Core ideas and Concepts of Leadership - Essay Example

? A Critique of Leadership: An Analysis of Core ideas and Concepts of Leadership Introduction “Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (Northouse, 2010, p3). This seem to suggest that leadership is about the ability of individuals to cause people to move from point A to point B as a part of a wider set of objectives and goals. In another sense, leadership might be seen as some kind of exertion of power by the leader over his or her followers. Nozick (2010) defines philosophy as an attempt to define components of society in relation to the framework within which people in a given culture or circumstance act and/behave. Leadership is a human and cultural activity and as such, it contains inherent elements of philosophy. Leadership can be viewed and defined according to several standards and facades. Leadership can be viewed as “a complex social process, rooted in the values, skills, knowledge and ways of thinking of both leaders and followers” (Gallos, 2008). This definition spells out several variables in the definition of the concept of leadership. Leadership can be defined from the angle of the leader. It can also be defined by the relationship between leader and follower. It can also be viewed from the angle of the social processes and actions that are involved in the entire process of leadership. More importantly, leadership can be defined from the transactional events that give rise to the concept of leadership. In the definition of leadership, a transactional event is seen as “any relevant activity in which a group or groups of people need to be directed or influenced in a way to attain a stated objective” (Jansen, 2010 p17). A transactional event can also be seen as some activity which require some kind of control or supervision by an identifiable individual (Stevenson, 2004). Transactional event therefore defines the situation or context within which leadership occurs. This gives a degree of identity of the type of leadership exerted in a given situation. This provides an important basis for the proper conceptualisation and definition of different types of leadership. However, the definition of leadership does not only encompasses the transactional event. There are other elements of leadership like transformational leadership that seem to oppose the view of transactional leadership. This is because in the strict sense, transactional events seem to put leaders in a position whereby they see their followers as a means to an end. Keith Grint identifies that there is no single form of leadership (2002). This confirms the fact that transactional leadership cannot be the only form of leadership. He states that there are four main types of leadership. The broad classifications include, personality, process, authority and situational contexts. Although transactional events are important in these four phenomena, they are not the only forms of leadership that exists. Transactional Events and Leadership In the wider sense, Bass defines transactional leadership as a “model for the analyses of types of leadership based on theories that focus on the interactions between leaders and followers” (1997). In other words, transactional-event model of examining leadership involves viewing leadership from an angle whereby a formal relationship exists between two parties in which one is to act as a leader and other is to act as subordinate (Stevenson, 2004). Bass goes on to state that transactional events occur where there is a shared network and within the shared network, one person has the power to exert influence over others (1997). This implies that transactional leadership flourishes in a situation or context where there are authority structures and systems. Transactional-Event, Leadership and Authority Weber identifies three main sources of authority which puts a person in a leadership position in a transactional event (Walonick, 1993). Stated differently, leadership positions in transactional events or transactional leadership relationships does not come about except when a person is given an appropriate authority to take up such actions. According to Weber, the three main sources of such authority to influence others in a transactional-event as a leader are patriarchal/traditional, rational/legal and charismatic/informal. Patriarchal leadership gives a person the ability to influence another individual in a transactional event because of the kind of family or the social status of an individual. This kind of authority was common in medieval times where people of noble birth were given the authority in nations and other institutions. Transactional leadership in this context means that a person is given power or authority to exert influence over others because of the social hierarchy and system. Rational/Legal authority is the commonest source of influence over followers in most organisations today (Kalinowski, 2005). This involves the acquisition of authority based on legally accepted and formal structures in a given organisation. As such, the individual in question has total control to exert influence over followers in a given organisation without questions. An example is the acquisition of professional positions in firms and in the Army. They are based on the qualifications and competencies of individuals based on their training and experience and not other subjective characteristcs. Charismatic authority involves a relationship where followers allow a person to lead them because of certain informal qualities that make the individual powerful or authoritative in the organisation. An example in this case could include leadership of political parties which are opened to people who will attract more votes rather than people with a strict sense of qualification. Another classical example is the case of religious leaders. Most of them acquire followers because of their qualities rather than some laid down qualification requirements. Elements of Transactional Leadership In his description of transactional leadership, Burns identifies that transactional leadership occur in a situation where a person is given authority and s/he exercises it (1978). In this context, the person with the power to exert influence comes up with five main assumptions that form the core and definitive principle of transactional leadership: 1. The leaders must allocate work to followers 2. The followers are motivated by reward and punishments. 3. The leader must set up clear instructions to followers. 4. If followers honour the instructions they are rewarded 5. If they fail to honour the instructions they are punished Transactional leadership is thus a kind of leadership that assumes that a person makes an effort to get things done. In the process, the person gets the power to give rewards and punishment. In this vein, that individual gets the power to exert some kind of influence by granting rewards or punishment based on the social relationship that exists between the leader and the followers. In the strict sense, transactional leadership is a form of social contract which exists between the followers or subordinates and the leader. In other words, transactional leadership is based on a kind of notional contract that exists in the mind of followers as a result of the authority vested in the leader to influence them towards a given goal. Bass therefore identifies three main elements of a leader in a transactional leadership. First of all, a leader is concerned with goals. In this sense, the leader has specified goals which must be attained. In this sense, the leader will have to find ways and means of getting the followers to attain those goals because s/he might be held accountable in a certain way. This leads to the second element of transactional leadership: monitoring. A transactional leader has to monitor the subordinates and ensure that they attain the stated goals that are put before them. This implies that a transactional leader has to monitor and evaluate the performance of the subordinates to ensure that stated goals and objectives are fully fulfilled. Thirdly, a transactional leader has the responsibility to determine rewards and punishments. In other words, a transactional leadership has the power to exert influence and control over followers because s/he has authority over followers. Issues with Transactional Leadership In the strict sense, transactional leadership forms the crux of leadership. From the analysis above, it can be identified that every leader-follower relationship is based on the two core elements of transactional leadership: 1. Influence and 2. Achievement of a common goal This is because every kind of leader-subordinate revolves around the fact that the follower recognizes the leader as a holder of authority. Without that, leadership relationships will not work and this will pave way for anarchy. Also, most ventures that involve leadership comes with some goals and objectives. Thus, the purpose of leadership is to come together as leader and follower to attain those goals and objectives. Thus unity of purpose forms the core of human relations in organisations (Fayol, 1943). However, leadership involves human beings. Any venture that involves human beings has elements of subjectivity and the attainment of some social benchmarks (Lussier & Achura, 2010). In the practical sense, it can be identified that strict contracts do not really exist anywhere. Most legal systems have identified this shortcoming and therefore make room for equitable considerations in cases where the strict elements of the law are breached (Grint, 2002). This means that it will be inherently wrong to construe leadership as a social contract that favours only transactional relationships between leader and follower. In an exegesis of the evolution of management, Bernstein (2001) identified that the development of management science has gone through three distinct phases: 1. Scientific method (classicalists) 2. Social evolution and 3. Modern phase (1960s and 70s). This evolution is strongly has implications for how leadership is and must be viewed. In the era of scientific method (the Industrial Revolution up to the Second World War), most management academics and practitioners thought that the essence of organisations is to provide optimum economic results (Bernstein, 2001). In this sense, the transactional leadership approach would be valid and human beings would be seen as a means to an end – optimum production. In this context, it was convenient to see a leader as solely responsible for setting goals that bring highest returns, monitor those goals and use his power to ensure that subordinates do what they have to do. However, social writers like Mayo and Aldair identified that there are some inherent elements in the human being that must be recognized to provide the true end of management (Bernstein, 2001). In this context, transactional leadership is not enough because it does not address some of the social needs and desires of employees. When the views of the social writers are incorporated, it is apparent that transactional leadership does not incorporate important elements of management like the development of employees, social aspects of motivation amongst others. Modern writers who came up in the 1960s and 70s identified other elements of the sociological and individual needs for intrinsic motivation (Bernstein, 2001). This led to the need for a new form of leadership which saw leadership in a broader context rather than the narrow sense. This is known as Transformational Leadership. Transformational Leadership Transformational leadership aims at using a holistic approach to develop followers through a variety of intrinsic and extrinsic features of leaders and followers (Nissinen, 2006). This implies that a transformational leader goes further than the ordinary transactional leader to support the follower to grow and achieve his or her best interest in a symbiotic manner. This means that the relationship is one in which the leader and the follower both benefit mutually as they seek to attain their common goals. Transformational leadership has become the ideal method of leading people in the 21st Century. This is because it goes beyond the transactional method of leadership. Transformational leadership seeks to use the inherent features of leadership to improve the follower as they continue to attain the goals of the organisation. “Transformational leadership is a process whereby leaders and followers help each other to advance to a higher level of morale and motivation” (Bass, 1997). In other words, the leader uses elements inherent in the leadership slot to provide improvement and advancement for the organisation and for the follower in a win-win manner. Theories of Leadership in Relation to Transactional V Transformational Leadership Various theories in leadership suggests that leadership could either be an exertion of influence (more of transformational) or an exertion of power (transactional). Leadership as a 'Person'. The leader is a person with a personality. 'Personality' is defined by Daft & Lane as a set of unseen characteristics and processes that include a relatively stable pattern of behaviour in response to ideas, objects and people in the environment (2008). Blake & Mouton (1964) places a leader on a continuum based on concern for people (Y) and concern for production (X). In this sense, a transformational leader might be seen as one with a concern for people. A transactional leader is one that is solely concerned for production and uses his followers for that only. McGregor identifies Theory X and Theory Y managers who have extreme relationships with their employees (1960). An autocratic leader (McGregor's Theory X leader) is most likely to be a transactional leader. Such a leader sees the subordinates as some kind of people who must be threatened and coerced to do things. As such, they believe that followers must be given full supervision and control in order to attain the objectives of the organisation. Such leaders inherently view leadership as some kind of transaction whereby followers must be influenced to attain certain laid down goals and objectives. On the other hand of viewing leadership as a process, there is the democratic leader (McGregor's Theory Y Leader) who has some trust and respect for subordinates. Such a leader helps the followers to advance to higher levels of morale and motivation and in the process encourage the followers to improve themselves and build important skills and abilities that will be of benefit to them. Leadership as a Situational or Result-Oriented concept Another angle from which leadership can be viewed is the situational approach, whereby people become leader because their skills and expertise is needed to solve a certain problem (Miller, 2007). In Fiedler's definition of leadership, he stated that a leader combines elements of personality and the situation at hand to build a leadership style (1967). Fiedler identifies two main components of leadership; leadership style and situational favourableness. The leader needs to acquire several leadership approaches and vary them according to the situation at hand. Fiedler as well as Blanchard and Hersey's approach suggests that leadership oscillates between transformational and transactional (Humbleton & Gumpert, 1982). This does not give a defined position on the debate. Rather, it supports a blend of the two extremes according to the existing circumstances. Elements of Transformational Leadership According to Bass & Bass (2008), transformational leadership works on the basis of four key components and elements which shape the way leaders behave. They are: 1. Individualised Considerations: Each leader spends time to understand the uniqueness of each subordinate. As such, the leader spends sufficient time to understand and know the nature of the needs of his or her subordinates. From there, the leader can compare the needs of the subordinate with the tasks and work requirements of that individual in question. This way, a transformational leader can identify the best way that the individual can be developed and/or improved so that the individual gets the best results both in terms of production as well as personal growth and development. 2. Intellectual Stimulation: When a transformational leader identifies the true needs and best interests of a follower, s/he can draw up a programme for the best improvement of the follower. This way, the leader will come up with stimulating exercises and activities for the follower. Through these structured or semi-structured system, a subordinate is most likely to benefit from the work at hand. In the shortest possible time, the follower will be an improved person and be ready for higher tasks and possibly rise through the ranks. 3. Inspirational Motivation: This involves the inspiration and motivation of subordinates by a leader. In this sense, the leader provides inspiration and other forms of communication which ensures that the subordinate is encouraged and strengthened to carry out higher tasks after careful and steady growth and improvement in skills. This might include some degree of personal contact and good communication. 4. Idealised influence: This involves the use of ethical systems and if possible structured systems to ensure that there is some order in the improvement of the employee. In the best conditions, the employee will be monitored closely and given all the necessary nurturing and support for further improvement. Conclusion Transactional leadership involves the acquisition of authority to influence people. Transactional leadership exists in the form of a social contract between the leader and followers whereby the leader identifies the goals, monitor their attainment and reward results. The leader's influence is borne out of the fact that s/he controls rewards and punishment. Transactional leadership is the core element of leadership. It provides the most basic form of leadership and its elements cuts across every form of leadership. However, transactional leadership is often used as a tool for the attainment of goals set by the leader only. Due to this limitation, transformational leadership exists with the view of providing a win-win situation for the leader and the follower. Transformational leadership involves the use of leadership tools and methods to ensure a situation where the leader and follower attains the best results. Transformational leadership alters all the elements of leadership to ensure that leaders support followers to attain their self development goals in the process of attaining goals and objectives. A transformational leader uses individualised consideration, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation and idealised influence to encourage the follower to attain organisational and personal goals and objectives. References Bass & Bass (2008) The Bass & Bass Handbook of Leaderhship: Theory, Research & Marginal Applications New York: Free Press. Bass, B. M. (1997) From Transactional Leadership to Transformational Leadership Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Publishers. Bernstein, H. (2001) Management Science: From the Industrial Revolution to the 21st Century Indiana: Infinity Publishing. Blake, R.; Mouton, J. (1964). The Managerial Grid: The Key to Leadership Excellence. Houston: Gulf Publishing Co.. Burns, J. M. (1978) Leadership New York: Harper & Row. Daft, R. & Lane, P (2008) The Leadership Experience Mason OH: Cengage Dale, Kathleen., & Fox, Marilyn L., (2008). Leadership Style and Organizational Commitment: Mediating Effect of Role Stress. Journal of Management Issues. (pp.1-18) Fayol, H. (1943) Administrative Method Paris: Ecole du Management Fiedler, F. E (1967) A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness New York: McGraw-Hill Gallos, J. (2008) Business Leadership: A Jossey Boss Reader Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Grint, K (2002) Faces of Leadership Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Hambleton, R. K., and Gumpert, R. (1982). “The validity of Hersey and Blanchard's theory of leader effectiveness.” Group and Organization Studies, 7(2) Janson, G. (2010) Leadership and Management New York: FTC Press. Lussier, R & Achura C. (2010) Leadership: Theory, Application & Skill Mason, OH: Cengage. Kalinowski, I. (2005) ‘Un savant tres politique’. In Weber, Max.La Science, Profession et Vocation.Paris: Agone, Martin , Roger (2007), The Opposable Mind: How Successful Leaders Win Through Integrative Thinking, Boston, MA : Harvard Business School Press MacGregor D. (1960) The Human Side of Management New York: McGraw Hill. Miller, C. (2007) The Spiritual Formation of Leaders Xulon Press. Nissinen, V. (2006) Deep Leadership Helsinki: Talentum Nozick R. (2010) Philosophical Explanations London: Kogan Page Rutledge, L. (2008) Motivation & The Professional African-American Woman New York: Authorhouse Publishing.. Stevenson, C. (2004) General Principles of Management Boston, MA: Eagle Press. Walonick D. (1993) Organization Theory & Behaviour Management MA: Harvard University Press Read More