Discussion Forum 1
Benjamin Kim
Liberty University
MGMT 501 – Executive Leadership and Management
Leadership
The textbook put it perfectly, “management and leadership are not synonymous, and both
are needed for an organization to succeed” (Satterlee, 2018, p.5). While many of the functions of
management might fall under the umbrella of leadership, the quality of leadership is a separate
function that is necessary for a successful manager to have. While management may address a
problem, leadership addresses change. The following concepts that stood out address aspects of
leadership that are critical to be considered for the successful operation of and organization.
Three Concepts
Transactional vs transformational leadership
Two studies – one of employees in Jordan and a second of top management members in
various companies, investigated the effect of the two differing leadership styles on job
performance, knowledge sharing, and organizational innovation. The importance of leadership
style is greatly important in the success and performance of an organization as “leaders play a
key role in organizations as they measure external circumstances, provide guidance for
employees to face challenges, and establish organizational superiority for continuous progress
and development” (Masa’deh, Obeidat, & Tarhini, 2016, p.682). These two different styles of
leadership are transformational and transactional. As described by Prasad & Junni (2016), these
behaviors are “opposite ends of a continuum” (p.1547). Transactional leadership, as described by
both papers – Masa’deh, Obeidat, & Tarhini (2016) and Prasad & Junni (2016) – appeals to the
self-interests of the workers, resulting in an exchange relationship. The relationship is one that
requires continued monitoring to maintain the right exchanges. Transformational leadership, in
contrast, “addresses the intrinsic needs of followers” (Prasad & Junni, 2016, p.1547), connecting
to the subordinates in an effort to motivate and inspire workers towards the organizational vision
as a greater purpose than their self-interests (Masa’deh, Obeidat, & Tarhini, 2016; Prasad &
Junni, 2016).
The importance of leadership style can be seen in the results of the studies. It’s not to say
that one is particularly better or worse than the other, but more so to indicate that depending on
the stage of growth as well as the short and long-term goals of the organization, the leadership
style may have to adapt. In the first study by Masa’deh, Obeidat, & Tarhini (2016), employees
across Jordan at the higher council of youth were surveyed to determine the effects of leadership
style on job performance and on knowledge sharing. The results of this study indicate that while
both leadership styles improved job performance, transactional leadership seemed to show
greater, or more accurately, significant impact on the organization’s performance as well as on
knowledge sharing. In the second study by Prasad & Junni (2016), surveying top management
team members across various companies in the United States, the leadership style executed by
CEOs did have differing impacts on an organization’s innovation. While transactional leadership
did show positive impact on innovation and resulted in innovation, it was more dependent on the
organization’s environment – whether it was a dynamic environment or not.
Followership
Without followers, there is no leader. An organization’s success will depend not only on
the leader, but also on the followers. The importance of followership for an organization is that
“by mastering the role of followership, a subordinate prepares for the role of leadership”
(Satterlee, 2018, p.7). Not only is the relationship between follower and leader important and
necessary for an organization, but more importantly, the transition from follower to leader makes
the concept of followership so critical. Adding to the importance of effective and positive
followership is the recent trends of “flattening organizational structures and the growing
proportion of high-skilled workers” (Brutus & Vanhove, 2017, p.261). These growing trends are
resulting in those in follower roles being expected to fulfill the responsibilities previously placed
only upon those in leadership roles. As a result of the flatter organizations, greater expectations
for self-managed followers and teams have arisen (Brutus & Vanhove, 2017).
Just as leaders don’t exist without followers, the same can be said in reverse – that
followers don’t exist without leaders. The two can only coexist in a mutual relationship, where
ideally, they would complement each other (Davis, 2017). The importance of accurately
characterizing effective followers is important according to Davis (2017) as the relationship of
leader-follower will be directly affected. Effective followers are not simply passive and in blind
submission to a domineering leader. Rather, they are active partners, “participating with
enthusiasm, intelligence, and self-reliance in the pursuit of organizational goals” (Davis, 2017,
p.211). In fact, Davis (2017) goes on to state that effective leaders and effective followers are not
different, “just operating in different roles” (p.211).
Types of power
In the relationship between manager and the workers, there also exists the exercise of
power to make the workers behave a certain way. According to Satterlee (2018), there are five
types of power: legitimate power, reward power, coercive power, expert power, and referent
power. To briefly explain, legitimate power exists in the title of manager; reward power exists in
the ability to give (or withhold) something to a worker as a reward; coercive power is the ability
to force compliance; expert power exists due to possession of special knowledge, skill or ability;
and referent power exists due to the traits and characteristics of a person.
Just like the different styles of leadership, possession and exercise of the different types
of power is important and useful when dealing with different followers and situations. In Mallin
& Ragland’s (2017) study, data was collected from 128 salespeople to look at the use of the
different types of power in affecting motivation and performance. Their findings were significant
and showed that managers could motivate and impact sales performance with all five types of
power, but differently for extrinsically motivated salespeople – coercive and legitimate power –
versus intrinsically motivated salespeople – coercive, legitimate, and referent power (Mallin &
Ragland, 2017). Likewise, another study proved the same concepts – that certain types of power
would be relevant and effective to motivate workers for an intended effect. Mahbobkhah (2019)
looked at a sample of 600 employees to examine the effect of the use of power to motivate
employee entrepreneurship. The findings revealed that all but coercive power were effective in
positively affecting employee entrepreneurship. All types of power can be used to affect changes
and impacts desired, but the use for each type will vary according to the situation and individuals
involved.
Biblical integration
There are many ways to show biblical integration with the concepts discussed above. To
start off, in 1 Timothy 3 (ESV), the Bible speaks of the requirements of an overseer in the
church, which would be most relatable to the position of a manager in an organization. Just as it
would be expected of a leader operating as a transformational leader, an overseer must conduct
himself as one to be looked up to and emulated as a role-model. Just as there are high
expectations placed upon a person to be overseeing and caring for God’s church, in an
organizational setting, the manager should also be expected the same, in order to be able to
motivate and inspire those under their care. Again, in 1 Peter 5:3 (ESV), it is clearly written “not
domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock”. This is the exactly the
concept of being a transformational leader.
References
Brutus T., & Vanhove A. (2017) Leading by serving: Redefining the roles of leaders and
followers in today’s workplace. In Davis C. (Ed.) Servant Leadership and Followership.
Palgrave Studies in Leadership and Followership (261-288). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59366-1_11
Davis N. (2017) Review of followership theory and servant leadership theory: Understanding
how servant leadership informs followership. In Davis C. (Ed.) Servant Leadership and
Followership. Palgrave Studies in Leadership and Followership (207-223). Palgrave
Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59366-1_9
Mahbobkhah, F. (2019). The effect of managers’ power on employees’ entrepreneurship: An
empirical study in the public offices of Iran. Brazilian Journal of Operations &
Production Management, 16(4), 617-626.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.14488/BJOPM.2019.v16.n4.a7
Mallin, M.L., & Ragland, C.B. (2017). Power-base effects on salesperson motivation and
performance: A contingency view. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 24(2), 99-
121. https://doi.org/10.1080/1051712X.2017.1313671
Masa'deh, R., Obeidat, B.Y. & Tarhini, A. (2016). A Jordanian empirical study of the associations
among transformational leadership, transactional leadership, knowledge sharing, job
performance, and firm performance: A structural equation modelling approach. Journal
of Management Development, 35(5), 681-705. https://doi-
org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1108/JMD-09-2015-0134
Prasad, B., & Junni, P. (2016). CEO transformational and transactional leadership and
organizational innovation: The moderating role of environmental
