Transformational Theory of Leadership - Essay Example

TRANSFORMATIONAL THEORY OF LEADERSHIP Introduction This article, upon introducing the key dimensions, will examine the major properties of the criticism made against the theory of transformational leadership as well as the arguments in favour of the theory. Specific attention will be on the arguments that question the overall foundation of the transformational theory. This base on the grounds that the process of constructing the theory contained numerous deductions that do not reflect the real situation making its findings ineffective. This means that certain core deductions of the theory will be under close scrutiny. Dimensions of the transformation theory Idealised influence; as explained by Bass B. & Bass R. (2009) concerns the establishment of trust and confidence as well as the provision of a role model that the followers will want to emulate. Confidence to the leader provides the motive for acceptance of changes. This is because followers who trust their leader tend to show minimum resistance to changes imposed by their leader. This idealised influence connects to a phenomenon called charisma, which is a property of transformational leadership determined by both followers and leaders. The connection between transformational leadership and charisma manifests during crisis in the organisation. Inspirational motivation; this is about motivating the whole organisation such as during the acceptance of a new proposal in the organisation. Transformational leadership provides an appealing appearance about the future and allows the followers to observe the meaning in their service. In addition, it challenges them with very high level standards. Transformational leaders allow followers to become part of the culture of the organisation and the environment (Bass B. & Bass R. 2009). Intellectual simulation, this involves the idea of arising and manipulating the awareness of followers concerning the existing problems as well as their capability of solving the problems. Transformational leaders conduct an examination of the assumptions as well as the beliefs and also encourage followers to become inventive, creative and deal with the existing problems in a different way. They influence followers to come up with ideas that are controversial without fearing punishment (Bass B. & Bass R. 2009). Individual consideration; this entails responding to the special and unique requirements of the followers to involve them in the process of transformation. Treatment of every individual is different on basis of the talent and knowledge of each one of them. The treatment also aims at enabling the followers to attain a high level of achievement that they could not achieve in any other way (Bass B. & Bass R. 2009). These four dimensions of transformation leadership depend on each other to express themselves. Arguments against the theory Several studies prove that the transformational theory has a positive effect on the management of an organisation and helps in improving the productivity in the organisation that leads to high performance. In addition, the theory can also assist in enhancing creativity and innovation in the production activities. The theory, can also find great significance in almost all aspects of an organisation. This is because, there are some cases in which, the transformational leaders are the most appropriate in driving an organisation to ensure its success and survival from harsh or unfriendly environments (Howell & Shamir 2005). This is because under these conditions, transformational leaders are capable of exploiting the prevailing needs of the market and seeks to satisfy higher requirements. Transformational leaders are capable of breaking through the frame of the culture of the organisation and achieve prosperity. This makes transformational leaders to gain very high recognition in the modern world of very stiff competition between organisations. However, there are several arguments that question the credibility of the theory and its ability to address the critical matters concerning the management of current organisations in the world. One of the major criticisms of the transformational theory is that it is very difficult to train and teach. This is because; the components that make up the theory are too comprehensive. The theory therefore, caters for a small group of people and this may result to abuse of power. When a transformational leader performs his obligation successfully in one condition, adverse effects that change his personal characteristics may influence him to act in the opposite direction. The theory possesses high potentials for immorality as well as unethical dimensions that a dishonest leader can exploit on its followers (Howell & Shamir 2005). A good example of this argument is when Adolf Hitler came to power in Germany at a time when the country was suffering from high rate of inflation and economic difficulties. Hitler, a transformational leader, managed to take Germany out of the problem. Nevertheless, after some few years, his followers became too passionate with his leadership and began to follow him blindly that finally led a campaign that caused serious problems in the whole of Europe. In addition, the transformational theory lacks clarity in the definition as well as the explanation of its major components (Shamir, House & Arthur 1993). This is because; the definitions assigned to the major components connected to the theory overlap each other and hence creating confusion. These major components are intellectual, inspirational, individualized and idealized. The theory of transformational leadership mostly suited in describing the personal properties of individual rather than satisfying specific requirements. A transformational leader motivates his followers by tempting strong feelings without a consideration of the overall effects on his followers and not strict in adhering to desired morals and ethical considerations. A transformational leader can thus impose very high pressure on his followers who in turn give him a high degree of respect and trust to the extent of being excessively, submissive. Some of these transformational leaders can have egotistical predispositions and hence thriving on manipulation and power. In addition, some followers may develop dependent characteristics and construct extremely strong bonds with the leader (Shamir, House & Arthur 1993). In this condition, it becomes difficult for the followers to notice the shortcomings of their leader and this may result to poor performance of the organisation. Transformational system of leadership does not have the mechanisms for checking and balancing the interests, power and influences that may help to prevent the formation of dictatorships and ill treatment of the minority group from the majority group (Fry, Vitucci & Cedillo 2005). A common characteristic of transformational leadership is the absence of righteousness that obviously leads to the application of undesirable social behaviours. All the criticism questioning the morality of transformational system of leadership based on the idea that a quality leader must demonstrate a reasonable degree of morality. Summarizing on the criticism about the transformational leadership theory, the theory lends itself to a self promotion of morality by its leaders because it utilises impressive management. It is thus adversative for any organisation that is learning and advancing to embrace a shared system of leadership, consensus, equality as well as a decision making process that is participative. Transformational leadership allows the followers to move beyond the personal interests for the benefit of the organisation and thus may involve the followers in the process of pursuing evil intentions (Fry, Vitucci & Cedillo 2005). Conclusively, transformational leadership is capable of manipulating the followers to the extent that they may make more losses than gains. Arguments in favour of the theory Two of the major arguments against the transformational theory mostly based on the fact that its key components lack clarity and that the theory is misleading. However, with a detailed examination of the components of the theory, the arguments against the theory lose significance. The qualification of a transformational leader is the one with suitable personality characteristics and the capability of influencing others to win their loyalty (Avolio, Walumbwa & Weber 2009). The transformational theory focuses on the dealings between leaders and their followers. This means that the arguments that utilise examples of bad leaders under the transformational theory like Hitler are not genuine. This is because; the transformational theory does not change with the difference in the interpolation of the theory by other people. The theory presents solid arguments that reflect to real life situations concerning all matters affecting an organisation. The argument that the requirements of the transformational theory present a set of traits that describe the personality of a person and that it is difficult to teach or learn the theory is also not genuine. This is because, apart from mere knowledge and skills, character is also an important component that shapes the effectiveness of a leader. Leadership also requires a set of morals and ethics and plays a role in determining the quality of a leader (Avolio, Walumbwa & Weber 2009). This therefore, means that it is possible to teach and learn the fundamentals of leadership. A key requirement is a leader who is responsible and the ethical considerations that can intercept the daily challenges. Therefore, it is possible to teach and learn all forms of leadership include transformational leadership. Work experience, managers, specific projects, role models as well as education all plays a significant role in the development of leadership qualities (Avolio, Walumbwa & Weber 2009). Using an example with a specific sport like football, not every individual will develop into an outstanding football player irrespective of the coaching. However, there are many who will benefit and gain significant improvement in the manner they play the game. Only a portion of them will develop into stars or competent leader from the process of coaching, wide experiences and the personal drives. There are some individuals with the capabilities of learning specific competencies better and faster than other individuals. In addition, some individuals are capable of reflecting likable or more charismatic properties than other individuals. However, majority of the most successful leaders do not belong to the group that comes from the veil of fortune and time (Gronn 1996). Most of them acquired their competencies through learning and personal experiences. A good example is when one considers the issue of parenting. Do people learn the skills of good parenting or they just suddenly become competent parents. It is obvious that it is possible to learn and improve the skills of parenting. This will also apply for leadership skills where one can learn and improve his leadership qualities. It is also possible to teach leadership qualities to a given degree. This argument bases on the three main leadership dimensions that are; perspectives dispositions and skills. Just as in any learning institution, it is possible to teach everything. However, there are always students that perform better than others concerning the capability of adapting to the knowledge as well as the capability of putting the knowledge into practice. It is possible to teach skills and training an individual for perspectives (Gronn 1996). However, it is almost impossible to teach dispositions like mental capacity and ambitions. This means that it is possible to teach some of the requirements of for effective leadership. This means that the idea presented by the transformational theory remains valid and applicable. In comparing transactional leadership with transformational leadership, transactional leadership make use of teleological form of ethics while transformational leadership make use of deontological form of ethics. In other words, transactional leadership and transformational leadership base on different foundations of ethics. However, ethical deductions can best come from both the two forms of leadership. This indicates the authenticity of the transformational leadership in terms of ethical issues and hence repelling all the earlier criticism that based on the idea. Conclusion The theory of transformational leadership proved its relevance and practicability in all aspects of leadership in the modern world. The various criticism presented against the theory are not strong enough to invalidate the prepositions of the theory. The arguments presented to counter the criticism of the transformational theory have proved effective in terms of performance in work, quality of leadership as well as loyalty. It is possible to teach the transformational theory and any other theory concerning leadership with the only difference coming in the manner an individual can apply the knowledge and skills acquired. It is very true that the transformational theory is a very relevant and popular theory in the modern world characterized by complex management issues. The theory of transformational leadership provides good solutions to problems regarding sustainability, creativity as well as uniqueness. Bibliography Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Weber, T. J. 2009, ‘Leadership: Current theories, research, and future directions’, Annual review of psychology, Vol. 60, pp. 421-449. Bass, B. M., & Bass, R. 2009, The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications, Simon and Schuster, NY. Fry, L. W., Vitucci, S., & Cedillo, M. 2005, ‘Spiritual leadership and army transformation: Theory, measurement, and establishing a baseline’, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 5, pp. 835-862. Gronn, P. 1996, ‘From Transactions to Transformations, A New World Order in the Study of Leadership?’ Educational Management Administration & Leadership, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 7-30. Howell, J. M., & Shamir, B. 2005, ‘The role of followers in the charismatic leadership process: Relationships and their consequences’, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 30, No.1, pp. 96-112. Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. 1993, ‘The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory’, Organization science, Vol. 4, No.4, pp. 577- 594. Read More