Leadership Styles - Transformational, Transactional & Participative - Literature review Example

Leadership Student’s Name: Grade Course: Tutor’s Name: Date: Leadership Introduction In the contemporary society, almost everyone agrees that leadership is a vital component of success in different sectors of the society. What the society lacks however is a unified definition of leadership. According to Stogdill (1974), there are as many definition of “leadership” as the people who define the same. One of the convincing descriptions of leadership found in the course of this study is the definition of leadership as the “reciprocal process of mobilizing, by people with specific motives and values, various economic, political and other resources, in a context of competition and conflict, in order to realize goals independently or mutually held by both leaders and followers” (Burns, 1978 p. 425, cited by Barker, 1997). Many a times, people define leadership in the context of specific leaders. However, Barker (1997) argues that focusing on behaviors and traits of specific leaders deny people the chance to view leadership as a development process. This is mainly because preconceived notions that are based on the behaviors and traits of specific leaders make it hard to differentiate good leadership from effective leadership. Northouse (2004) defines leadership as a process, whereby one person (the leader) influences other people in order to attain a common objective. Admittedly, the different definitions adopted by different scholars and researchers is a testimony that leadership is not only a complex phenomenon in practice, but also hard to define. Bolden (2004) notes that leadership depends on a process of influence that inspires a group of people to work towards attaining specific goals and objectives. This then means the people working under a specific leader are motivated in order to work rather than working through coercion. As such, they make choices out of their informed beliefs, predispositions and choice. Leadership consist of functions such as establishing direction, whereby the leader develops a vision and strategies to achieve specific set goals; aligns his followers through communicating the vision and creation of teams; and motivated and inspires his followed in order to motivate his followed as well as satisfy their needs (Arbinger institute, 2010; Bolden, 2004; ). Overall, despite the contention surrounding the actual definition of leadership, most scholars seem to agree that leadership revolves around giving guidance to people and inspiring them to achieve specific objectives Leadership has to articulate and arouse enthusiasm for a common vision and mission. In addition, it has to be a guide to others, but should not refrain from holding them accountable, and lastly, leadership should be an example to be followed (Goleman 1998). LITERATURE REVIEW  Transactional Leadership Transactional leadership is defined by Laohavichien et al. (2009, cited by Bush, 2003) as “the process used to influence followers through a system of rewards and punishment”.  MacGregor (1978, cited by Kuhnert & Lewis, 1987) defines it as a political form of leadership where the leader contacts another person for purposes of exchanging something which is valued. The approach adopted by transactional leaders is motivated by the exchange. This means that leaders who practice such form of leadership have conditional rewards for followers who excel in their work and a conditional punishment for people who do not meet their expectations. Accordingly, this form of leadership ensures that there is quality performance at any one time in an organization. Bass (1985) argues that transactional leadership” consider how to marginally improve and maintain the quantity and quality of performance, how to substitute one goal for another, how to reduce resistance to particular actions, and how to implement decisions” (p. 648). According to Bush (2003), transactional leadership is passive and often short-term oriented. As such, the transactional leader focuses on attaining short-term goals, without considering how his leadership skills affect the long-term goals of the organization he leads. According to Northouse & Northouse (2009), transactional leaders assume that people are motivated to perform either by rewards or punishment. Leaders who practice such also assume that social systems perform well where there is a clear pecking order. The leadership style also assumes that workers who choose to participate in a specific join cede all their authority to their leader, and that the main purpose of a worker is to do what the leader directs them to do. The style of transactional leadership is such that there are clear structures that stipulate what is expected of each worker. Meeting or exceeding the expectations are rewarded, while falling short of the expectations is punished (Bush, 2003). The early stages of transactional leadership involves laying the guidelines (usually in term of contracts), where the worker’s salary and benefits are stipulated. The punishment or disciplinary measures are also stipulated. Dubrin (2009) notes that after signing the contract, the worker then seizes the authority to “work as they wish” and instead commits to working towards ensuring that the leaders wish are met. In the course of transactional leadership, it is notable that many transactional leaders rarely mention the punishments. However, when a worker errs and fails to meet the specified expectations, they are made to take up the responsibility of the failure by the transactional leader. Another characteristic identified in transactional leadership is “managing by exception”. According to Dubrin(2009), this is the believe that transactional leaders have little interest in activities or approaches that transform the employee or the work environment, and instead chooses to focus on maintaining everything at consistent levels except when the employees fail to meet their targets. Bass (1985) argues that transactional leadership though unattractive in theory is still common practice in many organizational structures because leaders believe that the reward-punishment approach would motivate people and place contingent reinforcement through interpersonal communication hence better results in the work place. A lot of what is practiced by transactional leaders can be explained by the path-goal theory or the expectancy theory, whereby the leaders believe that their subordinates have the ability and the control to overcome several difficulties in the course in their work if they know what the expectations, rewards or punishment for the same is. Advantages The advantages of transactional leadership are mainly has to do with stronger goal acceptance by the employee and benefits to the employer. In the end, the organizations that practice such form of leadership have higher short term results (Bush, 2003). Disadvantages Transactional leadership raises some issues regarding trust and control. On one hand, the subordinate would have to trust the leader that once the performance has been met or exceeded, and then the leader would keep his word about rewarding the same. On the other hand, some analysts believe that transactional leaders lack the trusting ability that their subordinates can perform as expected without receiving some push either in terms of punishment or through rewards. Other negative aspects of the transactional leadership include: some leaders influence the others for their own benefits or decent practice by giving them an attractive rewards or punishments (Bush, 2003). Also, the quality of the employees' production will be less, because they will do their work only for getting the rewards and salary. The ability to follow and fulfill roles set by the high management in an organization is also something that is apparent in the transactional leadership. Bush (2003) notes that transactional leaders work more effectively where systems have already been set. This enables them to perpetuate a culture that supports the existing systems and structures for purposes of reinforcing the bottom-line, maximizing efficiency and guaranteeing short-term results. Unlike leaders who identify and develop new talent however, the transactional leader has no time or patience for new talent. Instead, such leaders rely on established human skills in the interaction stage. This then forms the basis for their “give and take” approach to leadership (Bush, 2003). Transformational leadership style Transformational leadership is defined as a leadership approach that uses passion to involve and inspire others towards the attainment of a vision (Bass, 1985). Accordingly, Bass (1985) defines transformational leaders as “leaders who attempt and succeed in raising their colleagues, subordinates, followers, clients or constituents to a greater awareness about the issues of consequence (p. 17). He however observes that for such type of leadership to occur, the leaders would have possess an inner confidence, strength and vision that allows them to successfully argue and convince their followers on what they perceive as good or bad. As such, the leader would have to argue against what is acceptable or popular at the time. Avolio et al.,(1991) identifies four behavior that are observed in transformational leaders. They include: 1) charismatic behavior; 2) intellectual stimulation; 3) individualized considerations and 4) inspirational motivation. Expounding on these behaviors, Bass & Avolio (1994) states that transformational leaders have idealized behaviors, which they communicate to their followers from the on start. Accordingly, the transformational leader has a strong sense of purposes and usually gains the support and respect of his subordinates through careful relations with them. Bass & Avolio (1994) also notes that transformational leaders values trust, and therefore makes a deliberate choice to trust their subordinates. Regarding inspirational motivation, the inspirational leader tends to be optimistic, enthusiastic, and articulates a convincing vision of the organization to his/her subordinates. He/she is usually confident that the set goals will be attained. Regardless of his approachable nature however, Bass & Avolio (1994) notes that the transformational leader always takes a firm stand on controversial issues. The transformational leader also takes upon him/her to coach and develop others, and idealizes attributes such as respect, faith and trust in his/her subordinates. According to Avolio & Bass (2002), transformational leadership accepts the fact that human beings are different and hence needs acceptance on an individual level. As such, the transformational leader makes the effort to communicate to his/her subordinates individually and address their work-related needs or desires separately. Bass (1998) notes that the transformational leader develops loyalty from his followers by delegating tasks and then monitoring the same in order to determine if any of the workers need further direction or support. Advantages According to Kellerman (2004), such transformational leadership empowers the followers and this helps to create a bond between the leader and followers. In an organization setting, this brings loyalty and productivity in the workplace. In the end, transformational leadership is able to create a powerful influence over people through establishing trust and congruency. The followers learn to trust and respect the transformational leader and hence are more likely to change their personal values to match the values identified by their leader (Behling & McFillen, 1996). The benefit of this leadership style is that it influences the followers to be more loyal, trust, admire and respect to their leaders. This type of leadership will fulfill the organization needs by encouraging the followers to achieve more than what they expected from them and to be more motivated and creative in their work (Kellerman, 2004). In addition, the followers will be having a self-confidence and be more committed when they using this kind of leadership in their work. Overall, transformational leadership portray a stronger sense of togetherness and encourages the entire team to work towards the growth of an organization. In the process, the leader is able to inspire individual follower growth and hence enhanced group performance. Disadvantages The disadvantages of transformational leadership lie with individual leaders. According to Northouse & Northouse (2009), the charisma of the individual transformational leader may affect the effectiveness of the people he leads. In cases where the leader’s charisma is strong, the followers loyally and enthusiastically follow him, usually overlooking his negative attributes. However, if the transformational leader has poor ethical standard or insincere motives, his loyal follows can ape the same from him thus leading to poor performance in an organization. With transformational leaders too intent at making mobilizing support among the followers to make the organizational goals a reality, Bass (1994) notes that it is likely that such leader could develop the tendency to ignore negative issues that come up in the leader-follower relationship. A good example is when a leader who enjoys wide-support from his followers takes up some narcissist habits that thrive on manipulating his followers. Process The process of transformational leadership involves articulating the vision that the leader has to his followers in an understandable and appealing manner. The leader than explains how he plans to achieve the vision, while acting optimistically and confidently. More to this, the leader assures the followers that he has confidence in their abilities to collectively meet the set goals and emphasizes the values that he and his followers need to collectively adhere to. The process of transformational leadership is however incomplete if the leader does not “lead by example” (Yulk’s, 2002). Participative leadership Participative leadership is a concept whose description encompasses shared responsibilities in a group (Northouse & Northouse, 2009). The assumption adopted in the description of this leadership style by different authors is that leaders ought to give the decision-making process in an organization a centric position, whereby the leaders encourages his followers to participate in the process for purposes of enhancing the effectiveness of an organization (Leithwood Et al, 1999). The participative leader assumes the position of his followers as long as the position promises to help the organization meet its overall objectives. The leader therefore offers his support to the efforts of his followers and creates a work environment where the desire of individual followers is promoted. This in turn enable the followers to put in maximum efforts in their performances and also creates a spirit of cooperation among followers as each seeks the best way to develop his abilities and skills in the work environment. Participative leaders lay more emphasis on the democratic principles of giving their followers an equal right to be heard. By doing this, the participative leader gives participants the critical role of choosing how they want to steer an organization. Participative leadership presupposes that members will be able to interact more freely through the structured opportunities on issues that affect the organization (Leithwood et al., 1999). Notably however, the decision making prerogative lays squarely on the leader alone, and regardless of the opinions of his followers, he has to vet every opinion offered and choose whichever promises the most results. The consequences of the decision made by participative leaders are also the responsibility of the leader. In participative leadership, there is an increased sensitivity by the leader towards moral principles that uphold the rightfulness of decisions reached (Bush, 2003). As such, the leader interacts with other people in the organization in order to enhance the participation of all stakeholders in the decision making. Participative leadership is based on the concept that all team members need to collectively identify goals that need to be pursued and then develop the necessary strategies or procedures necessary to attain the identified goals (Bush, 2003). Notably, in this form of leadership, the leader serves a facilitating role rather than an authority figure, that assigns duties or issue orders. Advantages Followers have an enhanced sense of involvement and are therefore more likely to abide by the decisions made through the consultative process. According to Bass (1985), participative leadership is like telling people to lay their own rules. Apart from the collective effort that arises from such a leadership style, followers are also more likely to observe the rules they set. Whatever decision the participative leaders makes, he makes sure t o notify his followers in good time in order to avoid surprises. The leader also notifies the followers as a sense of appreciating their contributions into the matter. There is also the possibility that more leaders could emerge in an organization that practices such form of leadership. Such could then serve an organization at a later date Disadvantages Participative leadership is only possible in environments where the leader has adequate time to seek decision-making opinions from the followers. In instances when a quick decision is required, then the leader would have to make a solo decision, or just consult as many people as his time would allow him (Garner, 2002). Garner (2002) also notes that in the absence of sincerity, the contribution of some of the followers would have adverse effects on the organization performance. In some cases, the followers may be sincere, but their decision making capabilities may be handicapped by the lack of expertise or skills in the matter being discussed. It is also notable that the differences of followers in a discussion at any one given time may differ because of their personality traits. Such would include resourcefulness, dependence, age and even self confidence (Garner, 2002). Dubrin (2009) further notes that participative leaders are accused of providing their followers with too little direction. In other cases, they are seen as macro-managers. On some extremes, participative managers consult their followers even for the trivial of decisions. This usually translates to wasted man hours because for every decision that is required, extensive, usually time consuming meetings are held (Northouse & Northouse, 2009). Process The participative leader invites his subordinates to participate in the decision-making process, and from the meetings held, he obtains opinions and ideas, which he integrates in the decision-making stage. Conclusion Of the three leadership styles analyzed in this study, there are examples that can be found in the conventional society. Amazingly, transactional leadership is the common leadership practiced in many business oriented organizations despite the fact that it does not appeal so much in theory. Here contracts are set, and performance measures are put in place. In most organizations however, leaders have learnt the art of mixing different styles thus drawing the advantages of each to form a winning combination. For example, transactional leadership if practiced in its absolute form would make relationships between the leaders and their followers profit-motivated only. This would then mean that the followers do not concern themselves with anything else rather than their need to meet targets in order to have the rewards as set out in the contract. In a competitive environment where workers need to feel appreciated for their efforts in addition to receiving material rewards, an absolute transactional leadership would have to be infused with other desirable characteristics of leadership in order to survive competition. The fact that long-term goals are always a centric issue of leadership, the short-term approach of transactional leadership is almost unsustainable in the conventional environment where the good talented workers are always on high demand. References Arbinger Institute. (2010). Leadership and Self-Deception: Getting Out of the Box. (Ed.) San Francisco, CA: Berret-Koehler publishers Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (2002). Developing potential across a full range of leadership cases on transactional and transformational leadership. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Avolio, B., Waldman, D., & Yammarino, F. (1991). Leading in the 1990's: The four I's of transformational leadership. Journal of European Industrial Training, 15 (4), 9-16. Barker, R.A. (1997). How can we train leaders of we do not know what leadership is? Uman relations 50 (4): 342-362. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York, NY: The Free Press. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Introduction. In B. M. Bass, & B. J. Avolio (Eds.) Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. CA: Sage Publications. Behling, O., & McFillen, J. M. (1996). A syncretical model of charismatic/transformational leadership. Group & Organizational Management, 2, 163-191. Bolden, R. (2004). What is Leadership? Leadership Southwest Research report 1. retrieved March 24, 2010 from http://www.iedc.si/programs/seminars/hrmasterclass/photos/What_is_Leadership.pdf Bush, T.(2003). Theories of educational leadership and Management. (ed.). London: Sage. Dubrin, A.J. (2009). Leadership: Research findings, practice, and skills.(6 ed.). New York: Cengage Learning. Garner, D. D. (2002). Effective Leadership: the Pharmacist's Role and Responsibility. Drug Topics. 146(18): 16-20 Goleman, D. (1998). Working with Emotional Intelligence. NY: Random House Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad leadership: what it is, how it happens, why it matters. New York: Harvard Business press. Leithwood, K., Jantzi,D., & Steinbach, R., (1999).Changing Leadership for Changing Times. Philadelphia: Open University Press. Northouse, P.G. (2004) Leadership: Theory and Practice. (ed). London: Sage Publications. Northouse, P.G.G. & Northouse, P.G. (2009). Leadership: Theory and Practice. (5 ed.) London: Sage. Stodgill, R.M. (1974). Handbook of Leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: Free Press. Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in Organizations. (5th edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Read More