Figuring out the best way to motivate followers is one of the most crucial aspects of being a successful leader. For a long time, leadership motivation focused mainly on offering individuals a tangible reward for their hard work. However, just as society and the economy have changed over time, so too has the motivators of those in the workforce. That is why there has been so much leadership research specifically dedicated to new theories and approaches to effective leadership. On of the most prevalent new theories of the past few decades is thought to have gained traction because its focus doesn’t just lie with tangible rewards as motivation and instead internal and emotional motivators are just as important, if not more so (Northouse, 2013). According to Bass and Riggio, “[its] popularity might be due to its emphasis on intrinsic motivation and follower development, which fits the needs of today’s work groups, who want to be inspired and empowered to succeed in times of uncertainty” (2006, as cited in Northouse, 2013, pg. 161). The approach that I’m referring to is transformational leadership.
Transformational leadership as described by Northouse (2013) encourages leaders to work closely with followers to determine their needs and figure out what motivates them. By establishing a relationship between leader and follower, the goals of each will be more easily met and everyone will be more likely to live up to their potential. When discussing transformational leadership, there are four factors that can be used to better understand it: factor 1, idealized influence, is the charismatic aspect of leaders which establishes them as a role model and gives their followers a sense of purpose; factor 2 is inspirational motivation, the part of leadership in which a leader encourages followers through emotional appeals; factor 3, intellectual stimulation, is when leaders support followers in more original and creative ways of thinking; finally, factor 4 is individualized consideration and is concerned with listening to the specific needs of each follower so that leadership styles can be tailored. Despite the main focus of transformational leadership being intrinsic motivators, it doesn’t discount the importance of transactional leadership. Transactional leadership is much more generalized and revolves around the exchange between the leader and their followers (Northouse, 2013). Transactional leadership can be broken down into two factors; the first factor is contingent rewards and is the tangible reward that followers will receive if they do what is asked of them; the second factor, management-by-exception, is essentially the behavioral corrections that leaders make of their followers (Northouse, 2013). Although initial conceptualizations established transformational and transactional leadership as entirely separate ideas, Bass (1985) claimed that the two were on a continuum with laissez-faire leadership being on the opposite end of the spectrum from transformational leadership. This factor of leadership may as well not be leadership at all as there is no connection or exchange made between leader and follower. Where a leader falls on the spectrum can determine how successful they will be in motivating their followers.
To illustrate this point, I will provide an example from my own career as a sales manager for a department store. As you could imagine, there are many goals as a sales manager that I must work with my employees to accomplish, the most obvious of which being sales. However, there others as well, one being opening credit cards. As many businesses do, our store has a credit card that customers can sign up for which gives them discounts, as well as other benefits, and thereby encouraging them to continue shopping with us in the future. Because the beneficial effects of signing a customer up for a card are not immediate, it can be much more difficult to motivate employees to do so. A new store manager was recently appointed at our location and this was one of the things she wanted to improve upon. Since she didn’t know the employees very well yet, the first method of leadership she enacted would be considered transactional due to its generalized nature. She offered up small rewards to those employees who reached their credit goals on a daily or weekly basis and she pulled up reports that showed which employees participated, that way a discussion could be had with them on the importance of meeting their goals. Both of these actions are factors of transactional leadership. This approach did positively affect our credit numbers, but not on a consistent enough basis and not for every employee. However, after some time went by and the store manager got to know the employees better, she began to establish transformational tactics. She would run a morning meeting with employees before then day started to inspire them to work harder. She encouraged them to find new ways to effectively convey the benefits of the card to customers. She also gave examples on a regular basis of how she herself successfully signed up a customer. One of the most important things she did was establish ways of recognizing those employees who were doing an exceptional job in order to invoke intrinsic motivators. This is not much of a surprise though, according to Yukl (1999), “transformational leadership was positively related to follower satisfaction, motivation, and performance” (as cited in Northouse, 2013, pg. 176). Although, while she did enact these new methods, she didn’t entirely get rid of the transactional aspects that were working because they were effective in motivating some people. That’s the benefit of the transformational approach to leadership, it can be tailored to a situation so that both the leader and follower can achieve the most beneficial outcome. In this day and age where intrinsic motivation can be just as, if not more effective than contingent rewards, it is essential that leaders assimilate transformational leadership factors into their arsenal.
References:
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications
Yukl, G. A. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theories. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285–305.
Rebekah Dubin says
Kevin,
You made some great connections of transformation leadership and the effectiveness of how the new theory works with the internal and emotional motivators from your real world example. Not only can we look at the internal and emotional motivators, but we can also take a look at transformational leadership and charisma. One characteristic of the great transformational leaders is the ability to inspire and it is a process that often incorporates charismatic and visionary leadership (Northouse, 2016, p. 161). House (1976) published the theory of charismatic leadership and for him the personality characteristic of a charismatic leader include dominant, having a storing desire to influence others, being self-confident, and having a strong desire to influence others being self-confident, and having a strong sense of one’s own moral values (Northouse, 2016, p. 164).
An example of someone with a characteristic of charisma would be Martin Luther King Jr. There were many other African-American leaders at the time, but it was King who stood out because of the way in which he motivated the masses and his uncompromising commitment to nonviolent protest.
In addition to displaying charisma, they are specific types of behaviors that go along with them which are strong role models, competent to followers, articulate ideological goals, high expectations for followers and exhibit confidence in followers to meet the expectations, and arouse task-relevant motives (Northouse, 2016, p. 164) Martin Luther King Jr. would also be one show many of these behaviors in the way he stood up for what he believed as a strong role model for others knowledgeable to his followers with the largest gathering of protesters ever in the U.S. capital and greatest speech in American History.
While looking at personality characteristics and behaviors, we can see the effects on followers which include trust in leader’s ideology, obedience, emotional involvement, increased confidence, and heighten goals. At my organization and department, my manager shows a strong desire to influence the group by having team meetings articulating the expectations and goals and in effect the team will go unquestioning acceptance. In summary, as stated in Northouse, 2016 charismatic leadership works because it ties the followers and their self-concepts to the organizational identity.
Reference
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications
Michelle Lew says
While many different theories of leadership revolve around what makes a particular individual a great leader, the transformational perspective allows the results to speak for the leader. This theory can be very similar to the contingency theory, though with a strong focus on leader-member relations. Contingency theory is an idea posed by Fielder (1967) where the leader is matched to appropriate and fitting situations. There are three factors of the overall situation: (1) leader-member relations, (2) task structure, and (3) positions power (Northouse, 2007).
While the store manager mentioned in the blog is new to the situation, she was able to change her leadership style and adapt to the needs of the employees. Though she began with a merely transactional form of leadership with extrinsic rewards and task-oriented exchanges, she was able to adapt her style to be more transformational and exemplify the process of the contingency theory in action. The changing of her styling resulted from an analysis of why prior transactions did not result from long-term change. During the “transactional period,” the new manager faced neutral leader-member relations as she was not yet familiarized with employees and vice versa. Task structure, or clear requirements of performance with outlined steps toward a correct solution (Northouse, 2007), was already at high levels as a goal provided by the store owners. This component of the situation remained fixed as it was out of the managers’ and employees’ control, but specific to the business. Position power was also fixed in this new manager’s situation as she was given managerial responsibilities to incentivize and properly guide employees or followers through reward and punishment. Realizing that the prior transactional incentives were not consistently effective, she was able to change the only situational factor she had clear power over: leader-member relations. Over time, the new manager became more familiarized with her team and was able to strengthen the cooperative and friendly relationships between herself (the leader) and her employees (the followers) (PSU WC, 2019, L. 6, p. 6.) This situational analysis allowed the new manager to change her own style in order to best fit the team, applying the contingency theory ex post facto to her getting the job rather than the higher executives using the theory to hire her.
The most noticeable transformational leadership is evident in high-LPC leaders. This Least-Preferred Coworker scale developed by Fiedler (1967) rated individuals on a scale as either being task oriented (with low scores) or relationship motivated (with high scores). The transactional leadership prior to familiarization with the staff had caused the new manager to become more task-oriented in which she would reward employees through basic daily credit sales. The PSU WC lesson commentary (L. 6, p. 6) mentions how “if tasks are accomplished then low-LPC leaders move to their secondary level of motivation, which is forming and maintaining relationships with followers.” This is exactly what the new manager did through inspirational morning meetings and recognizing individuals surpassing basic expectations. The completion of tasks allowed the new manager to truly hone her leadership skills to focus on relationships in addition to tasks, demonstrating her middle LPC. With the now good leader-member relations, high task structure, and strong position power, the manager’s middle LPC is able to coincide with the situation in order to be truly effective. Though a low LPC score is certainly applicable to the situational factors, the middle LPC of the manager allows her to focus on whatever task or relationship problem requires the most attention at the moment rather than leaning towards one or the other.
Northouse (2007) explains how contingency theory “suggests that a leader’s effectiveness depends on how well the leader’s style fits the context.” It is clear that the new manager’s styling clearly fits the store workplace and that the transformational theory defines what her style is. Contingency theory helps explain her transition and adaption from transactional to transformational leadership stylings while the transactional or transformational aspect explains the specific behaviors she implements as a leader.
Resources:
Fiedler, F. E. (1967). Cognitive resources and leadership performance. Applied Psychology: An International Review 44(1), 5-28.
Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2019). PSYCH 485 Lesson 6: Contingency & Path-Goal Theories. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/canvas/su19/2195min-5376/content/06_lesson/printlesson.html