By: Whitney Robinson
Transformational leaders are those that inspire. They take a situation, plug in their team and resources in an appropriate manner, and extract a result that is beyond basic. According to Northouse (2013), Transformational leaders use charisma to inspire their followers to accomplish more than what is expected of them. The basic premise, is that a leader will use their ability to interact and inspire their followers in such a way that they no longer are simply doing a job for a reward (transactional leadership, Northouse 2013), but they go above and beyond to accomplish more than that status quo in a way that benefits both the leader and the team. So why is it then that this is not the ‘new’ status quo, and all leaders aspire to be transformational?
Classically, some transformational leaders have given the method a bad rap. As David Boje (2000) describes, famous transformational leaders include Adolf Hitler and others that sought to inspire followers for notorious ends. Boje goes on to describe the transformational leader as someone who steps outside the confines of bureaucracy and status quo, and creates a movement that portrays them as hero-leaders. Boje depicts the three major historical leaders: The charismatic/hero reformer, the bureaucratic/transactional leader, and the traditional feudal/prince leader. In his paper, Boje talks about how bureaucratic and feudal leaders hold power for only as long as there is not a challenger or reformer, and the power of the prince is only challenged by a more inspirational and charismatic leader. In modern civilization, with bureaucracy and government holding such a strong hold on a leader/follower model, will we ever again see a transformational leader?
In my opinion, in the big government scene, no- we will not in our lifetimes see a sweeping transformational leader. Like we saw with President Obama, all the promises in the world for change and transparency were not ever fully realized due to the design of our modern systems of government. Why is it then, that most of us do not see transformational leaders in our daily lives? Like Edward Brown points out (2012), most small group leaders follow a mix of leadership qualities from transformational to transactional. Whether it is a lack of training, or opportunity, small business leaders struggle with matching their vision for progress with those that work for them. As I see at my work, my boss simply does not wish to view outside (our) input as having any relevance for her mission.
Molly Hamilton (n.d.) of the University of Southern Illinois writes a journal article about the impacts of transformational leadership, and particularly how it relates to coaching. Hamilton writes how the advantages coaches have to inspire their teams usually relate to the fact that coaches can inspire their team by relating to experience they have had in their lives. Coaches have a connection to their team most often by being professionals or technically proficient athletes who have been in the same situations their team face. In the modern work place, I feel that I respect bosses and leaders who have either grown within our organization, or have at least developed within our field. As an administrator, I can feel the strain myself and with the rest of my team having a leader who is a scientist and not from our ilk.
I think in the end, it is not necessary for a leader to have lived the lives of their followers (be it a coach, or a business leader), but the leader must take the time to sympathize and realize the struggles that a team faces. My current boss does none of this, and takes a very direct prince-role to micromanage and oversees all aspects of our operation. I feel that if she was to take a minute to understand everyone’s strengths and weaknesses, and took a greater role to inspire instead of dictate, we would all be more productive. Like Brown suggests, if a leader has a healthy mix of transactional and transformational leadership roles they will be very productive in the modern work place. Having an extreme with laisse-faire or dictatorship approach will always hinder more than help a team.
References:
Brown, E. (2012). Charismatic leadership versus transactional leadership. Core Edge
Image and Charisma Institute. Retrieved from
Hamilton, M. (n.d.). The interaction of transactional and transformational leadership.
University of Southern Illinois. Retrieved from
http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1078&context=ojwed
Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (Sixth ed.). Thousand Oaks:
SAGE
Michael David Robinson says
I think the point you were trying to make in your post would have been much stronger if you had given a specific example of how your boss’s dictatorial, micromanaging style led you to be less productive than you would have been if her leadership methods had been more in line with the transformational style of leadership.
I am going to play Devil’s Advocate here.
I think an important point that a lot of people miss when studying leadership is that the study of leadership is empirical, not normative. We are interested in answering the question “what happens within an organization when a leader employs certain tactics or exhibits certain behaviors?” When this question can be answered with enough consistency with respect to certain sets of traits or behaviors, a theory emerges.
Whether a leader ought to refrain from using a certain style of leadership, even if using that style of leadership turns out to be effective, is a question of ethics or moral philosophy. It might very well be the case that your boss is using the leadership style that she is, because she has determined that her business makes the most money when she uses that particular style.
Why should your boss try to change her leadership style if she does not have to? You mentioned that you work for a small business. Perhaps becoming a different type of leader would require great expenditures of time and money that the company simply does not have. Maybe the supply of workers in the area exceeds the demand, such that your boss can get away with not being attentive to their needs, because the ease with which they can be replaced by someone else is enough to motivate them to work hard for the sake of being able to have a job next week.
I think the above situation illustrates why it is a mistake to try to separate psychology from economics.
Here is a novel concept: perhaps, at the end of the day, the entirety of leadership is transactional. After all, if a company implements other styles of leadership, only because implementing those styles prove to be more profitable, have they really broken out of the transactional model, or is it just not as obvious anymore? For example, a company might engage in activity that is seen as fitting the servant leadership model by providing its employees with opportunities to further their education, or pursue outside projects that are meaningful to them. However, by doing so, the company attracts the best workers to itself and is able to crush the competition because its designs and the new products that it rolls out are simply that much better. At the end of the day, it is still all about the bottom line.
Cody Gustaveson says
I was hoping for more discussion as to how your boss is failing. Your discussion is very insightful and I would really have enjoyed some examples to understand the shortcomings that you are experiencing. I deal with a very similar situation all the time, although the leaders I face are given authority and it is rare to find one that ever seeks to understand those they lead. One of the interesting phenomenon is that they all tend to do a good job, regardless of how their followers view them. The task gets accomplished, people grow and learn, and individuals see tangible results. The drawback is that I always find myself in dismay. I always seem to think they are bad leaders despite the actual results. This may be different than what you experience because all of the people in my situation are trained to follow and how handle the circumstances of this type of leadership. This fact may promote a better outcome than in you circumstances.