effectiveness of change management process in an
organization.
According to Ajayi (2002), the change leader needs
following capabilities:
Superhuman determination to make the change happen;
Persistence;
Stamina;
A sufficient mandate that stems from personal change; and
First-rate intelligence.
With out strong leadership, effective organizational change
won’t ever be possible. Managing change in an effective manner
requires change leaders that can lead a team which have courage to
drive change properly in an existing system. As change is a
transformation process, therefore the agents of change (leaders and
management) must have to drive a supportive response for change
from the stakeholders (Kotter, 2007). Absence of clear
understanding of change accomplishment methods and the
incapability to adjust one’s management style or organizational
functions are quoted as hurdles to success (Bossidy & Charan,
2002; Gilley, 2005).
The literature reveals that basic leadership and management
practices are associated with the core competencies of an
organization to achieve desired outcomes (Goonan & Stoltz, 2004).
Leadership is an important essence for change management
process as by definition, change requires new system creation and
then institutionalizing the new innovative approaches. Primarily,
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 121
the transformational leadership is considered as leadership style
having capabilities to increment change fully in an organization
(Eisenbach, Watson & Pillai, 1999).
Visionary transformers are required to bring quality-led
strategic change (Nwankwo & Richardson, 1996). In today’s
modern era of technological advancement, every organization is
struggling to get an edge over its competitor and to do so
organizations are required to be more adaptive towards change. To
meet up with the challenges of twentieth century, organizations are
required to be converted into learning organizations at first stage,
in order to become world class organization. For transformation of
a traditional organization into a learning organization, the
fundamental required essence is leadership. That can clarify the
vision and mission of the organization, assist the employees to
complete their targets and help them to get settled in new
innovative and learning environment (Singh, 2011).
Leader as Change Agent Framework
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 122
References
Ajayi, O. (2002). Leading change. USA: Capstone Publishing.
Anderson, A. (2011). Engaging resistance: How ordinary people
successfully champion change. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Armstrong, M. (2003). A handbook of human resource
management practice. London: Kogan Page
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond
expectations. New York: Free Pr.
Bejestani, H, S. (2011). Improving Project Change Management
Using Leadership Spirit.
Bossidy, L., & Charan, R. (2002). Execution: The discipline of
getting things done. New York: Crown
Chirimbu, S. (2011). Management and Organizational Change.
Retrieved from: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1735866
Darling, J, R & Heller, V, L. (2009). Organization Development in
an Era of Socioeconomic Change: A Focus on The Key to
Successful Management Leadership. Organization
Development Journal, 27(2), 9-26.
Eisenbach, R., Watson, K., & Pillai, R. (1999). Transformational
leadership in the context of organizational change. Journal
of Organizational Change Management, 12(2), 80 – 89.
Galpin, T. J. (1996). The human side of change: A practical guide
to organization redesign. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Publishers
Gans, K. (2011). Should you change your thinking about Change
Management? Strategic Finance, October 2011, 48-50.
Gilley, A. (2005). The manager as change leader. Westport, CT:
Praeger
Goonan, J, K., & Stoltz, K, P. (2004). Leadership and Management
Principles for Outcomes-Oriented Organizations. Medical
Care, 42(4), 31-38.
Herold, D, M & Fedor, D, B. (n.d). Leading change management,
leadership strategies that really work. Standford Business
Books
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 123
Higgs, M & Rowland, D. (2005). All changes Great and small:
Exploring Approaches to change and its Leadership.
Journal of Change Management, 5(2), 121-151.
Kaminski, J. (2000). Leadership and Change Management:
Navigating the Turbulent Frontier. Retrieved from:
http://www.nursing-
informatics.com/N4111/changemant.pdf
Karp, T & Helgo, T, I, T. (2008). From Change Management to
Change Leadership: Embracing Chaotic Change in Public
Service Organizations. Journal of Change Management,
8(1), 85-96.
Kotter, P, J., 2007. Leading Change - Why transformation efforts
fail. Harvard Business Review, January 2007, 92-107.
Leana, R, C & Barry, B. (2000). Stability and Change as
Simultaneous Experiences in Organizational Life. The
Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 753-759.
Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/259203
Lewin, K (1947).Change Management Model. Retrieved from:
http://www.change-management-
coach.com/kurt_lewin.html
Lowder, T, M. (2009). The Best Leadership Model for
Organizational Change Management: Transformational
Verses Servant Leadership. Retrieved from:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1418796
Manikandah, P. (2010). Change Management- Where Do Leaders
Make Difference? Advances in Management, 3(9), 5-7.
Michaelis, B., Stegmaier, R., & Sonntag, R. (2009). Affective
Commitment to Change and Innovation Implementation
Behavior: The Role of Charismatic Leadership and
Employees’ Trust in Top Management. Journal of Change
Management, 9(4), 399-417.
Nadler, D., & Nadler, M. B. (1998). Champions of change: How
CEOs and their companies are mastering the skills of
radical change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers
Role of Leadership…. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 5 No. 2
Sidra, Zuhair, Noman & Dr. Sajid 124
Nadler, D., Shaw, R. B., & Walton, A. E. (1995).Discontinuous
change: Leading organizational transformation. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Nadler, D, A & Tushman, M, L. (1990). Beyond the Charismatic
Leader: Leadership and Organizational Change. California
Management Review, 32(2), 77-97.
Nickols, F. (2010). Change Management 101: A premier.
Retrieved from: http://www.nickols.us/change.pdf
Noer, D. M. (1997). Breaking free: A prescription for personal and
organizational change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Nwankwo, S., & Richardson, B. (1996). Quality management
through visionary leadership. Managing Service Quality,
6(4), 44 – 47.
Senge, M, P. (1990). The Leader's New Work: Building Learning
Organizations. Sloan Management Review, Fall 1990, 7-23
Singh, K, S. (2011). Leadership & Organizational Learning in
Knowledge Management Practices in Global
Organizations. The Indian Journal of Industrial Relations,
47(2), 353-365.
Smith, I. (2005). Achieving readiness for organizational change.
Library Management, 26(6/7), 408-412.
Smith, I. (2006). Continuing professional development and
workplace learning. Library Management, 27(4/5), 300-
306.
Wanberf, R, C & Banas, T, J. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of
openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace. Journal
of Applied psychology, 85(1), 132-142.
Mandatory Assignment Resources/Situational - Transformational and Transactional Leadership.pdf
117
Journal of Business Studies Quarterly
2014, Volume 5, Number 4 ISSN 2152-1034
Situational, Transformational, and Transactional Leadership and
Leadership Development
Jim Allen McCleskey
Abstract
In order to advance our knowledge of leadership, it is necessary to understand where the study
of leadership has been. McCleskey (2014) argued that the study of leadership spans more than
100 years. This manuscript describes three seminal leadership theories and their development.
Analysis of a sampling of recent articles in each theory is included. The manuscript also
discusses the concept of leadership development in light of those three seminal theories and
offers suggestions for moving forward both the academic study of leadership and the practical
application of research findings on the field.
Keywords: Leadership, Situational Leadership, Transactional Leadership, Transformational
Leadership, Development, Review
Introduction
This manuscript analyzes three seminal leadership theories: situational leadership,
transformational leadership (TL), and transactional leadership. It begins with introductory
comments about the academic field of leadership, continues with a look at the three theories
including their history and development, and proceeds to a micro-level, examining several recent
published studies in each area. It presents a comparison and contrast of the key principles of
each. The manuscript also discusses modern leadership challenges and leadership development
in the context of all three theories. First, a brief history of leadership follows.
Leadership Theory
One of the earliest studies of leadership, Galton’s (1869) Hereditary Genius emphasized
a basic concept that informed popular ideas about leadership (Zaccaro, 2007). The idea is that
leadership is a characteristic ability of extraordinary individuals. This conception of leadership,
known as the great man theory, evolved into the study of leadership traits, only to be supplanted
later the theories under discussion here (Glynn & DeJordy, 2010). Before discussing leadership,
it is useful to define the term. The question of the correct definition of leadership is a nontrivial
matter. Rost (1993) discovered 221 different definitions and conceptions of leadership. Some of
those definitions were narrow while others offered broader conceptions. Bass (2000; 2008)
argued that the search for a single definition of leadership was pointless. Among multiple
118
definitions and conceptions, the correct definition of leadership depends on the specific aspect of
leadership of interest to the individual (Bass, 2008). This manuscript focuses on three specific
conceptions of leadership: situational, transformational, and TL. The next section begins with
situational leadership.
Situational leadership
Situational leadership theory proposes that effective leadership requires a rational
understanding of the situation and an appropriate response, rather than a charismatic leader with
a large group of dedicated followers (Graeff, 1997; Grint, 2011). Situational leadership in
general and Situational Leadership Theory (SLT) in particular evolved from a task-oriented
versus people-oriented leadership continuum (Bass, 2008; Conger, 2010; Graeff, 1997; Lorsch,
2010). The continuum represented the extent that the leader focuses on the required tasks or
focuses on their relations with their followers. Originally developed by Hershey and Blanchard
(1969; 1979; 1996), SLT described leadership style, and stressed the need to relate the leader’s
style to the maturity level of the followers. Task-oriented leaders define the roles for followers,
give definite instructions, create organizational patterns, and establish formal communication
channels (Bass, 2008; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969; 1979; 1996; 1980; 1981). In contrast,
relation-oriented leaders practice concern for others, attempt to reduce emotional conflicts, seek
harmonious relations, and regulate equal participation (Bass, 2008; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969;
1979; 1996; 1980; 1981; Shin, Heath, & Lee, 2011). Various authors have classified SLT as a
behavioral theory (Bass, 2008) or a contingency theory (Yukl, 2011). Both conceptions contain
some validity. SLT focuses on leaders’ behaviors as either task or people focused. This supports
its inclusion as a behavioral approach to leadership, similar to the leadership styles approach
(autocratic, democratic, and laissez-faire), the Michigan production-oriented versus employee-
oriented approach, the Ohio State initiation versus consideration dichotomy, and the directive
versus participative approach (Bass, 2008; Glynn & DeJordy, 2010). It also portrays effective
leadership as contingent on follower maturity. This fits with other contingency-based leadership
theories including Fiedler’s contingency theory, path-goal theory, leadership substitutes theory,
and Vroom’s normative contingency model (Glynn & DeJordy, 2010; Bass, 2008; Yukl, 2011).
Both conceptualizations of SLT admit that task-oriented and relation-oriented behaviors are
dependent, rather than mutually exclusive approaches. The effective leader engages in a mix of
task and relation behaviors (Cubero, 2007; Graeff, 1997; Shin et al., 2011; Yukl, 2008; 2011;
Yukl & Mahsud, 2010). The level of maturity (both job and psychological maturity) of
followers determines the correct leadership style and relates to previous education and training
interventions (Bass, 2008; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969). Some scholars criticize SLT specifically
and situational leadership in general.
Criticisms of situational leadership
SLT was a popular conception of leadership; however, as experience with the original
Hersey & Blanchard model accrued, problems with the construct appeared. Nicholls (1985)
described three flaws with SLT dealing with its consistency, continuity, and conformity. Bass
(2008) agreed, noting lack of internal consistency, conceptual contradictions, and ambiguities.
Other scholars suggested additional weaknesses of SLT (Bass, 2008; Glynn & DeJordy, 2010).
Research revealed that no particular leadership style was universally effective and behavioral
theories relied on abstract leadership types that were difficult to identify (Glynn & DeJordy,
2010). A number of recent studies utilized the situational leadership approach. Next, this
manuscript describes two of them.
119
Research articles on situational leadership
Paul and Elder (2008) presented a guide for the analysis of research articles. Paul and
Elder (2008) suggested that the examination of an article explicitly consider the purpose,
question, information, concepts, assumptions, inferences, point of view, and implications in the
study. Arvidsson, Johansson, Ek, and Akselsson (2007), used a situational leadership framework
in the study of air traffic control employees. Arvidsson et al. (2007) set out to investigate how
leadership styles and adaptability differ across various situations, conditions, structures, and
tasks in the air traffic control arena. The authors asked a variety of research questions about the
relationship between leadership adaptability, task-orientation of the leader, leadership style,
working situation, operational conditions, organizational structure, and level of leadership
experience (Arvidsson et al., 2007). The information contained in the article included a
discussion of the literature linking leadership and safety and a relationship between leadership
and reduced stress levels. The article described the SLT model, the study, methods, results, and
discussion. The specific concepts presented included leadership and SLT. The authors’ implicit
assumptions included a relationship between effective leadership and workplace safety as well as
a relationship between leadership effectiveness and stress and between stress and poor workplace
performance. The authors also assumed that differences among coworkers require leaders to
exhibit sensitivity to and the ability to diagnose varying levels of maturity or readiness among
employees (Arvidsson et al, 2007). The point of view of the article is quantitative, positivist, and
objectivist. The authors hypothesize a correlation between independent and dependent variables
and then set out to investigate and confirm that relationship (Creswell, 2009). Arvidsson et al.
(2007) discussed implications of their work. In particular, despite the fact that previous research
indicated that relation-oriented leadership is preferred over task-oriented leadership, task-
orientation is suitable in some situations. Assigning tasks and job roles, specifying procedures,
and clarifying follower expectations result in increased job satisfaction (Arvidsson et al., 2007).
The next section examines another recent study.
Larsson and Vinberg (2010) conducted a study to identify common leadership behaviors
at a small group of successful companies and to organize those behaviors into suitable categories
to discuss theoretical implications of situational aspects of effective leadership. The study
attempted to uncover common leadership behaviors as they related to quality, effectiveness,
environment, and health perceptions. The implicit questions included which leadership
behaviors relate to outcomes, situational aspects, effectiveness, productivity, quality, and job
satisfaction (Larsson & Vinberg, 2010). The information in the article covered situational
leadership theories, theoretical constructs of effectiveness, and a description of four case studies
of effective organizations. The study addressed the concepts of leadership effectiveness, task
orientation, relation orientation, change leadership, and case study methodology. Larsson and
Vinberg (2010) started from the position of endorsing the relationship between leadership and
organizational success. Then they sought to identify the behaviors common to successful
leadership across four subject organizations. Larsson and Vinberg conducted the study from a
qualitative, comparative, positivist point of view (2010). The authors discuss the implications as
well as the need for additional research. Larsson and Vinberg (2010) conclude that successful
leadership includes both universally applicable elements (task-oriented) and contingency
elements (relation and change-oriented). The authors suggest additional research in leadership
and quality, and in leadership and follower health outcomes (Larsson & Vinberg, 2010). The
next section presents the transformational leadership theory.
120
Transformational leadership (TL)
Over the past 30 years, TL has been “the single most studied and debated idea with the
field of leadership” (Diaz-Saenz, 2011, p. 299). Published studies link TL to CEO success (Jung,
Wu, & Chow, 2008), middle manager effectiveness (Singh & Krishnan, 2008), military
leadership (Eid, Johnsen, Bartone, & Nissestad, 2008), cross-cultural leadership (Kirkman, Chen,
Farh, Chen, & Lowe, 2009), virtual teams (Hambley, O’Neill, & Kline, 2007), personality
(Hautala, 2006), emotional intelligence (Barbuto & Burbach, 2006), and a variety of other topics
(Diaz-Saenz, 2011). Burns (1978) operationalized the theory of TL as one of two leadership
styles represented as a dichotomy: transformational and transactional leadership. While distinct
from the concept of charismatic leadership (see Weber, 1924/1947), charisma is an element of
TL (Bass, 1985; 1990; 2000; 2008; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Conger, 1999; 2011; Conger & Hunt,
1999; Diaz-Saenz, 2011). Burns (1978) defined a transformational leader as “one who raises the
followers’ level of consciousness about the importance and value of desired outcomes and the
methods of reaching those outcomes” (p. 141). The transformational leader convinced his
followers to transcend their self-interest for the sake of the organization, while elevating “the
followers’ level of need on Maslow's (1954) hierarchy from lower-level concerns for safety and
security to higher-level needs for achievement and self-actualization” (Bass, 2008, p. 619).
Based on empirical evidence, Bass (1985) modified the original TL construct. Over time, four
factors or components of TL emerged. These components include idealized influence,
inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. Researchers
frequently group the first two components together as charisma (Bass & Riggio, 2006). The
transformational leader exhibits each of these four components to varying degrees in order to
bring about desired organizational outcomes through their followers (Bass 1985; 1990; 2000;
Bass & Riggio, 2006). Idealized influence incorporates two separate aspects of the follower
relationship. First, followers attribute the leader with certain qualities that followers wish to
emulate. Second, leaders impress followers through their behaviors. Inspirational motivation
involves behavior to motivate and inspire followers by providing a shared meaning and a
challenge to those followers. Enthusiasm and optimism are key characteristics of inspirational
motivation (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Intellectual stimulation allows leaders to increase their
followers’ efforts at innovation by questioning assumptions, reframing known problems, and
applying new frameworks and perspectives to old and established situations and challenges (Bass
& Riggio, 2006). Intellectual stimulation requires openness on the part of the leader. Openness
without fear of criticism and increased levels of confidence in problem solving situation combine
to increase the self-efficacy of followers. Increased self-efficacy leads to increased effectiveness
(Bandura, 1977). Individualized consideration involves acting as a coach or mentor in order to
assist followers with reaching their full potential. Leaders provide learning opportunities and a
supportive climate (Bass & Riggio, 2006). These four components combine to make leaders
transformational figures. In spite of significant empirical support, a number of criticisms of TL
theory exist.
Criticisms of transformational leadership
Empirical research supports the idea that TL positively influences follower and
organizational performance (Diaz-Saenz, 2011). However, a number of scholars criticize TL
(Beyer, 1999; Hunt, 1999; Yukl, 1999; 2011). Yukl (1999) took TL to task and many of his
criticisms retain their relevance today. He noted that the underlying mechanism of leader
influence at work in TL was unclear and that little empirical work existed examining the effect of
TL on work groups, teams, or organizations. He joined other authors and noted an overlap
121
between the constructs of idealized influence and inspirational motivation (Hunt, 1999; Yukl,
1999). Yukl suggested that the theory lacked sufficient identification of the impact of situational
and context variables on leadership effectiveness (1999; 2011). Despite its critics, an ongoing
and vibrant body of research exists on TL and an analysis of two recent articles follows below.
Recent articles on transformational leadership
Gundersen, Hellesoy, and Raeder (2012) studied TL and leadership effectiveness in
international project teams facing dynamic work environments. As noted previously, Paul and
Elder (2008) presented guidelines for the analysis of research articles. The article presented an
examination of the relationship between TL and work adjustment including the mediating role of
trust. The research questions created included the relationship between TL and team
performance, the mediating role of trust, the moderating role of a dynamic work environment,
the relationship between TL and work adjustment, and the relationship between TL and job
satisfaction. Information contained in the article included brief reviews of TL, team
performance, dynamic work environment, trust, work adjustment, and job satisfaction. The
article also discussed the study sample, measures, statistical procedures, limitations, future
research suggestions, implications, and overall conclusion. The specific concepts presented
included TL, trust, dynamic work environment, team performance, work adjustment, and job
satisfaction. The assumptions of the authors included three explicit premises. The suitability of
TL varies according to context, the need for additional empirical work on the relationship
between TL and team outcomes exists, and no previous empirical studies on work adjustment in
international settings as an outcome of leader behaviors exists (Gundersen et al., 2012). The
authors write from a quantitative, positivist, objectivist viewpoint with a confirmatory purpose.
The authors hypothesized a correlation between independent and dependent variables and then
set out to investigate and confirm that relationship (Creswell, 2009). Gundersen et al. (2012)
argue that their study increases knowledge of the drivers of organizational effectiveness.
Specifically, TL behaviors affect performance on international assignments in a variety of
complex projects by contributing to work adjustment and positive outcomes. These implications
apply to high-stakes organizational outcomes including selection of organizational leaders.
Another TL study follows below.
Hamstra, Yperen, Wisse, and Sassenberg (2011) studied transformational (and
transactional) leadership style in relation to followers’ preferred regulatory style, workforce
stability, and organizational effectiveness. The authors intended to address a gap in the
leadership literature by addressing regulatory fit in the context of turnover intentions, while
integrating both transformational and transactional leadership and examining both promotion and
prevention focused regulatory strategies (Hamstra et al., 2011). The research addressed the
relationship between TL and turnover intentions, given a promotion-focused regulatory strategy,
given a prevention-focused regulatory strategy; and the relationship between transactional
leadership and turnover intentions given a promotion-focused regulatory strategy, and given a
prevention-focused regulatory strategy. Information contained in the article included a brief
discussion of TL, transactional leadership, workforce turnover intentions, regulatory strategy,
participants and procedures, measures used, results, and a general discussion of the research
findings. The specific concepts enumerated above include transactional and TL style, and
followers’ regulatory focus. The authors assumed that leadership influences followers turnover
intentions, that a match between followers self-regulatory strategy influences organizational
outcomes, and that leadership style preferences may fit with regulatory style preferences. The
authors worked from a positivist, objectivist, and confirmatory point of view. The authors
122
hypothesized a correlation between independent and dependent variables and then set out to
investigate and confirm that relationship (Creswell, 2009). Hamstra et al. (2011) discussed
several implications of the study including the idea that tailoring specific leadership behaviors or
styles to followers prefer self-regulatory orientation may improve employee retention,
organizational stability, and the engagement of followers. The authors recommended further
research on the relationship between leadership style, turnover intention, and follower
commitment. The authors also suggested additional research on preferred self-regulatory
orientation and other organizational outcomes variables. The next section of the manuscript
explores transactional leadership theory.
Transactional leadership
Transactional leadership focuses on the exchanges that occur between leaders and
followers (Bass 1985; 1990; 2000; 2008; Burns, 1978). These exchanges allow leaders to
accomplish their performance objectives, complete required tasks, maintain the current
organizational situation, motivate followers through contractual agreement, direct behavior of
followers toward achievement of established goals, emphasize extrinsic rewards, avoid
unnecessary risks, and focus on improve organizational efficiency. In turn, transactional
leadership allows followers to fulfill their own self-interest, minimize workplace anxiety, and
concentrate on clear organizational objectives such as increased quality, customer service,
reduced costs, and increased production (Sadeghi & Pihie, 2012). Burns (1978) operationalized
the concepts of both transformational and transactional leadership as distinct leadership styles.
Transactional leadership theory described by Burns (1978) posited the relationship between
leaders and followers as a series of exchanges of gratification designed to maximize
organizational and individual gains. Transactional leadership evolved for the marketplace of
fast, simple transactions among multiple leaders and followers, each moving from transaction to
transaction in search of gratification. The marketplace demands reciprocity, flexibility,
adaptability, and real-time cost-benefit analysis (Burns, 1978). Empirical evidence supports the
relationship between transactional leadership and effectiveness in some settings (Bass, 1985;
1999; 2000; Bass, Avolio, Jung, & Berson, 2003; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Hater & Bass, 1988;
Zhu, Sosik, Riggio, & Yang, 2012). Today, researchers study transactional leadership within the
continuum of the full range of leadership model (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Some researchers
criticize transactional leadership.
Criticisms of transactional leadership
Burns (1978) argued that transactional leadership practices lead followers to short-term
relationships of exchange with the leader. These relationships tend toward shallow, temporary
exchanges of gratification and often create resentments between the participants. Additionally, a
number of scholars criticize transactional leadership theory because it utilizes a one-size-fits-all
universal approach to leadership theory construction that disregards situational and contextual
factors related organizational challenges (Beyer, 1999; Yukl, 1999; 2011; Yukl & Mahsud,
2010). Empirical support for transactional leadership typically includes both transactional and
transformational behaviors (Gundersen et al., 2012; Liu, Liu, & Zeng, 2011). Next, this
manuscript reviews two recent articles featuring transactional leadership theory.
123
Recent articles on transactional leadership
Liu et al. (2011) looked at the relationship between transactional leadership and team
innovativeness. The authors focused on the potential moderating role of emotional labor and
examined a mediating role for team efficacy. The authors intended to contribute to the
leadership field by closing an identified gap in the literature with the introduction of emotional
labor and team efficacy as important factors in the existing relationship between transactional
leadership and team innovativeness. The authors predicted a significant negative relationship
between transactional leadership and team innovativeness. The article included an overview
discussion of teams, innovativeness, transactional leadership, emotional labor, and team efficacy.
The authors assumed that transactional leadership could foster team innovativeness in some
settings. The authors also assumed that emotional labor was a moderating factor in that
relationship. Liu et al. (2011) conducted the study from the quantitative, positivist, objectivist,
and confirmatory point of view. The authors hypothesized a correlation between independent
and dependent variables and then set out to investigate and confirm that relationship (Creswell,
2009). Liu et al. (2011) discussed several implications of their findings. Emotional labor acts as
a boundary condition on the relationship between transactional leadership and team
innovativeness. This knowledge helps deepen the understanding of the context in which
transactional leadership leads to organizational effectiveness. Liu et al. (2011) recommended
additional research on transactional leadership and other positive organizational outcomes, and
additional research on other possible boundary conditions. The next section addresses another
study on transactional leadership.
Groves and LaRocca (2011) studied both transactional and TL in the context of ethical
behavior. In contrast to the full range of leadership model view of transactional leadership as
part of a continuum of behaviors, Groves and LaRocca see transactional leadership and TL as
distinct constructs underpinned by separate ethical foundations. Specifically, transactional
leadership flows from “teleological ethical values (utilitarianism)” and TL flows from
“deontological ethical values (altruism, universal rights, Kantian principle, etc.)” (Groves &
LaRocca, 2011, p. 511). While an in-depth discussion of ethics is outside the scope of this
manuscript, it is noteworthy that other authors (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999; Singh & Krishnan,
2008) also discussed the relationship between ethics and transactional leadership. The concepts
presented by Groves and LaRocca (2011) include corporate social responsibility, ethics, TL,
transactional leadership, and managerial decision-making. The authors examined ethics in
relation to leadership style and its impact on follower values and corporate social responsibility.
The point of view presented by the authors is quantitative, positivist, objective, and confirmatory
as evidenced by a research design that hypothesizes a correlation between independent and
dependent variables and then set out to investigate and confirm that relationship (Creswell,
2009). Liu et al. (2011) confirmed empirical support for their view. Author identified
limitations included: results oriented toward leaders description of what they would do rather
than actual behavior, omission of measures designed to identify social desirability, and inability
to generalize findings to the larger population. Additional limitations mentioned included
potential common source and common method bias, lack of longitudinal data, follower response
bias, and an inability to separate personal ethics from preferred leadership style (Liu et al., 2011).
The authors suggested additional research to address these limitations. Next, this manuscript
summarizes the key concepts in situational, transformational, and transactional leadership.
124
Situational, Transformational, and Transactional Leadership
This manuscript analyzes three seminal leadership theories: situational leadership, TL,
and transactional leadership. Situational leadership emphasized leadership behaviors along a
continuum between task-orientation in relation-orientation. Situational leadership also
emphasized the level of maturity, or readiness of the followers as a contingency or context that
leaders need to account for in order to establish the correct fit between the leader and follower
(Bass, 2008). In TL, leaders achieve results by employing idealized influence, inspirational
motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Bass, 2000; 2008; Bass &
Riggio, 2006). The transformational leader exhibits each of these four components to varying
degrees in order to bring about desired organizational outcomes through their followers (Bass &
Riggio, 2006). Transformational leaders share a vision, inspire followers, mentor, coach, respect
individuals, foster creativity, and act with integrity (Bass, 1990; 1999; 2008; Bass & Riggio,
2006).
Transactional leadership involves exchanges between leaders and followers designed to
provide benefits to both. Leaders influence followers through contingent rewards and negative
feedback or corrective coaching. Despite originating as distinct constructs, transactional and TL
exist as parts of another leadership model, the full range of leadership model (Bass & Riggio,
2006). One notable difference between these three leadership theories involves the subject of
charisma (Conger, 1999; 2011; Conger & Hunt, 1999; Hunt, 1999; Shamir & Howell, 1999).
Many scholars combine idealized influence and inspirational motivation under the
heading charismatic-inspirational leadership or simply charismatic leadership (Bass, 2008; Bass
& Riggio, 2006; Hunt, 1999; Shamir & Howell, 1999). The concept of charisma in entered the
social sciences from religion through the work of Max Weber (1924/1947). In contrast to TL,
both situational and transactional leadership theories ignore the role of individual differences
between leaders (Bass, 2008). Charisma is a key example of one such individual difference.
Summary of key differences and similarities
As described above, similarities exist between task-oriented leadership and transactional
leadership (Bass, 1985; 1990; 1999; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Burns, 1978). Both focus on the
exchange between leaders and followers and both emphasize work products or outcomes.
Relation-oriented leadership compares to TL (Bass 1985; 1990; 1999; Burns 1978; Conger,
2011), authentic leadership (Avolio, 2010; Bass, 2008; Caza & Jackson, 2011), and servant
leadership (Bass, 2008). Relation-oriented leadership is people focused, inspirational,
persuasive, and intellectually stimulating (Bass, 2008). Both situational leadership theory and
transactional leadership focus on leadership behaviors to the exclusion of leadership traits or
individual differences, while TL looks at leadership behaviors and individual differences.
Transactional and TL theories involve universal approaches to leadership. TL applies to a wide
range of situations and contexts and evidence suggests TL fits a variety of diverse cultural
contexts (Den Hartog, House, Hanges, Ruiz-Quintanilla, & Dorfman, 1999; Leong, 2011;
Rowold & Rohmann, 2009; Tsai, Chen, & Cheng, 2009; Zhu et al., 2012). In contrast,
situational leadership theories and contingent leadership approaches advocate for the right
leadership style and behaviors for the context and situation faced by the organization (Bass,
2008; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969; 1979; 1996; Yukl, 1999, 2008; 2011). Transformational and
transactional leadership theories, and the corresponding full range of leadership theory, continue
to add to an impressive 30-year history of empirical support (Diaz-Saenz, 2011; Gundersen et al.,
2012; Hamstra et al., 2011; Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Leong, 2011; Reichard, Riggio, Guerin,
Oliver, Gottfried, & Gottfried, 2009; Yukl; 2011). However, 30 years of history does not
125
guarantee that transformational and transactional leadership adequately address the challenges
facing the modern field of leadership.
Contemporary Leadership Challenges and the Future of Leadership Development
A vital challenge to the academic leadership field involves the need to develop leaders
and leadership. Day (2011) argued that over time, some leaders developed “the erroneous belief
that leadership develops mainly in leadership development programs” (p. 37). Historically,
leadership development targeted specific skills and competencies, while focusing on diffusion of
best practices. For example, leadership development programs target self-management
strategies, social competencies, and work facilitation (Day, 2009). Day (2011) suggested a
transition in leadership development beyond the best practices orientation. Day argued for a
more scientific approach to developing leaders and leadership. Modern leadership requires a
new focus on developing leadership expertise (Day, 2009), new perspectives on the role of leader
identity (Day & Harrison, 2007), and the development of adaptive leadership capacity (DeRue &
Wellman, 2009). Each of the three leadership theories discussed in this manuscript approaches
the subject of leadership development differently.
Situational leadership theory advocates matching the leader to the situation if possible or
matching the leadership orientation (task versus relation) to the follower maturity (Hersey &
Blanchard, 1969; 1979; 1996). Leadership development efforts aimed at improving
organizational effectiveness should use instruments designed to gauge the level of task-
orientation and relation-orientation of the leader in order to establish a fit with the current level
of follower maturity. Existing leaders should receive skills and competency training aimed at
developing their task-oriented or relational-oriented skill deficits. Previous empirical research
indicated that level of follower maturity related to previous education and training interventions
(Bass, 2008; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969; 1979; 1996).
Bass & Riggio (2006) suggested that TL development could not focus on specific, narrow
skills. Bass (2008) argued for TL as a reflection of the “whole integrated person and their deeply
held values and self-concepts” (p. 1106). Development in TL requires a broadly established
educational process. Burns (1978) agreed, advocating for the joint involvement of facilitators
and students in an effort to reach "higher stages of moral reasoning" and higher levels of
individual judgment (Burns, 1978, p. 449). Based on these recommendations for a broad
educational process, targeting the leader’s values and self-concepts, aimed at higher stages of
moral reasoning, it is reasonable to doubt whether TL development is possible. This represents
another key difference between TL and situational leadership.
The extant leadership literature provides little guidance on transactional leadership
development. This may stem from the fact that most leaders do not need development to behave
transactionally with their followers. Transactional leadership is traditional leadership (Burns,
1978). As Weber (1924/1947) indicated, a system of operation and coordination is called
“traditional” if it is part of an existing system of control, and if the leader enjoys authority based
on status and on the existence of personal loyalty created through a process of education (p. 341).
This process of education is transactional leadership development. Real-world examples,
available practice, and on-the-job training opportunities abound for the leader attempting to
develop their transactional leadership behaviors. This manuscript closes with a brief description
of the future of leadership.
Bass (2008) predicted the continued importance of both personal traits and situations to
leadership. Bass argued that large, purely transactional organizations would give way to
transformational ones as modern leaders become more innovative, responsive, flexible, and
126
adaptive (Bass, 2008). The study of leadership marches on toward follower-centered approaches
(Bligh, 2011), hybrid configurations (Gronn, 2011), complexity theory (Uhl-Bien & Marion,
2011), and a variety of other arenas. The increase in theoretical pluralism, evident since the 90s,
continues as the academic field of leadership continues its search for the truth (Bryman,
Collinson, Grint, Jackson, & Uhl-Bien, 2011). Leadership scholars must continue to engage in
thorough and thoughtful research into the connections between development and efficacy,
organizations and outcomes, and between leaders and followers. That is both the future
challenge and the historical past of leadership.
References
Arvidsson, M., Johansson, C. R., Ek, Å., & Akselsson, R. (2007). Situational leadership in air
traffic control. Journal of Air Transportation, 12(1), 67-86. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed
u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=25644644&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Avolio, B. J. (2010). Pursuing authentic leadership development. In N. Nohria, & R. Khurana
(Eds.), Handbook of leadership theory and practice (pp. 739-765). Boston, MA: Harvard
Business Press.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership: Good, better, best. Organizational Dynamics, 13(3), 26-40.
doi:10.1016/0090-2616(85)90028-2
Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the
vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19-31. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed
u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=9607211357&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Bass, B. M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership.
European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 8(1), 9-32.
doi:10.1080/135943299398410
Bass, B. M. (2000). The future of leadership in learning organizations. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 7(3), 18-40. doi:10.1177/107179190000700302
Bass, B. M. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, & managerial
applications (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., Jung, D. I., & Berson, Y. (2003). Predicting unit performance by
assessing transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology,
88(2), 207-218. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.207
Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Psychology Press.
Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational
leadership behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 181-217. doi:10.1016/S1048-
9843(99)00016-8
Beyer, J. M. (1999). Taming and promoting charisma to change organizations. The Leadership
Quarterly, 10(2), 307-330. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00019-3
Bligh, M. C. (2011). Followership and follower-centered approaches. In A. Bryman, D.
Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership
(pp. 425-436). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bryman, A., Collinson, D., Grint, K., Jackson, B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (Eds.). (2011). The SAGE
handbook of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
127
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Caza, A., & Jackson, B. (2011). Authentic leadership. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B.
Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 352-364).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Conger, J. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insider's
perspective on these developing streams of research. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2),
145-179. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00012-0
Conger, J. A. (2011). Charismatic leadership. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson
& M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 86-102). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Conger, J. A., & Hunt, J. G. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership: Taking stock
of the present and future (part i). The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 121-127. doi:
10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00017-X
Creswell, J. H. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Cubero, C. G. (2007). Situational leadership and persons with disabilities. Work, 29(4), 351-356.
Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed
u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=27621294&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Day, D. V. (2009). Executive selection is a process not a decision. Industrial & Organizational
Psychology, 2(2), 159-162. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2009.01126.x
Day, D. V. (2011). Leadership development. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson &
M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 37-50). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Day, D. V., & Harrison, M. M. (2007). A multilevel, identity-based approach to leadership
development. Human Resource Management Review, 17(4), 360-373.
doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2007.08.007
Den Hartog, D. N., House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., & Dorfman, P. W.
(1999). Culture specific and cross-culturally generalizable implicit leadership theories:
Are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally endorsed? The
Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 219-256. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00018-1
DeRue, D. S., & Wellman, N. (2009). Developing leaders via experience: The role of
developmental challenge, learning orientation, and feedback availability. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 94(4), 859-875. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed
u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=42838422&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Diaz-Saenz, H. R. (2011). Transformational leadership. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B.
Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 299-310).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Eid, J., Johnsen, B. H., Bartone, P. T., & Nissestad, O. A. (2008). Growing transformational
leaders: Exploring the role of personality hardiness. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 29(1), 4-23. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1108/01437730810845270
Glynn, M. A., & DeJordy, R. (2010). Leadership through an organizational behavior lens: A look
at the last half-century of research. In N. Nohria, & R. Khurana (Eds.), Handbook of
leadership and practice (pp. 119-158). Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
128
Graeff, C. L. (1997). Evolution of situational leadership theory: A critical review. The
Leadership Quarterly, 8(2), 153-170. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(97)90014-X
Grint, K. (2011). A history of leadership. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson & M.
Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 3-14). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Gronn, P. (2011). Hybrid configurations of leadership. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B.
Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 437-454).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Groves, K. S., & LaRocca, M. A. (2011). An empirical study of leader ethical values,
transformational and transactional leadership, and follower attitudes toward corporate
social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(4), 511-528. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1007/s10551-011-0877-y
Gundersen, G., Hellesoy, B. T., & Raeder, S. (2012). Leading international project teams: The
effectiveness of transformational leadership in dynamic work environments. Journal of
Leadership & Organizational Studies, 19(1), 46-57. doi:10.1177/1548051811429573
Hambley, L. A., O’Neill, T. A., & Kline, T. J. B. (2007). Virtual team leadership: The effects of
leadership style and communication medium on team interaction styles and outcomes.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103(1), 1-20.
doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.004
Hamstra, M. R. W., Van Yperen, N. W., Wisse, B., & Sassenberg, K. (2011). Transformational-
transactional leadership styles and followers’ regulatory focus: Fit reduces followers’
turnover intentions. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 10(4), 182-186. doi:10.1027/1866-
5888/a000043
Hater, J. J., & Bass, B. M. (1988). Superior's evaluations and subordinates' perceptions of
transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(4), 695-
702. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed
u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=5111775&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Hautala, T.M. (2006). The relationship between personality and transformational leadership.
Journal of Management Development, 25(8), 777-794. doi:10.1108/02621710610684259
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1969). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training & Development
Journal, 23(5), 26. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed
u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=7465530&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1979). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training & Development
Journal, 33(6), 94. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed
u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9067469&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1980). The management of change. Training & Development
Journal, 34(6), 80. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed
u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9072349&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1981). So you want to know your leadership style? Training &
Development Journal, 35(6), 34. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed
u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=7471134&site=ehost-live&scope=site
129
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1996). Great ideas revisited: Revisiting the life-cycle theory of
leadership. Training & Development Journal, 50(1), 42.
Hunt, J. G. (1999). Transformational/charismatic leadership's transformation of the field: An
historical essay. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 129-144. doi:10.1016/S1048-
9843(99)00015-6
Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-
analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 755-768.
doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.755
Jung, D., Wu, A., & Chow, C. W. (2008). Towards understanding the direct and indirect effects
of CEOs' transformational leadership on firm innovation. The Leadership Quarterly,
19(5), 582-594. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.07.007
Kirkman, B. L., Chen, G., Farh, J.-L., Chen, Z., & Lowe, K. B. (2009). Individual power
distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders: A cross-level,
cross-cultural examination. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 744-764.
doi:10.5465/AMJ.2009.43669971
Larsson, J., & Vinberg, S. (2010). Leadership behaviour in successful organisations: Universal or
situation-dependent? Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 21(3), 317-334.
doi:10.1080/14783360903561779
Leong, L. Y. C. (2011). Is transformational leadership universal? A meta-analytical investigation
of multifactor leadership questionnaire means across cultures. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 18(2), 164-174. doi:10.1177/1548051810385003
Liu, J., Liu, X., & Zeng, X. (2011). Does transactional leadership count for team innovativeness?
Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24(3), 282-298.
doi:10.1108/09534811111132695
Lorsch, J. W. (2010). A contingency theory of leadership. In N. Nohria, & R. Khurana (Eds.),
Handbook of leadership theory and practice (pp. 411-432). Boston, MA: Harvard
Business Press.
Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York, NY: Harper.
Nicholls, J. R. (1985). A new approach to situational leadership. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 6(4), 2.
Paul, R. & Elder, L. (2008). The miniature guide to critical thinking. ( No. 520m).
www.criticalthinking.org: Foundation for Critical Thinking Press. Retrieved from
http://courseroom2.capella.edu/webct/RelativeResourceManager/Template/OM8004/Cour
se_Files/cf_Miniature_Guide_to_Critical_Thinking-Concepts_and_Tools.pdf
Reichard, R. J., Riggio, R. E., Guerin, D. W., Oliver, P. H., Gottfried, A. W., & Gottfried, A. E.
(2011). A longitudinal analysis of relationships between adolescent personality and
intelligence with adult leader emergence and transformational leadership. The Leadership
Quarterly, 22(3), 471-481. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.04.005
Rost, J. C. (1993). Leadership development in the new millennium. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 1(1), 91-110. doi:10.1177/107179199300100109
Rowold, J., & Rohmann, A. (2009). Transformational and transactional leadership styles,
followers' positive and negative emotions, and performance in German nonprofit
orchestras. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 20(1), 41-59. doi:10.1002/nml.240
Sadeghi, A., & Pihie, Z. A. L. (2012). Transformational leadership and its predictive effects on
leadership effectiveness. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(7), 186-
197.
130
Shamir, B., & Howell, J. M. (1999). Organizational and contextual influences on the emergence
and effectiveness of charismatic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 257-283.
doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00014-4
Shin, J., Heath, R. L., & Lee, J. (2011). A contingency explanation of public relations
practitioner leadership styles: Situation and culture. Journal of Public Relations Research,
23(2), 167-190. doi:10.1080/1062726X.2010.505121
Singh, N., & Krishnan, V. R. (2008). Self-sacrifice and transformational leadership: Mediating
role of altruism. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 29(3), 261-274.
Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1108/01437730810861317
Tsai, W., Chen, H., & Cheng, J. (2009). Employee positive moods as a mediator linking
transformational leadership and employee work outcomes. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 20(1), 206-219. doi:10.1080/09585190802528714
Uhl-Bien, M., & Marion, R. (2011). Complexity leadership theory. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson,
K. Grint, B. Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 468-
482). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization (T. Parsons Trans.). New
York, NY: Free Press. (Original work published in 1924)
Yukl, G. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic
leadership theories. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285-305. doi:10.1016/S1048-
9843(99)00013-2
Yukl, G. (2008). How leaders influence organizational effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly,
19(6), 708-722.
Yukl, G. (2011). Contingency theories of effective leadership. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K.
Grint, B. Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 286-
298). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yukl, G., & Mahsud, R. (2010). Why flexible and adaptive leadership is essential. Consulting
Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62(2), 81-93. doi:10.1037/a0019835
Zaccaro, S. J. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist, 62(1), 6-
16. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.62.1.6
Zhu, W., Sosik, J.J., Riggio, R.E. & Yang, B. (2012). Relationships between transformational
and active transactional leadership and followers' organizational identification: The role of
psychological empowerment. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 13(3), 186.
Mandatory Assignment Resources/The Urgent Need for Skilled Transformational Leaders.pdf
The Urgent Need for Skilled Transformational Leaders: Integrating Transformational Leadership and Organization Development
D. D. Warrick
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
There is an urgent need in organizations of all types and sizes for transformational leaders who have the courage and skills to reinvent and build organizations capable of succeeding in today’s times of dynamic change and scarce resources. And yet, while the idea of transformational leadership has a rich and well researched history, few leaders are familiar with the term, few organizations are developing transform- ational leaders, and very few leaders have any idea how to be a transformational leader. One of the challenges with theories on transformational leadership is that while they are strong on the characteristics needed to be a transformational leader, they are not as clear on the actual skills needed to change and transform organizations. By integrating concepts from transformational leadership and from the field of organization development that specializes in organization change and transformation, both fields are strengthened. Transformational leadership is made more clear and practical and organization development benefits from a greater emphasis on the need for transformational leaders in leading change. The article also presents an operational definition of transformational leadership so organizations can purposefully and systematically develop transformational leaders and interested leaders can learn the fundamental thinking and skills needed to be a skilled transformational leader. INTRODUCTION
Organizations in both the private and public sectors are in need of revolutionary, transformational change! Incremental change and modest improvements won’t be enough. Everything must be done better, smarter, and faster while doing more with less and building organizations that attract and retain talented leaders and staff. The organizations that hear this call for change and take a proactive approach to making the changes that can and must be made have a good chance of thriving. The rest may have difficulty surviving in a new organization world where uncertainty, constant change, increased competition, frequent restructuring, downsizing, budget cuts, and layoffs are becoming common place and a growing number of organizations that are household names are not able to make it.
The degree of change that is required in these times of dynamic and unpredictable economic, social, political, technological, and organizational change can best be accomplished by transformational leaders who have the desire, courage, and skills to make the needed changes and who understand the fundamentals of transformational leadership. Noel Tichy said in his book, The Leadership Engine, “The scarcest resource in the world today is leadership talent capable of continually transforming organizations to win in tomorrow’s world” (Tichy, 1997:8). Nothing will transform an organization faster and prepare an organization better for future success than skilled transformational leaders. Even having one skilled transformational leader at the top could potentially increase the success of an organization. However,
Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011 11
what is most needed is transformational leaders throughout an organization. Is your organization staffed by transformational leaders? Are you developing transformational leaders? Your future may depend on it. UNDERSTANDING TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
The term transformational leader was originally developed by James MacGregor Burns (Burns, 1978). Burns made a distinction between transactional leaders and transformational leaders. Transactional leadership describes the transaction that occurs between leaders and followers in getting the job done and achieving goals. In many ways it is another term for management. The leader makes clear what needs to be done and offers rewards in exchange for individual and group effort directed towards goal attainment. Transformational leadership describes a process by which leaders bring about significant positive changes in individuals, groups, teams, and organizations (Avolia, Waldman, & Yammarino, 1991) by using inspiration, vision, and the ability to motivate followers to transcend their self-interests for a collective purpose. Transformational leadership focuses more on leadership skills and takes leadership to a new level of transforming organizations and setting them on a new course of action. Both transactional and transformational leadership are important. Organizations need to be well managed but you can’t manage an organization to greatness. Greatness comes from leadership.
Bernard Bass was also a pioneer in developing and researching the concept of transformational leadership (Bass, 1985). He described specific behaviors that characterized transformational leaders such as being a model of integrity and fairness, setting clear goals, having high expectations, encouraging people and providing support and recognition, stirring the emotions and passions of people, and getting people to look beyond their own self-interests and reach for higher goals. Bass also identified several dimensions of transformational leadership including (Bass, 1985, 1987, 1999, 2001, Bass & Avolio, 1991, 1992):
1. Idealized Influence (Bass originally called this charisma but later renamed it idealized influence to describe providing a clear vision and mission, instilling pride in what needs to be accomplished, and gaining respect and trust from leading with high moral and ethical standards)
2. Inspiration (communicating high expectations, adding meaning to goals and undertakings, using symbols to focus efforts, expressing important purposes in simple ways, doing things to keep people motivated)
3. Intellectual Stimulation (encouraging new and better ways of doing things, fostering creativity, re-examining assumptions, promoting intelligence, rationality, and problem solving)
4. Individual Consideration (showing a personal interest in employees and their development)
In addition, Bass played a major role in researching the impact of transformational leadership. Many empirical studies have shown that transformational leadership is positively associated with improvements in job satisfaction, job performance, and employee commitment and trust (Bass & Avolio, 1990; Bass, 1999).
Another key player in the development of the concept of transformational leadership was Noel Tichy who co-authored a book with Mary Anne Devanna titled The Transformational Leader (Tichy & Devanna, 1986). Tichy and Devanna point out that the old-style manager who managed what he or she found and left things the same will no longer work and that companies need leaders who are willing to make revolutionary changes that will enable them to stay competitive in an increasingly international business environment. They outline a three step process for transforming organizations:
1. Revitalization (recognizing the need for change) 2. Creating a new vision 3. Institutionalizing change
Their view of a transformational leader is of a visionary leader with new ways of thinking about
strategy, structure, and people as well as about change, innovation, and having an entrepreneurial
12 Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011
perspective. They also believe that transformational leadership is a systematic process that can be learned and managed.
There have been many other contributors to the thinking and research on transformational leadership. Figure 1 summarizes some of the major characteristics of transformational leaders. These ideas should be very instructive to leaders who aspire to being transformational leaders and to organizations committed to developing transformational leaders. POTENTIAL PAYOFFS OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
It is surprising that there isn’t a stronger interest in transformational leadership considering its many documented payoffs. The extensive research on transformational leadership indicates that it can create a shared vision and commitment to higher level goals and builds respect and trust between leaders and followers. It can also improve the performance of individuals, groups, teams, and organizations and increase innovation, creativity, and the involvement and engagement of employees in making improvements. It is effective at empowering employees, improving employee motivation and satisfaction, and reducing employee stress and burnout. Figure 2 summarizes some of the research on the many potential payoffs of transformational leadership. INTEGRATING TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT
The field of organization development (OD) had its early roots in the 1940s through the work of Kurt Lewin and the Research Center for Group Dynamics that he founded at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1945 (Brown, 2011, p 8). Through the inspiration of Lewin, Kenneth Benne, Leland Bradford, and Ronald Lippitt pursued further studies of groups and later whole organizations by establishing the National Training Laboratory (NTL) in Bethel Maine in 1946 (Anderson, 2010, p 16). However, it was the late 1950s and early 1960s when the term organization development started being used and books on the subject appeared. It isn’t clear whether the term was created by Richard Beckard, Robert Blake and Jane Mouton, or Herbert Shepherd, but all were involved in the early stages of OD as a field. Richard Beckard’s early definition of OD is still among the most popular:
“OD is an effort (1) planned, (2) organization-wide, and (3) managed from the top, to (4) increase organizational effectiveness and health through (5) planned interventions in the organization’s processes using behavioral science knowledge” (Beckhard, 1969).
After studying definitions of OD and soliciting new definitions from leaders in the field of OD,
Warrick (2005, p 172) concluded that:
“OD is a planned and collaborative process for understanding, developing, and changing organizations to improve their health, effectiveness, and self-renewing capabilities.”
In reviewing the fields of transformational leadership and organization development, it seems obvious
that the two fields are interrelated and that adding an OD perspective to transformational leadership and a transformational leadership perspective to OD strengthens both concepts. However, organization development concepts are rarely mentioned in the transformational leader literature and transformational leader concepts are seldom mentioned in the OD literature. The books and articles on transformational leadership do an excellent job of describing what transformational leaders do and virtues and payoffs. However, little is said about the skills actually required to change and transform whole organizations, departments, and teams. Thus, a transformational leader may be skilled at being a visionary leader who can motivate and inspire people but may at times fail to achieve the desired results for a lack of understanding of what is involved in organization change and transformation. Tichy and Devanna in their
Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011 13
1986 book titled The Transformational Leader probably comes the closest of the transformational leadership authors to addressing organization development concepts such as managing change although the term organization development is never mentioned in their book.
Interestingly, the multitude of books and articles on organization development provide valuable information on how to develop, change, and transform organizations but draw little from the wealth of research on transformational leaders and the critical role they play in building healthy, high performance organizations and managing change and transforming organizations. From what is known about transformational leaders, it would make sense that when transformational leaders are involved in OD efforts, the odds of success and of accelerating the change process could be significantly increased. In fact, a strong case could be made that developing transformational leaders should be one of the early steps in the OD process. AN OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP THAT INTEGRATES TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND OD CONCEPTS
By creating an operational definition of transformational leadership that integrates transformational leadership and organization development concepts, it is possible to identify and define the skills needed to be an effective transformational leader and to train leaders on the skills. The definition of transformational leadership used in the model shown in Figure 3 is that transformational leaders are leaders who are skilled at leading, championing change, and transforming organizations. The first skill, leading, relies primarily on the transformational leadership literature while the next two skills, championing change and transforming organizations rely primarily on the organization development literature. Figure 4 provides an opportunity for leaders to evaluate their transformational leadership skills based on the model presented in Figure 3. The discussion that follows will focus on the model presented in this article. However, the greater goal is to encourage others to develop understandable and useable transform-ational leadership models that integrate the best of transformational leadership and OD concepts and can be used to train transformational leaders. A description of the three skills follows. LEADING
Transformational leaders first have to be skilled leaders. Few topics have received so much attention. And yet, with so much written about leadership and so much leadership education and coaching available, there seems to be a scarcity of good leaders and a lack of understanding of the fundamentals of leadership in both the private and public sectors.
It is not the purpose of this article to discuss the extensive literature on leadership but rather to create an operational definition that incorporates transformational leadership concepts that can be used in training leaders. Leading in the model presented is defined as the process of providing vision, direction, and inspiration (Warrick, 1995). These are skills that can be learned. When leaders lead they raise aspirations, unite people around common goals, and inspire people to excel. However, when leaders don’t lead, the result is a lack of focus, direction, and unity, inefficiency, underutilization of potential, political maneuvering, a lack of confidence in leaders, and an inability to change and transform organizations.
Providing vision means giving people a clear picture of where the organization needs to go or of what needs to be done and why. Visionary leaders are most effective when they have a passion for what can be accomplished and are committed to elevating the performance and standards of people, groups, and organizations. An actual vision can be shaped by the leader or by involving others and can include long term aspirations, an important goal, or short term tasks. It can be used in vision statements or simply in describing something that needs to be accomplished. When people understand what needs to be done and why, they are likely to be more committed, focused, and united. If it is used as a statement such as for the long term vision of an organization, it should be short and memorable and change the way people think and act. Otherwise it will have little impact. Being a visionary leader may be a gift that some leaders have. However, more often than not it comes from studying situations, being well informed enough to
14 Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011
know what is possible, having a passion for excellence and accomplishing something special, and having the discipline to work at communicating ideas in a simple and understandable way.
Skilled leaders also provide direction on what it will take to get things done. Vision defines the target and direction clarifies what it will take to get there. Direction typically is communicated in terms of goals (what needs to be done), values (how things should be done), and priorities (what is most important). It can be done formally or informally and by the leader or others empowered or designated by the leader. The leader’s role is to make sure that the direction is as clear as possible, that there is commitment to the direction, and that employees are empowered to accomplish what needs to be done and held accountable. Some leaders are skilled visionary leaders but do not provide the direction needed to accomplish the vision. Getting people invested in a worthy goal or task without providing direction on what it will take to get there will eventually result in frustration or apathy.
The key to bringing life to vision and direction is inspiring people to excel and to persevere. Bass originally called this charisma but later changed the term to inspiration. While being charismatic can inspire people it is also difficult to maintain. Inspiration is not dependent on charisma. It comes from being passionate and enthusiastic about what you are doing and trying to accomplish and from walking the talk, being a person of integrity and honesty, being a consistent example worthy of following, and taking a genuine interest in people and their success and development. Inspirational leaders are uplifting to be around. They engage and involve people, listen to their ideas, and motivate and empower them to succeed.
It is important to add to this discussion on developing skills in leading the findings of Jim Collins in his best-selling book Good to Great (Collins, 2001). Collins and his research team studied 1135 organizations and found only 11 that met their stringent criteria for going from good to great. The eleven leaders of these organizations all had two characteristics in common. They had a strong professional will (commitment to excellence) that was contagious and they were all known as humble leaders (modest, open, approachable, and others oriented rather than self oriented, pompous, arrogant, and over-confident). Professional will inspires excellence and humility creates a climate of openness that is essential to knowing what is going on and having accurate information to base leadership decisions on. CHAMPIONING CHANGE
Next to skills in leadership, skills in championing change may be the most important skills leaders need to develop in these times of dynamic change. Unfortunately, few leaders have been trained how to champion change. Consequently, organizational changes experience a 70% or more failure rate (Burke, 2008, Doyle, 1992, Miller, 2002, Senge, 1999). Even the right changes implemented the wrong way are likely to fail and frequent failures at implementing change undermine confidence in leaders and the desire to support changes.
In this article championing change will be described as skills in initiating, facilitating, and implementing change (Warrick, 2009). Initiators of change lead and sponsor needed changes. They are well-informed about issues, opportunities, and how to get things done. They have a change mindset, always looking for new and better ways to do things. They are also skilled at facilitating change by getting the right people together to explore ideas and plan changes and by guiding change related meetings and paving the way to accomplish needed changes.
The third skill in championing change is perhaps the most important of the three skills. Implementing change requires skills in using a sound change process to successfully design, manage, and sustain the desired change. This is a critical skill for transformational leaders and a skill that can be learned by training leaders to use a change model (see for example Lewin, 1951, Beckhard and Harris, 1977, Nadler and Tushman, 1989, Warrick, 1995), a change checklist to guide leaders through the change model, and a form for designing changes (see Warrick, 2005). Leaders may lead the implementation of change or make sure that a person skilled in implementing change is leading the change process.
Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011 15
TRANSFORMING ORGANIZATIONS
How many leaders do you know who have been trained how to transform organizations or who naturally possess these skills? Even though the need to transform organizations and prepare them to succeed in today’s times is great, this critical skill is typically overlooked in training leaders. It is interesting to consider that although the term “transformational” defines a transformational leader, there is little guidance offered in the literature about how to actually go about transforming an organization.
The term transform means to fundamentally change something or someone from one state to another. From an organizational perspective it means that everything, except perhaps the core values of an organization, assuming they are known and used, is up for consideration in making the organization stronger and better. While OD has focused from the beginning on developing healthy, high performance organizations and successfully managing change, the emphasis on transforming organizations is a more recent development. Interestingly, in 1994 the most popular OD readings book changed the title to include a threefold emphasis when the title of the new edition became Organization Development and Transformation: Managing Effective Change (French, Bell, and Zawacki, 1994). The addition of organization transformation (OT) to the title reflects the emphasis now being placed on transforming organizations. In the introduction to their book, French, Bell, and Zawacki said:
“Organization transformation (OT) is a recent extension of organization development that seeks to create massive changes in an organization’s structures, processes, culture, and orientation to its environment. Organization transformation is the application of behavioral science theory and practice to effect large-scale, paradigm-shifting organizational change.”
For purposes of this article, transforming organizations is described as an on-going process of knowing present realities, identifying future ideals, and developing and implementing a process for transforming organizations. The term organizations is intended to include whole organizations, departments, teams, and other forms of organizations.
It makes sense that before transforming an organization it would be important for leaders to be well informed about present realities and be clear on the future ideals they are trying to move organizations towards. Leaders are often out of touch with the realities of the organizations they lead, change, and transform. This can create an illusion of doing well while the organization is regressing that results in flawed plans that treat symptoms rather than the real issues (Warrick, 2002). Therefore, it is essential that leaders have a keen awareness of present internal and external realities of the organizations they lead before trying to transform them.
They also need to define and articulate future ideals that describe what the organization ideally aspires to. To do this leaders along with others need to study future industry trends and best practices and state-of-the-art thinking about best run organizations and what it takes to build a healthy (excellent and motivating culture and place to work), high performance (identifiable results that exceed the norm), self- renewing (quick to adapt to change and offers opportunities at all levels to learn grow, stay up-to-date, and contribute) organization. If they can define and clearly communicate the ideals in simple, compelling ways, they have a high probability of rallying people to help them accomplish the ideals.
The third skill in transforming organizations is to develop and implement a process for transforming organizations. There are few models available on how to transform organizations. Perhaps the best and most popular is John Kotter’s model presented in his classic book titled Leading Change (Kotter, 1996). His model includes eight steps: (1) establishing a sense of urgency; (2) creating the guiding coalition; (3) developing a vision and strategy; (4) communicating the change vision; (5) empowering employees for broad based-action; (6) generating short-term wins; (7) consolidating gains and producing more change; and (8) anchoring new approaches in the culture. He expanded on this model in a later book co-authored with Dan Cohen titled The Heart of Change (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). In this book the authors emphasize the importance of engaging hearts (feeling, emotions) and not just minds in committing to change. While
16 Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011
the eight step model is excellent for transforming organizations, it does not mention transformational leadership or OD concepts.
In accomplishing transformational change in organizations, it is important to develop a sound transformation process, train leaders on the process, appoint a transformation team to help guide the process, and seek internal or external professional guidance in developing, executing, evaluating, and improving the process. An example of a transformation process is shown in Figure 5. GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPING SKILLED TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERS
Organizations that recognize the considerable potential payoffs of having transformational leaders at the top and hopefully throughout the organization need to have a plan for developing transformational leaders. Even the best of leaders, with rare exception, are not likely to be skilled at transformational leadership as this important type of leadership requires critical skills in leading, championing change, and transforming organizations that leaders may not be aware of or possess.
Traditional training methods that provide knowledge and hope that the knowledge will be applied are not likely to be adequate for developing transformational leaders. In designing programs for developing transformational leaders and realizing the potential benefits the following guidelines are recommended:
1. Assure top level support and involvement: Build top level commitment to the program and assure that top level leaders participate in the training. They can be the first to be trained or better still join with other levels of leaders in the training.
2. Appoint a design team to plan the training and develop a transformational leadership model to be used in the training: A design team made up of at least one top level leader and respected leaders from different levels of the organization should be organized to work with internal or external professionals to help design the program, develop a transformational leadership model to be used in the training, and build commitment to the program.
3. View the program design as an intervention and not an event: Transformational leadership training should be used as an opportunity to impact people, teams, and the organization and to possibly transform the organization. The top level leaders and design team should explore how to design the program for impact both during the program and following the program.
4. Make sure the program is designed to change the way people think and provide opportunities to practice new behaviors and develop new habits: To actually change the behavior of the participants programs need to be designed to change the way people think (training that provides compelling and applicable knowledge and learning experiences), create opportunities to practice skills both in the training and outside the training, and allow enough time for the practice to become habits (new ways of behaving).
5. Plan follow-up actions to apply what has been learned: Participants should be given assignments to apply what they are learning. It is important to keep the assignments useful and doable so they don’t overload the participants. For example, it may be helpful to have each participant commit to one significant personal change, one change that will improve or transform the group they lead, and one change personally or in a group that would improve or help transform the organization.
6. Provide coaching and help in applying the course: The probability of applying what is being learned will increase significantly if participants have coaching or help available.
7. Evaluate and improve the process and plan future actions: It is important for the design team to evaluate and improve the process and to plan ways to sustain the change and momentum that has been gained, to continue the emphasis on transformational leadership, and possibly to work with the leaders in developing a plan to transform the organization.
A well designed transformational leadership program has considerable potential to develop skilled
transformational leaders and to have a significant impact on the performance of people, teams, and
Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011 17
organizations and the culture of an organization. One can well imagine the ripple effect of having each of the participants involved in making personal changes and improving or transforming the groups they lead and contributing to the improvement or transformation of the organization. CONCLUSION AND CHALLENGE
In today’s times of fierce competition and dynamic, non-stop change, there is a need for transformational leaders and for organizations to have a sense of urgency in developing transformational leaders. The payoffs can be substantial! There is also a need to integrate transformational leadership and organization development concepts and when this is the case both concepts are strengthened. Finally, there is a need to develop operational definitions of transformational leadership that can be used to train skilled transformational leaders. It is the purpose of this article to make addressing these needs a high priority for organizations and to help them recognize the payoffs of doing so. REFERENCES Anderson, Donald L. (2010). Organization Development: The Process of Leading Organizational Change. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications. Arzu, Ilsev & Lale, Gumusluoglu (2009). Transformational Leadership and Organizational Innovation: The Roles of Internal and External Support for Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26, (3), 264-277. Avery, James B., Hughes, Larry W., Luthans, Kyle W., & Norman, Steven M. (2008). Using Positivity, Transformational Leadership and Empowerment to Combat Employee Negativity. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 29, (2), 110-126. Avolio, Bruce, Waldman, David, & Yammarino, Francis (1991). Leading in the 1990’s: The Four I’s of Transformational Leadership. Journal of European Industrial Training, 15, (4), 9-16. Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., and Jung, D. L. (1999). Re-examining the Components of Transformational and Transactional Leadership Using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 441-462. Avolio, Bruce J., Waldman, David A., & Yammarino, Francis J. (1991). Leading in the 19902: The Four I’s of Transformational Leadership. Journal of European Industrial Training, 15, (4), 9-16. Bass, Bernard M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectation. New York: Free Press. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership: Good, Better, Best. Organizational Dynamics, 12, 26-40. Bass, Bernard & Avolio, Bruce (1993). Transformational Leadership and Organizational Culture. Public Administrative Quarterly, 7, (1), 112-121. Bass, Bernard M., Avolio, B. J., & Goodheim, L. (1987). Biography and the Assessment of Transformational Leadership at World Class Level. Journal of Management, 13, 7-9. Bass, Bernard & Avolio, Bruce (1991). From Transactional to Transformational Leadership: Learning to Share the Vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18, 3, 19-31.
18 Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011
Bass, Bernard M. (1999). Two Decades of Research and Development in Transformational Leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, (1), 9-32. Bass, Bernard M. & Avolio, Bruce J. (2001). Developing Transformational Leadership: 1992 and Beyond. Journal of European Industrial Training, 14, (5), 21-27. Beckhard, R. (1969). Organization Development: Strategies and Models. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Beckhard, Richard & Harris, R. (1977). Organization Transitions: Managing Complex Change. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Brown, Donald R. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organization Development (8th ed.). Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Burke, W.W. (2008). Organization Change: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Chakrabarti, A.K. (1974). The Role of Champion in Product Innovation. California Management Review, 17, (2), 58-62. Bycio, P.H., Hackett, R.D., & Allen, J.S. (1995). Further Assessments of Bass’ (1985) Conceptualization of Transactional and Transformational Leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, (4), 468-478. Collins, J. (2001). Good to Great. New York: Harper Business. Daft, Richard L. (2005). The Leadership Experience (3rd ed.). Mason, Ohio: South-Western. Dionne, Shelley D., Yammarino, Francis J., Atwater, Leanne E., & Spangler, William D. (2004). Transformational Leadership and Team Performance. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 17, (2), 177-193. Doyle, K. (1992). Who’s Killing Total Quality? Incentive, 166, (8), 12-19. Fitzgerald, Susan, & Schutte, Nicola S. (2010). Increasing Transformational Leadership Through Enhancing Self-Efficacy. Journal of Management Development, 29, (5), 495-505. French, Wendell, Bell, Cecil H. Jr., Zawacki, Robert A. (1994). Organization Development and Transformation: Managing Effective Change. Boston: McGraw-Hill. Friedman, Hershey, Langbert, Mitchell, and Giladi, Kreindy (2000). Transformational Leadership. National Public Accountant, 45, (3), 8-11. Gill, Amarjit S., Flaschner, Alan, B., & Shachar, Mickey (2006). Mitigating Stress and Burnout by Implementing Transformational Leadership. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18, (6), 469-481. Humphreys, John H. & Einstein, Walter O. (2003). Nothing New Under the Sun: Transformational Leadership from a Historical Perspective. Management Decision, 41 (1), 85-95.
Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011 19
Kanungo, Rabindra (2001). Ethical Values of Transactional and Transformational Leaders. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 18, (4), 257-265. Kelloway, E. Kevin, Barling, Julian, Kelley, Elizabeth, Comtois, Julie, & Gatien, Bernadette (2001). Remote Transformational Leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24, (3), 163- 171. Kotter, John P. (1996). Leading Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Kotter, John P. (2002). The Heart of Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Lewin, Kurt (1951). Field Theory in Social Science. New York: Harper and Row. Michaelis, Bjorn, Stegmaier, Ralf, & Sonntag, Karlheinz (2010). Shedding Light on Followers’ Innovation Implementation Behavior: The Role of Transformational Leadership, Commitment to Change, and Climate for Initiative. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25, (4), 408-429. McShane, Steven L. & Mon Glinow, Mary Ann (2010). Organizational Behavior: Emergin Knowledge and Practice for the Real World (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Miller, D. (2002). Successful Change Leaders: What Makes Them? What do they do that is Different? Journal of Change Management, 2, (4), 359-368. Nadler, David & Tushman, Michael (1989). Organizational Framebending: Principles for Managing Reorientation. Academy of Management Executive, 3, 194-202. Nielsen, K., Yarker, J., Brenner, S.O., Randall, R., & Borg, V. (2008). The Importance of Transformational Leadership Style for the Well-Being of Employees Working With Older People. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 63, (5), 465-475. Nurdan, Ozaralli (2003). Effects of Transformational Leadership on Empowerment and Team Effectiveness. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 24, (6), 335-344. Pawer, Badrinarayan Shankar & Eastman, Kenneth (1997). The Nature and Implications of Contextual Influences on Transformational Leadership: A Conceptual Examination. Academy of Management Review, 22, (1), 80-109. Polychroniou, Panagiotis V. (2009). Relationship Between Emotional Intelligence and Transformational Leadership of Supervisors: The Impact on Team Effectiveness. Team Performance Management, 15, (7/8), 343-356. Sashkin, Marshall & Sashkin, Molly (2003). Leading the Way: What Makes a Good Leader? Security Management, 47, (11), 24-25. Simosi, Maria & Xenikou, Athena (2006). Organizational Culture and Transformational Leadership as Predictors of Business Unit Performance. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21 (6), 566-579. Tichy, Noel M. and Devanna, Mary Anne (1986). The Transformational Leader. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Tichy, Noel M. with Eli Cohen (1997). The Leadership Engine. New York: Harper Business, 8.
20 Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011
Wang, Peng & Ahu, Wichun (2011). Mediating Role of Creative Identity in the Influence of Transformational Leadership on Creativity: Is There a Multilevel Effect? Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18, (1), 25-39. Warrick, D.D. (1995). Best Practices Occur When Leaders Lead, Champion Change, and Adopt a Sound Change Process. Organization Development Journal,13, (4), 91-100. Warrick, D.D. (2002). The Illusion of Doing Well While the Organization is Regressing. Organization Development Journal, 20, (1), 56-60. Warrick, D.D. (2005). Organization Development from the View of the Experts. In William J. Rothwell, Roland Sullivan, and Gary McLean (Eds). Practicing Organization Development: A Guide for Consultants. San Francisco: Josey-Bass/Pfeiffer, pp. 164-187. Warrick, D.D. (2009). Developing Organization Change Champions: A High Payoff Investment! OD Practitioner, 41, (1), 14-19.
Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011 21
APPENDIX
FIGURE 1
Characteristics Author(s)
1. Visionary leader committed to transforming people, groups, and organizations: The leader envisions and communicates a desirable future and is committed to elevating and transforming the performance and standards of people, groups, and organizations.
Bass (1985), Bass (1999), Burns (1978, p. 20), Friedman, Langbert & Giladi (2000), Tichy & Devanna (1986), p.4
2. Communicate clear goals and values that elevate performance: Mobilize people to embrace and accomplish worthy goals by involving people in the process, making goals meaningful and articulating how they can be reached, leading by example and emphasizing important values, setting high standards of performance, and building confidence in people.
Bass (1985), Burns (1978, p. 20), Tichy & Devanna (1986)
3. Inspire excellence and raise aspirations: Inspire people to excel and to sacrifice individual interests for a higher purpose, makes challenges meaningful and simple to understand, and encourages positive change in individuals, groups, and organizations.
Bass (1985), Bass & Avolio (1991), Bass, Avolio, & Goodheim (1987), Tichy & Devanna (1986), p. 187
4. Strong ethical and moral standards: Lead with high ethical and moral standards and is honest and straightforward with people which sets the standard for others to follow and builds a climate of trust.
Bass (1985), Bass & Steidlmeier (1999), Burns (1978), Friedman (2000), Kanungo (2001)
5. Genuinely care about people and their development: Show a genuine interest in people and their development and positively influences the values, attitudes, and behavior of people.
Bass (1985), Bass (1999), Sashkin and Sashkin (2003)
6. Empower and motivate people and teams to excel: Make clear what needs to be done and empower and motivate people and teams to utilize their potential.
Bass (1985), Bass (1999)
7. Encourage innovative thinking and new ways of seeing things: Encourage people and teams to find new and better ways to do things and to look at things in innovative ways from a different perspective.
Bass (1985), Bass (1999)
8. Build a culture of excellence: Study the present culture and change or improve the culture by realigning the culture with a new vision and changing cultural assumptions, values, and norms.
Bass (1985), Bass & Avolio (1993), Tichy & Devanna (1986), p. 109-110
9. Excel at emotional intelligence skills. Skilled in working with people (self-aware, skilled in self-management, social awareness, and relationship management).
Fitzgerald & Schutte (2010), Polychroniou and Panagiotis (2009), Simosi & Xenikou (2006)
10. Involve and engage people at all levels: Involve and engage people and strive for an alignment of individual and organizational interests. Pawar & Eastman (1997)
CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERS
22 Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011
FIGURE 2
Payoffs Author(s)
1. Increased individual performance, motivation, satisfaction, morale, loyalty, commitment, innovation, and empowerment.
Avey, Hughes, Luthans, & Norman (2008), Bass (1999), Michaelis, Stegmaier, & Sonntag (2010), Humphreys & Einstein (2003), Kanungo (2001), Kelloway, Barling, Kelley, Comtois, & Gatien (2003), McShane & Von Glinow, (2010 p. 374), Nurdan (2003)
2. Increased team performance, commitment, innovation, and cohesiveness.
Bass (1999), Blascovich & Hoyt (2003), Dionne, Yammarino, Atwater, & Spangler ((2004), Deanne, Kelloway, Barling, Kelley, Comtois, & Gatien (2003)
3. Increased organization performance, outcomes, innovation, and creativity, and improvements in culture.
Arzu & Lale (2009), Bass (1999), Humphreys & Einstein (2003), Michaelis, Stegmaier, & Sonntag (2010), Simosi & Zenikou (2006), Wang & Zhu (2011)
4. Positively correlated with improved employee attitudes and behaviors.
Avolio, Bass, & Jung (1999), Bass, Avolio, & Goodheim (1987), Bycio, Hackett, & Allen (1995), Nielsen, Yarker, Brenner, Randall, & Borg (2008)
5. Elevates the desires and aspirations of individuals and groups. Bass & Avolio (1991), Burns (1978)
6. Significant positive changes in individual and organization behavior. Avolia, Waldman, & Yanmarind (1991), Daft (2005, p. 153),
7. Unites diverse members in the pursuit of higher goals. Pawar and Eastman (1997)
8. Shapes and reinforces a new culture. Tichy and Devanna (1986), 109-110
9. Builds trust among leaders and employees. Bass (1999), Sashkin & Sashkin (2003)
10. Decreased employee stress and burnout. Gill, Flaschner, & Shachar (2006)
PAYOFFS OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011 23
FIGURE 3
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERS are leaders who are skilled at Leading, Championing Change, and Transforming Organizations.
LEADING
Leading is the process of providing:
• Vision. A clear and compelling picture of what needs to be done and why. • Direction. Clear goals, values, and priorities. • Inspiration. Leading by example and motivating people to excel, meet the challenge, and persevere.
CHAMPIONING CHANGE
Championing Change is the process of: • Initiating Change. Skills in leading or sponsoring needed change. • Facilitating Change. Skills in guiding or paving the way for change. • Implementing Change. Skills in designing, managing, and sustaining changes.
TRANSFORMING ORGANIZATIONS
Transforming Organizations is the process of: • Knowing Present Realities. Skills in being keenly aware of internal and external realities. If you know reality
you can almost always do something about it. • Identifying Future Ideals. Skills in being aware of best practices and clearly defining and communicating future
ideals. If you know and can define what is possible you can probably build it. • Developing And Implementing A Process For Transforming Organizations. Skills in developing a
transformation process and knowing how to build a healthy, high performance, self-renewing organization.
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
24 Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011
FIGURE 4
In these times of dynamic change and the need to do everything smarter, faster, and better, Transformational Leaders who are skilled at leading, championing change, and transforming organizations will be in high demand. Unfortunately, few leaders have been trained in Transformational Leadership Skills. This questionnaire is designed to help you evaluate where you are strong and weak in Transformational Leadership Skills so you will know what you need to do to become a skilled Transformational Leader. Use the following scale to rate yourself on the Transformational Leadership Skills described below. Then complete the information for interpreting and evaluating your scores.
Low Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 High Rating
Leading _____ 1. Vision. Skills in providing a clear and compelling picture of what needs to be done and why. _____ 2. Direction. Skills in providing clear goals, values, and priorities. _____ 3. Inspiration. Skills in leading by example and motivating people to excel, meet the challenge, and persevere.
Championing Change
_____ 4. Initiating Change. Skills in leading or sponsoring needed change. _____ 5. Facilitating Change. Skills in guiding or paving the way for change. _____ 6. Implementing Change. Skills in designing, managing, and sustaining changes.
Transforming Organizations
_____ 7. Knowing Present Realities. Skills in being keenly aware of internal and external realities. _____ 8. Identifying Future Ideals. Skills in being aware of best practices and clearly communicating future ideals. _____ 9. Developing And Implementing A Process For Transforming Organizations. Skills in developing a transformation process and knowing how to build a healthy, high performance, self-renewing organization.
Interpreting And Evaluating Your Results
Overall Transformational Leadership Skills Score
Underdeveloped Below Average Average Good Excellent 9-18 19-28 29-43 44-53 54-63
_____ Total Leading Points _____ Total Championing Change Points _____ Total Transforming Organization Points _____ TOTAL OVERALL POINTS
STRENGTHS OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE
Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011 25
FIGURE 5
1. Develop a keen sense of present realities inside and outside the organizations. 2. Explore best practices and define the ideal. 3. Create a design team to help design and implement the transformation process. 4. Develop a compelling vision and a clear and simple transformation strategy. 5. Frequently communicate the vision and strategy. 6. Train and empower leaders to be skilled transformational leaders and to champion needed changes. 7. Involve the appropriate people throughout the organization in making changes and assure the change process is effectively managed. 8. Create, communicate, and recognize early wins. 9. Align everything to support the desired changes. 10. Build in reliable feedback mechanisms to monitor progress, make needed adjustments, sustain the changes, and learn from the process..
SAMPLE PROCESS
26 Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics vol. 8(5) 2011
