Hamad Bakar Hamad MBA in Maritime Management 000455020 Page 3
Contradiction between Transformational leadership and Charismatic leadership
Transformational leader is an “icon”
to organization especially in an organization wherethis leader did what was thought to be impossible (Bass & Avolio, 1994 as cited byMandell & Pherwani, 2003).
Hitler is best example of Charismatic leader whileGandhi is highly inspirational transformational leader.(Doyle & Smith 2009)
It has also been argued by (Burns, 1978 as cited by Tucker & Russell, 2004) that atransformational leader will elevate his/her followers to a higher level of achievementby his/her inspiration motivation; moreover followers will strive to organization needs inexpense of their own needs. Transformational leadership is leadership style which isbased on four behaviors commonly known as the 4Is. They are Idealized Influence,Inspiration Motivation, Intellectual Simulation, Individualized consideration
(Bass &Riggio. 2006). Typically the first two behaviors are charismatic behaviors (Mandell &Pherwani, 2003) whereby a leader inspire his/her followers to the extent that they reacha high level of believe that without him or her an organization
move any stepforward. From this end, a red line can be drawn between the transformational leader tothe charismatic one, the former is working on behalf of his/her followers andorganization while the latter keeps his/her own agenda to the expense of the followersand organization.
Some examples of individuals who are considered transformational leaders include, Bill Gates of Microsoft,Steve Jobs of Apple, Michael Dell of Dell Computer Corporation, Jeff Bezos of Amazon.com, Lou Gerstner of IBM, and Jack Welch of GE.(Kreindy, 2000)
Critics of transformational and charismatic leadership lie on its ambiguity indifferentiating between the two. (Bass, 1995 as sited by Yukl, 1999) stressed that,
Transformational Vs. Transactional Leadership Essay
Over the past twenty years, an abundant body of researches have been done to review transformational leadership and transactional leadership. Burn (1978) was the first person to introduce and conceptualize the concept of transformational leadership and transactional leadership. Bass (1985) based on Burn’s concept and deepened his notion with modifications, which stated that one of the best frameworks of leadership is transformational or transactional. Following Bass and Avolio (1994, p. 4) provided the idea of these two leaderships and generalized them into the development of global economic world. Bass and Avolio (1997) also suggested that there was no need to view transformational and transactional leadership as opposing ways or leaderships when we applied them into our management. Recently, researchers have begun to increase the interest of investigating the relationship between these two leaderships and seeking the influences and correlation with other features, like personality, performance and behaviour towards effectiveness (Hartnell & Walumbwa, 2011, p. 225; Rowld & Rohmann, 2009, p. 42; Bono & Judge, 2004, p. 901; Eeden, Cilliers & Deventer, 2008, p. 253). In this essay, I would like to distinguish transformational and transactional leadership and talk the possible integrations between them.
The main distinction of transformational and transactional leadership is the way that how leaders relate with followers and the acquisition they receive from each other (Burn, 1978). Transactional leadership requires exchange of resources as the leaders explain the procedure to followers and expects them to successfully complete their work to fulfil their needs (Eeden et al., 2008, p. 255). This is the part of transaction which satisfies followers’ needs as well by giving contingent reward as well. Leaders are aiming to control and surveillance employees through sensible and thrifty intention (Bass, 1985). It simply requires an agreement between leaders and followers toward organization goal (Burns, 1978). In transformation leadership, leaders focus on changing followers’ moral sensibilities and potentially increasing their motivation beyond self-interest (Kezar & Eckel, 2008, p. 381). It needs more associated with outcome criteria than transactional leadership (Rowold & Rohmann, 2009, p. 42). Transformational leadership helps to build positive relationship among staff and raising their morale. In contrast, transactional leadership helps to build the fundamental structure of the organisation (Kezar & Eckel, 2008, p. 383).
Transformational leadership are classified into four components which are pointed out by Bass (1990, p. 28), ‘charisma, idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration’. Apart from these basic roles, charisma leadership, a collection of personal characteristics, has its own role of literature since it has...
Loading: Checking Spelling0%