A Critical Perspective to Analyse a Current Approach to Leadership - Essay Example

Leadership Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 Identification of transformational leadership approach 4 2) Presentation of the critical perspective 6 3) Justification of choice of Habermas’s theory 8 Conclusion 10 References 12 Introduction The term leadership is one of the most widely researched topics not only in management but also in social science and psychology. It is basically a relational term. Leadership refers to the relationship in which some specific individuals are capable of influencing others. Roosevelt, Gandhi, Mandela-they are all great leaders, but the question is would they have been treated as great leaders if there were no followers of them. So it is quite clear that the term leadership is relational as well as relative term. The relationship is always analysed in the context of group. Good leadership is likely to inspire others to take on attitudes, values, goals and make them behave in such a way that is good for the wellbeing of the group. In other words individual action could be transformed into group action with help of effective leadership (Zanna, 2003). As far as the definition of leadership is concerned different experts have defined leadership differently. According to John C Maxwell leadership is nothing but influence. On the other hand Warren Bennis said that "Leadership is a function of knowing yourself, having a vision that is well communicated, building trust among colleagues, and taking effective action to realize your own leadership potential."(Oklahoma State University, n.d.). In a broad perspective it can be said that leadership is essential for directing a team or management towards the accomplishment of objectives and goals. So a generally accepted definition would say that leadership is the ability of influencing a team or group in the direction of accomplishing a set of objectives or goals. There could be several approach of leadership such as charismatic leadership, transformational leadership and transactional leadership. This paper provides an in-depth critical analysis of transformational leadership approach. The paper includes a critical perspective of the chosen approach as well as the main reasons of choosing this for analysis over the other approach. 1) Identification of transformational leadership approach Transformational leadership is one of the most popular and most recent approaches of leadership. It has been a common topic of leadership theory. Since 1980 it has been researched by the management experts. Transformational leadership is an important part of the paradigm of “New Leadership”. According to Bass and Riggio the main reason behind the popularity of transformational leadership is its emphasis on the follower development and intrinsic motivation. Transformational leadership is the most relevant leadership approach in today’s uncertain work environment. It is clear from the term itself that transformational leadership is such a process that transforms and changes people. In transformational leadership, leaders go beyond their own interests and focus on organizational interests. They are likely to be intellectually stimulating and inspiring (Avolio, Bass, 2002). Generally they have extraordinary and profound effect on the followers. Transformational leadership focuses on the values, emotions, long term goals, ethics and standards. It is often found to be incorporating visionary and charismatic leadership. There is an outstanding form of influence in transformational leadership and this influence make followers move in order to achieve something which is more than the expected outcome. Transformational leadership is such an approach that could describe a broad range of leadership starting from influencing followers at the personal level to influencing an entire organization or even a whole culture. A great example of transformational leader is CEO of Proctor & Gamble, A. G. Lafley. He brought creativity and flexibility in such a company which was slowly moving. He decided to expand the core brands (crest toothpaste) of the company. He set a goal that 50% of company’s new product would be developed with its outside partners. It was found that he always thought about organization’s interest and this approach of thinking greatly influenced his followers. As a consequence company’s performance was significantly improved in terms of its revenue and profits (Robbins, Judge, 2008). Downton first coined the term transformational leadership. But it first arrived as a crucial approach of leadership after the classic work named ‘Leadership’ of famous political sociologist Macgregor Burns. He compared transformational leadership with another type of leadership named transactional leadership. According to him transactional leadership approach focuses on the exchanges that take place between the followers and their leader. Example of transactional leadership could the leadership style demonstrated by the politicians who promise that there would not be any new tax. There is a very common exchange dimension in transactional leadership which could be observed at the different levels in different types of organizations. On the other hand in transformational leadership there is an engagement between the leaders and followers. This engagement enhances the level of morality and motivation among both leaders and followers. Leaders who follow transformational leadership are likely to be focused on the motives and needs of the followers. They help their followers in the process of reaching their maximum potential. According to Burns, Mahatma Gandhi was a great transformational leader as he raised the demands and hopes of millions of Indians and in the process of doing that he changed himself (Northouse, 2009). 2) Presentation of the critical perspective As far as the critical perspectives are concerned approaches like Habermas and Foucault could be analyzed. Jurgen Habermas is one of the most renowned philosophers in the history of philosophy. He has linked Anglo American and continental way of thinking. Habermas’s work has touched a wide range of subjects starting from aesthetics to socio political theory, from religion philosophy to language and epistemology. His ideas and thoughts have significant impact on sociology, philosophy, political-legal thoughts, argumentation theories and communication studies. Furthermore he is known to be a renowned public intellectual in Germany. Habermas’s theory of discourse ethics and communicative action are crucial in the context of building leadership. These theories have been found to be very much helpful for teachers in order to become leaders by making significant contribution in the process of various educational reform and change. Habermas criticized theories of modern societies in his work and explained that there are significant relationship between two distinct theoretical concepts which are micro theory regarding rationality which is focused on communicative coordination and the macro theory regarding modern societies’ systemic integration. Habermas has made significant contribution in communication theory. In Habermas’s theory on communicative rationality, power is the main concept. Habermas’s work address four general subjects which are rationality of actions, concept on social order, theory of action and diagnosis of contemporary society. According to Habermas “Communicative action can be understood as a circular process in which the actor is two things in one: an initiator, who masters situations through actions for which he is accountable, and a product of the transitions surrounding him, of groups whose cohesion is based on solidarity to which he belongs, and of processes of socialization in which he is reared” (Robinson, n.d.). In Habermas’s theory, communicative action takes place when speaker coordinate his or her action which is actually based on a shared value or understanding that goals or objectives are inherently merit worthy or reasonable. According to Habermas theory strategic action is different from communicative action. Basis of communicative action is that individual’s goals are reasonable (Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy, May 17 2007). Apart from communicative action theory of Habermas there is another important theory of this famous German sociologist. This theory is discourse ethics. Discourse ethics is based on the concepts of Habermas on constructivist models of learning. According to discourse ethics is cognitivist, deontological, universalist and formalist. Habermas said that moral problems could be solved in cognitive and rational way and this has been the main assumption of discourse ethics. An important aspect of discourse ethics is universalisation. The principle of universalisation’s Kantanian version has been reformulated by Habermas and transformed into intersubjectivity. One of the main opponents of Habermas and his theory was Foucaults although both of them were political thinkers. The process of thinking of Habermas was well developed and well structured in the context of political ideas but in the context of actual political process his thinking did not have strong base. Foucault’s way of thinking is weak in the context of generalized ideas, he is known as declared opponent of concepts on ideals. A sophisticated concept of realpolitik was reflected in the work of Foucault. It is true that both Habermas and Foucaults have agreed on the fact that in politics there must be proper reason of behind taking one side. However Foucault has been found to be warning that “to respect rationalism as an ideal should never constitute a blackmail to prevent the analysis of the rationalities really at work.” (Flyvbjerg, B. n.d.). It is important to notice that Foucalt was found to be familiar with Habermas’s work and Habermas was also found to be familiar with Foucault’s work. But at the same time the main complain of Habermas against Foucault was regarding Foucault’s relativism. Habermas has strongly dismissed genealogical historiographies of Foucault. 3) Justification of choice of Habermas’s theory There could be several reasons behind selecting Habermas’s approach over others’ approach. One of the main reasons is that most of the researchers and experts have appreciated and applied the theories of Habermas. It has been found that researchers and scholars like Van Manen, Fischer, Grundy, Kemmis etc have accepted and implemented the theories proposed by Habermas. Theory of ‘Three knowledge-constitutive Interests’ has been applied by Van Manen in the process of development of curriculum for examination. In his work Manen addressed an important question, ‘what to teach’. He also addressed how this question should be answered by the school systems as well as schools. According to Manen Habermas’s theory provided a useful framework which has helped him in order to carry out his work. Like Manen, kemmis and Grundy have also accepted the relevancy and significance of theories proposed by Habermas. Habermas’s ‘three cognitive interests’ have been used as heuristics devices by these two scholars while they were interpreting teachers’ commitments and work. Another renowned scholar and researcher, Fischer has also used theory of cognitive interests which was proposed by Habermas. Fischer applied this theory in the process of developing a methodology for evaluating policy while he was working in the project named ‘Head Start’ in United States of America. It has been found from Fischer’s paper that critical theory could be very well applied in practical situations. Hoffman has also found to be used the theories provided by Habermas. Hoffman work was focused on international relations and in this work Habermas’s theory was used for categorizing various theories regarding international relations. According to Hoffman critical theory has brought reflexivity in the theory of international relations. Another scholar who has been found to be used Habermas’s theory was Laughlin. Laughlin, while he was involved in his research on accounting, he developed a ‘useful methodology’ with the help of Habermas’s theory. According to the work of Laughlin a method was provided by Habermas in order to question economic reason’s colonizing effects. Laughlin suggested that Habermas theory could be used for promoting change in United Kingdom public sector. In the last decade also Habermas theory was widely used by the researchers like Mingers who was able to develop a view of critical management science on the basis of the theories provided by Habermas. Mingers even claimed that he was the first person to apply Habermas theory in management science. So, it is quite clear that Habermas theory could be used in several different fields of study and this makes it a widely accepted theory among a large number of scholars and researchers in the world. Habermas theory was also applied in the study of information system and this was done by Lyytinen. Habermas theory was the main basis of the research on gender related differences in mathematical attainment which was done by Johnston and Dunne. According to them a powerful platform for carrying out the research was provided by the critical perspectives of Habermas’s theory. Habermas theory was also found to be very much relevant in the context of adult education theory and this was first realized by Connelly. According to Dunford and Palmer Habermas theory could be applied in the concepts of change management. In their study Habermas’s view of knowledge was used as a framework. Grunau applied ‘knowledge-constitutive interests’ theory of Habermas in order to explore professional development among science educators. Laughlin and Broadbent accepted Habermasian approach while they were developing a model whose main objective was to understand the change in schools. Webbstock and Luckett used theories of Habermas to explain the there could be three distinct educational paradigms which could be applied in order to understand curriculum. According to them Habermas;s theory would be effective in finding out the reasons behind the arousal of conflicts and tensions at the time of developing curriculum. In the present century Habermas theory has been applied by Willmott in order to understand “New Organizational Forms” (Quong, T. E. 2003). It could be stated based on the above discussion that habermas’s theory has been accepted by most of the scholars and researchers from various fields. His theory has been used in several social investigations starting from professional development to adult learning, from accounting practices to management science and curriculum design. Several studies and the application as well as acceptance of Habermas theory in those studies have proved that it is one of the most important theories in various fields of research. Conclusion Leadership is perhaps the most widely researched topic of management over the years. Leadership means differently to different experts. A general definition of leadership would be saying that it is the ability of influencing a team or group in the direction of accomplishing a set of objectives or goals. There could be several approaches of leadership such as transformational, transactional and charismatic. Among all these transformational approach is mostly observed in the present work force. Transformational leaders are likely to be going beyond their own interests and focus on organizational interests. They are likely to be intellectually stimulating and inspiring. Generally they have extraordinary and profound effect on the followers. This paper also include an in depth analysis of critical theory of Habermas who is one of the most renowned sociologists in the world. Habermas’s theory has been analysed and compared with theories provided by another renowned individual named Foucault. Habermas’s theory has been widely used by scholars and researchers from all around the world in their works on several distinct topics of sociology, education and management. References Flyvbjerg, B. No Date, Ideal Theory, Real Rationality: Habermas Versus Foucault and Nietzsche, [Online] Available at: http://flyvbjerg.plan.aau.dk/IdealTheory.pdf [Accessed on January 23, 2010] Gimmler, A. No Date, The Discourse Ethics of Jürgen Habermas, [online] Available at: http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/cavalier/Forum/meta/background/agimmler.html [Accessed on January 23, 2010] Robinson, S. No Date, The Jürgen Habermas Web Resource, Michigan State University, [online] Available at: https://www.msu.edu/~robins11/habermas/ [Accessed on January 23, 2010] Northouse, P. G. 2009, Leadership: Theory and Practice, SAGE Oklahoma State University, No Date, Our Definition of Leadership, [Online] Available at: https://oc.okstate.edu/pages/personal/11654/Leadership%20Definition.pdf [Accessed on January 23, 2010] Quong, T. E. 2003, School Leadership and Cognitive Interests, University of Southern Queensland, [Online] Available at: http://eprints.usq.edu.au/1488/2/Quong_2003_whole.pdf [Accessed on January 23, 2010] Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy, May 17 2007, Jürgen Habermas [Online] Available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/habermas/#TheComAct [Accessed on January 23, 2010] Zanna, M. P. 2003, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 35, Academic Press Read More