Leadership is defined as the effective act of persuading followers to pursue shared or at least joint purposes that represents the values and motivations of leaders, followers and the organization as a whole. The root of leadership is the sheer concern for the needs and goals of followers. McMillan and Gilley and (2009) argued that addressing the real needs of followers is one of many requirements to display moral leadership. Moral leaders do not abuse the use of others to achieve their personal goals, but work toward the continuing profit and development of their followers. True moral leaders having sincere concern about the true well-being of their followers would be seen as both influential and inspiring by others. However, moral leadership by itself might not end in enhanced power unless addressing the real needs of followers takes the form of transformational leadership behaviors. Moreover, since moral leadership presumes a considerate approach to the real needs of others, the extent to which a leader’s perception and others’ perceptions match would affect the impact of moral leadership on power. Self-other agreement, regarding transformational and transactional leadership, should therefore be worth exploring. This reflection on leadership types and roles looks at the influence of moral leadership on leader’s power, how self-other agreement regarding transformational leadership affects that relationship as well as how demographic factors such as gender, race and religion can play a role in the influence one can pertain as a moral and just leader. Moral leadership in today’s world is important in our political, business, and military affairs as the effectiveness of leadership of is detrimental in the outcome of any company or ...
... middle of paper ...
...ility for their work and understand the strengths and weaknesses of fellow followers. This results in a more cohesive unit. Understanding this, the leader can effectively link followers with tasks that enhance their job performance, motivation and ability thus benefiting the organization as a whole. However, transactional leadership tends to be most effective in situations where problems are simple and clearly-defined because it revolves around a reward or punishment system. For example, if you do something right you are rewarded. If you do something wrong, you are demoted or punished. However harsh it seems, transactional leadership is the leadership style that is more focused on accomplishing goals rather than employee satisfaction. When the outcome of a task is detrimental to an organization (i.e. military task), a more transactional approach is certainly needed.
While transactional leadership relies on a system of rewards and penalties it doesn't provide a lot of in conditions of inspiration to encourage folks to travel past the fundamentals. Given this truth the supporters of transactional leaders may get happy and develop a propensity to attain smallest expectations solely that might facilitate them avoid penalties (Bass, 1990). Therefore the leader and also the follower ar in associate conformity on what the follower would take delivery of achieving the negotiated level of performance (Bass, 1990). The success of such leadership depends on the extent of satisfaction the leader and followers have in following this technique of performance based mostly appraisals (Bass, 1990)
There are four more attributes added to the transactional leadership theory and forms the transformational theory. Basically, it is the process where the leader and follower raises their hand for each other towards a greater benefit (Dems, 2015). This type of leadership style is very energetic, enthusiastic and passionate and it’s not confined in a hierarchical relation. Here leader exposed the clear goal to the follower and having a high expectation. But he never forgets about his follower to help them, encourage the. Leader shares his opinion and welcome every input from group members (Transformational Leadership, 2015) . The four qualities are intellectual stimulation to followers to explore new ideas. Considering each individual despite only group or team. Inspirational motivation for creating an inspiring vision to the group which is really achievable. Most important thing the behavior of transformational leader is being a role model to follow (Dawes,
Giltinane (2013) identifies three leadership styles. The first is transactional leadership in which a leader is controlling and functions in a reward and punishment environment. In transactional leadership style, leaders give little room for employees to express ingenuity. Decisions are passed laterally from top down and the form of leadership is to stress obedience rather than loyalty. Transactional leadership is closely related to autocratic style (Giltinane, 2013).
The two most intriguing leadership styles presented in the readings were transformational leadership and servant leadership. Both leadership styles are relationship-oriented, that is, in order for these leadership styles to be effective, positive relationships must exist between leaders and followers. Also, both leadership styles reject the role of leader as being reserved for those individuals in designated positions of power, but rather a quality that may be exhibited by any individual (Kelly, 2012, pp. 10-11). However, the differing goals of each leadership style is the seemingly critical factor that separates transformational leadership from servant leadership.
A leadership theory is a clarification of some features of leadership; theories have practical importance as they are being used for better understanding, anticipating, and controlling successful leadership. Hence, the main principle of any theory is to inform practice(Lussier and Achua 2009). Leadership theories could be classified into eight main categories: Great man, trait, behavioral, contingency, Situational, Participative, Relationship , management (Cherry 2010).
Transformational leadership also integrates well with a biblical worldview because both advocate valuing followers as well as leaders, the importance of ethical behavior, the need to forgive and learn from mistakes, and the value of a high moral example. Kouzes and Posner advocate leaders having a “moral authority to lead” (2007, p. 41), practicing personal accountability and working to improve all aspects of their follower’s lives. This others-centered leadership approach fits well in the Christ centered atmosphere of a Christian school.
Axiology is the study of the Nature of Values. As an Existentialist I believe that a person’s choices are what creates the human being. As I am a military child, I have had a very strict life. While most of the values I learned were from my home life, school and other sources backed these values up. I will focus on my top three values which are respect, responsibility, and understanding. The others that will guide my practice are discipline, trying your best, kindness, and commitment. The first value that came to my mind was respect. Respect is very important because you must earn others respect and vice versa. I learned this, first, through my home, by respecting my parent’s wishes, even if it was not something I agreed with. Thus in turn,
This method implies that leaders and follower have combine motives that can be beneficial to both parties. When theses task are assigned, there is a designed reward or punishment for the followers. This method of leadership can also be associated with managing in a sense. Transactional leadership in a sense is like management in that it does not look to inspire or promote change, it is in fact more about ensuring a particular process, and procedure meets the desired results.
Leadership is not defined by position. Leadership is an extraordinary responsibility given only to those willing to exude selflessness, decisiveness, and wisdom. CSM William R. Hambrick, Jr is an accomplished leader that embodies the values, attributes, and competencies that I aspire to convey to my subordinates. The impact that CSM Hambrick has had on my career and leadership philosophy is immeasurable. His far-reaching legacy is one of confidence, sound judgment, and empathy.
With this particular style, leaders are known to have a hands off approach when guiding others, and usually they do not provide the support that may be needed. Furthermore, Laissez-fair leaders allow individuals to make their own decisions without much interference or feedback. In addition to a Laissez-fair leader, there is also the transformational method of leadership. A Transformational leader can be described as a person who “persuades their subordinates to take on the organizational revolution as their own” (Rana, Malik, & Hussain, 2007, p. 163). In addition, transformational leaders also formulate challenging purposes in order to pave the way for others. For example, although Abraham Lincoln was the president of the United States, he volunteered in the Blackhawk War, which proves how caring and selfless he was. He was able to sympathize and relate to others, although it may have been considered as politically incorrect. The last leadership style that has been discussed is known as transactional. With the transactional method of guiding others, there is a “reciprocal exchange” (Rana, Malik, & Hussain, 2007, p. 164) that exists between a leader and subordinates. Focusing on the desired outcome is the main objective with transactional leaders as opposed to focusing to the individuals
Transforming theory of leadership is considered as a moral process due to interaction of leaders with followers based on their shared values, motives as well as goals (Burns, 1978). The theory comes by recognizing the needs and motives of
The transaction leader differs approach differs from the transformational leader. In general it is motivated by a change taking place. According to McLaurin and Almiri, transactional leadership is a bargaining exchange process between the leader and the follower, lead to the expected or planned outcomes, focus on maintaining the status quo, does not consider the needs of the followers on an individual basis, and the flow of power is more stable than the transformational leader.
Initially, transactional and transformational leadership are different in terms of implementation and its outcomes. However, transformational leadership was developed from transactional leadership (Downton, 1973). Bass (1985) defined transactional leadership as an exchange activity that leaders execute to motivate subordinates in order to achieve their tasks by giving out reward or punishment correspond with their performance. Additionally, active and passive management by exception are taken into account when it comes to misconception and faults. Bass (1985) stated that transformational leadership emphasizes the value of subordinates, encourages them to perform extra effort, and assures their comprehension on organization’s goals and objectives. Besides, idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulatio...
What do Kenneth Lay, Bernard Ebbers, Conrad Black, Dennis Kozlowski, and Scott Thompson have in common? Yes, they were all in high ranking leadership positions, worked for very large companies, and were men. Unfortunately for the companies they worked for, they also lacked any sense of ethical leadership. Ethics are very important in the business world, and managers need to do all they can to hire and retain ethical people.
). Burke et al (2006) suggested that transactional leadership, based on contingent rewards, can have a positive effect on followers' satisfaction and performance. However, a transactional leader focuses on management tasks, and will not identify shared values of a team. By contrast, transformational leaders inspire others with their vision and work together with their team to identify common values (Marquis and Huston 2009). The transactional approach is task-orientated and can be effective when meeting deadlines, or in emergencies such as when dealing with a cardiac arrest. This approach can lead to non-holistic patient care, because nurses focus on the task they need to complete, rather than the patient as a whole (Bach and Ellis 2011).