The Theory of Transformational Leadership James McGregor Burns (1978) is generally credited as being the originator of the concept of transactional and transformational leadership characteristics

Question

85 users unlocked this solution today!

The Theory of Transformational Leadership

James McGregor Burns (1978) is generally credited as being the originator of the concept of transactional and transformational leadership characteristics although Downton (1973) first distinguished the difference between transactional leadership and transformational leadership. Downton's theories on this topic did not gain popularity until Burns (1978) applied the concepts to political leaders. The theory of transformational leadership was then expanded on by Bass (1985) and Bass and Avolio (1994). In his seminal work, Burns (1978) discusses the key concepts of transactional leadership and transformational leadership as they apply to political figures. He defines transactional leadership as a lower-level relationship between leader and follower where transactions and agreements occur between the two with no conscious regard for higher levels of morality or motivation. Transformational leadership transcends transactional leadership to a higher level where leaders seek out the needs and motives of the followers and work collaboratively to meet those needs. The focus of transformational leadership is a shared purpose that elevates both the leader and the follower to a higher ground (Bass & Avolio, 1994).

This leadership book by Burns (1978) was very important in shaping the future of the transformational leadership theory and research because it popularized the theory of transformational leadership. This work was also original in the insertion of the moral and ethical elements of leadership not previously seen in other theories. Many researchers began to test the theory of transformational leadership through a variety of studies after the work of Burns became popular (Avolio, Zhu, Koh, & Puja, 2004; Bass & Avolio, 1994; Black, 2006; Bono & Judge, 2003; Buinien & kudien, 2008; Bycio, Hackett & Allen 1995; Emery & Barker, 2007; Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Kark, Shamir, & Chen, 2003; Kirkpatrick & Locke 1996; Koh, Steers, & Terborg, 1995; Schaubroeck, Lam, & Cha, 2007; Wang, Law, Hackett, Wang, & Chen, 2005. Many of the studies following the works of Burns reflected positivists and post positivists views in the quantitative methodological approaches used to test the relationship between transformational leadership and other factors like employee commitment. These studies often revealed objective epistemologies with value-free axiology. In his book, Burns (1978) was one of the few leadership researchers at that time who inserted values into the leadership equation as an integral part of leadership. Bernard Bass (1985) was considered a disciple of James McGregor Burns and built upon the theories that resulted from Burns' work. In his book, Bass (1985) continues to develop the transformational leadership theory in conjunction with charismatic leadership. Bass applies the transformational leadership theory to organizations in an effort to show how performance can be transformed as well. He added the traits of creativity and vision to the necessary characteristics of transformational leadership needed to obtain that performance beyond expectation. Bass used this book to establish his own theoretical framework for leadership based on some of the key elements outlined by Burns. In his book, Bass (1985) identifies charisma as a critical element and provides ways to identify charisma in a variety of organizational sectors and settings. Bass also describes and defines the different elements of leadership styles and behaviors that can essentially be measured for effectiveness. To measure these specific leadership styles and behaviors, Bass introduces a leadership questionnaire in this book that served as the starting point for the later development of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) that would be more formally developed by Bass and Avolio in 1990 and then revised in 1995. The MLQ was developed to judge items categorized as transactional or transformational in nature. Transactional items include: (a) contingent reward, (b) management-by-exception, and (c) management-by-exception passive. Transformational items include: (a) idealized influence (charisma), (b) intellectual stimulation (c) individualized consideration, and (d) inspirational motivation (Bass & Avolio, 2004). Bass (1985) conducted research that confirms that followers of transformational leaders are motivated to perform above and beyond expectations as they feel loyalty, admiration, trust, and respect toward the transformational leader. However, Bass does not embrace the same philosophy as Burns in regards to the ethical and moral aspects of transformational leadership. Bass views transformational leadership as amoral and in this regard is inconsistent with Burns' view.

The Transactional Leadership Style

The three elements of transactional leadership are (a) contingent reward, (b) management-by-exception, and (c) passive management-by-exception. Contingent reward specifies that transactional leaders will often provide reward to their followers contingent upon specific goals or behaviors (Burns 1978). Management-by-exception behavior in transactional leaders is manifested when exceptions to goals are noticed. Proactive action is taken before a serious problem results. If specified behaviors or established goals are not being met, the leader may take action, intervene in that specific case, and offer correction. Passive management-by-exception is seen in leaders who are not proactive in nature and wait until a serious problem occurs before intervening, often resulting in negative exchanges (Bass, 1990). It was noted by Bass (1990) that leaders who employ a transactional leadership style operate within the culture boundaries that already exists within the organization to reach goals. Conversely, leaders who adopt the transformational leadership style seek to change the existing culture within the organization to reach necessary goals. Values are considered a major foundation of transformational leadership and are taken into consideration by transformational leaders when effecting change (Kouzes & Posner, 2007). The effectiveness of leadership is often viewed in relationship to the interactions between the leader and follower. The quality of the transactional exchanges as described by Bass (1990) plays an important role in creating a perception of exceptional leadership. Both the leader and follower are responsible for quality interactions. Sergiouvanni (1990) points out that transactional leadership is considered less desirable by some observers who perceive it to be a method to meet basic extrinsic needs and does not address higher moral issues or values. Waldman, Bass, and Einstein (1987) maintain that transactional leadership can be useful when the focus is meeting short-term goals. The transactional approach is also considered effective when influence can be obtained through a more formal transactional exchange between leader and follower (Conrad & Poole, 2002).

The Transformational Leadership Style

The transformational leadership style was described by Burns (1978) as the process of identifying the needs, motives, and values of leaders and followers to facilitate the best interest of everyone. With transformational leadership, the leader strives to inspire and foster motivation in followers and create a bond through a shared vision (Bass & Avolio, 2004). Transformational leaders stimulate followers to levels of performance beyond normal expectations (Barbuto 2005, Bass & Riggio, 2006; Feinberg, Ostroff & Burke, 2005). Transformational leadership encompasses four areas of leadership behavior: (a) idealized influence (charisma), (b) individualized consideration, (c) intellectual stimulation, and (d) inspirational motivation (Bass, 1985). Idealized influence is the process of providing a role model example to followers in regards to charisma. Leaders who are engaging in idealized influence are characterized as having a high level of ethical standards as they attempt to do what is in the best interest of the followers they lead (Bass & Avolio, 2004). Other researchers have described leaders who exhibit idealized influence as loyal, humble, positive, honest, and competent (Bennis & Goldsmith, 2003; E. Gordon, 2000). Individualized consideration involves the process of identifying and supporting the needs of followers. In addition to the organizational goals, leaders seek to help followers meet individual goals. The development of the follower through mentoring, training, and coaching is a high priority for the leader (Bass, 1985). The intellectual stimulation process encourages followers to challenge processes and the status quo. Leaders equip followers with the training and tools needed to be creative in the problem-solving process as they learn to come to their own conclusions. Leaders who demonstrate the behavior of intellectual stimulation tend to empower their followers to make decisions (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Inspirational motivation is characterized by leaders who articulate a clear vision to the followers that is inspiring and engaging. While inspirational motivation is a separate category of transformational leadership than the charisma aspect of idealized influence, leaders who exhibit one most often exhibit the other (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Leaders who exhibit inspirational motivation show an ability to gain support for the leader's vision and values (Bass, 1985). Transformational leadership is indicative of a leader who promotes the concept of shared vision and shared values (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999).Leaders who engage in the leadership behaviors of transformational leadership experience positive outcomes from their subordinates. These outcomes include higher levels of intrinsic motivation, increased levels of performance, better retention rates, and higher job 28 satisfaction (Kouzes & Posner, 2007). Transformational leadership creates positive outcomes for both leader and follower (Bass & Avolio, 1994).

QUESTIONS:

For this assignment, draft a document that analyzes both your personality and leadership style. What is your personality type? Explain the results and whether you think it accurately reflects your leadership style. Explain how the assessment's results might impact personnel management in the fire service or in the organization you work for.

Do you think your leadership style is the best approach for leading in the fire service? If not, what would you change about the way you lead? If you have not had a chance to lead, answer the questions based on the type of leader you want to be.

PLEASE PROVIDE REFERENCES AND THE WORK SHOULD BE IN APA STYLE