Leadership

Unit: Lead Transformational Change Session 1

Session 1: Introduction to leadership

The goal of transformational leadership is to “transform” people and organizations in a

literal sense – to change them in mind and heart; enlarge vision, insight, and

understanding; clarify purposes; make behavior congruent with beliefs, principles, or

values; and bring about changes that are permanent, self-perpetuating, and momentum

building."

- Steven Covey (1989), 7 Habits of Highly Successful People

Introduction

This module will focus on the emerging field of study which examines leadership against the backdrop of planning, implementing and sustaining transformational change. The conduct of our study will not be limited to any one theory of leadership or school of thought on transformational leadership.

The concept of leadership has long excited thought, research, discussion, writing, and learning responses (Depree 1989: 9). It has importance for individuals, organisations and societies. Its cross-disciplinary nature has meant that psychologists, organisational theorists, knowledge and organisational management theorists, scientists, educators and others have presented opinions on and models of leadership. The continuing debate indicates that two questions need immediate redress—‘What is leadership?’, and ‘What constitutes an effective transformational leader?’. Answering such questions also recognises that while existing leadership models may be inadequate or of limited relevance to the development of modern leaders; despite the study of leadership having historical roots that span centuries. Nevertheless we will reference back to previous leadership research and theory throughout this course.

This first session will establish the transformational perspective for our study of leadership by first examining the history of leadership, and separating leadership from management.

Objectives

After completing your study of this session, you should be able to:

identify important developments in leadership theory from a historical perspective

analyse leadership concepts within the context of traditional and emergent paradigms of economic and social development

differentiate leadership from management

assess the relationship between leadership and the development of an effective leader

demonstrate a clear understanding of how change impacts upon leadership

recognise that individual leaders must develop unique leadership styles in response to internal and external situations

analyse the importance of transformational leadership

articulate a personal view on the veracity of the ‘great man’ [sic] view of leadership.

Introduction to LeadershipSession 1

Readings

There are no set texts to acquire to complete this course, the components or the topics in this session. All readings to assist you to develop a broad understanding of the subject are provided.

1. Boylan, P. (2002). Introduction to the Theoretical and Philosophical Basis of Modern Management [lecture notes and background papers], City University: London, http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/~ra332/theorymgt.html, accessed October, 2004.

2. Lashway, L., Mazzarella, J. & Grundy, T. (1997). ‘Portrait of a leader’, in S. C. Smith & P. K. Piele (eds). School leadership, pp. 9–27. . Accessed November 2008 at http://eric.uoregon.edu/pdf/samples/SL/SL.ch1.pdf

3. Bass, B. M. (1999). ‘Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership’, European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology. vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 9–32. Accessed December 2008 at http://members.home.nl/bjjluttikhuis/4437836.pdf.

4. Matteson, J.A. & Irving, J.A. (2005). ‘Servant versus Self-Sacrificial Leadership: A Behavioral Comparison of Two Follower-Oriented Leadership Theories’, International Journal of Leadership Studies. Vol. 2 [1], 15 pages. http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/ijls/new/vol2iss1/matteson/mair.htm, accessed November 2006 ( 2005, Regent University, by permission).

Additional resources

R e f e r e n c e s

Avolion, B.J. (1997). ‘The Great Leadership Migration to a Full Range Leadership Development System’, Kellogg Leadership Studies Project: Transformational Leadership, Working Papers. The James McGregor Burns Academy of Leadership, Academy of Leadership Press: University of Maryland. Accessed November 2008, http://www.academy.umd.edu/Resources/AcademyPublicationsPDF/KLSP/TransformationalLeadership/LeadershipMigration/Migration.pdf.

Bass, B. M. (1990). ‘From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision’, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 18, pp. 19–31.

Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1990). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Consulting Psychologist Press: Palo Alto, CA.

Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving Organisational Effectiveness through Transformational Leadership, Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA.

Blair, G. M. (1997). Leadership Styles, Attitudes and Models, available at http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/~gerard/MENG/ME96/Documents/intro_style.html

Chemers, M.M. (1997). An Integrative Theory of Leadership Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: London. Accessed November 2008, at http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=27754254.

Doyle, M. E. & Smith, M. K. 2001, ‘Classical leadership’, The Encyclopaedia of Informal Education, (updated February 200), available at http://www.infed.org/leadership/traditional_leadership.htm

Greenleaf, R. (2003). The Servant-Leader Within: A Transformative Path. Paulist Press: New York.

Humphreys, J. H. & Einstein, W. O. (February, 2003). ‘Nothing new under the sun: Transformational leadership from a historical perspective’, Management Decision, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 85–95.

Jung, D. I. & Avolio, B. J. (2000). ‘Opening the black box: An experiential investigation of the mediating effects of trust and value congruence on transformational and transactional leadership’, Journal of Organisational Behaviour, vol. 21, pp. 949–964.

Page 2

Unit: Lead Transformational Change Session 1

Pandya, M., Shell, R., Warner, S., Junnarkar, S. & Brown, J. 2004, Nightly Business Report Presents Lasting Leadership : What You Can Learn from the Top 25 Business People of our Times, Wharton School Publishing: Pennsylvania.

Smith, B. N., Montagno, R. V., & Kuzmenko, T. N. (2004). ‘Transformational and Servant Leadership: Content and Contextual Comparisons’. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 10(4), 80-91.

Tichy, N. M. & Devanna, M. A. (1986). The transformational leader: The key to global competitiveness, John Wiley & Sons: New York.

L i n k s

Australian Institute of Management www.aim.com.au

Basic definitions of management http://www.managementhelp.org/mgmnt/defntion.htm#anchor662641

Chartered institute of management UK http://www.managers.org.uk/

Knowledge@Wharton http://www.knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/

http://www.fastcompany.com/guides/leadlesson.html

Fast Company Leadership forums and articles http://www.fastcompany.com/topics/leadership

Management theory http://www.business.com/directory/management/management_theory/

Leadership and management

Differentiating leadership, management and supervision

While management and leadership are interdependent, one can make a simple distinction between the two by describing leadership as the creation of vision and orientation of action, and management as responsibility for actualisation, or actions undertaken to achieve the vision. As later study will reveal, however, leadership in organisations often has been studied as an aspect of the function of management. Important observations and leadership models have arisen from researchers and managers moving beyond day-to-day management of applied performance (that is, doing), to the creation of a vision and motivation of people (that is, being a leader). A succinct statement of the different perspectives distinguishes managers as ‘the people who do things right’, while leaders ‘are people who do the right thing’ (Bennis & Nanus, 1985: 21). Within this context, a supervisory role is assumed by leaders and managers to ensure that actions are undertaken to achieve the desired ends.

For the supervisory-level (first-line or front-line) manager, all too often effectiveness revolves around responsibility for performance outcomes that require using both management and leadership competence. Yet, as we will illustrate, management and leadership are distinct, and both the organisation and the individual leader need to be aware of their capabilities for both. In today’s organisations, workplace leadership must not be restricted to any form of ‘manager’ or limited by a hierarchical position in the organisation.

Introduction to LeadershipSession 1

ACTIVITY 1.1

1. Think about some definitions for the following. You may wish to note some

definitions for later discussion with colleagues:

A manager is: ______________________________________________

A leader is: ________________________________________________

A supervisor is: _________________________________________

A junior staff member is: ____________________________________

2. Would a workplace leader always be a manager leading a team?

READING 1.1

Boylan, P. (2002). Introduction to the Theoretical and Philosophical Basis of Modern Management [lecture notes and background papers], City University, London, http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/~ra332/theorymgt.html, accessed October 2004.

ACTIVITY 1.2

1. Consider Reading 1 and consider some of the approaches adopted by

different theorists. Compare, for instance, Taylor, Drucker and Kanter.

2 Do you think management attributes have to vary with level of

employment (that is, seniority or complexity of job role)? Be prepared to

discuss and provide evidence for your response.

3. Why is the job of leading different from that of managing?

4. Does a board of directors manage or lead?

Much of today’s literature assumes that organisations and individuals understand the distinction between supervision, leadership and management and can pursue a career based on this understanding. To develop our understanding, this section will investigate the sometimes if leadership is just a role of a supervisor or manager.

Early theatrical work that promoted leadership as a role played by senior managers or ‘bosses’ has been challenged. The Tannenbaum and Schmidt continuum (Figure 1) clearly expresses the modern dilemma in which leadership is not vested in an individual manager but in a workforce composed of individuals who all have the capacity to influence outcomes. A central aspect of leadership is how the leader vests authority and involves staff. Individuals who use authority to control or monopolise problem-solving mechanisms invariably jeopardise the opportunity of harnessing team and subordinate input into decision-making and change processes. It is this desire to control how things are being done that marks the manager, while the desire to involve and inspire others begins to delineate the leader.

Page 4

Unit: Lead Transformational Change Session 1

Figure 1 Manager–Leader authority dimensions

(Modified from Tannenbaum & Schmidt, 1972)

The Tannenbaum and Schmidt continuum reinforces the importance of authority in distinguishing leaders from subordinates. Legitimacy of power is intertwined with this study. The more that followers perceive power to be legitimately vested with an individual leader, the less individuals are likely to resist or frustrate the exercise of power (Sayles, 1979: 49; Ehrlich, Meindl & Viellieu, 1990). Equally, where organisational and societal cultures have become less willing to accept that power resides with the position, the more difficult it has been for people in a position to expect their power to be considered legitimate. This strongly reflects the trend in Western management styles to focus on individual leaders and the leader’s situation inspiring others, rather than in the authority to lead being vested in a hierarchical position.

Beyond how we define leadership, the ability to measure different aspects of leadership at the individual, group and wider level is fundamental to most leadership approaches.

The concept of a leadership continuum suggests we can assess or measure where individual leaders reside on this continuum. How you lead, or the leadership style, will differentiate an individual’s current ‘position’ on the leadership continuum.

Firstly we need to examine some of the different perspectives taken when theories of leadership are formed: those that focus on the person, the situation and context, the act, or the vision.

In a focus on the person, some view leadership as purely the set of traits or characteristics attributed to individuals who are identified as leaders:

… the true leader is a listener. The leader listens to the ideas, needs, aspirations,

and wishes of the followers and then—within the context of his or her own well-

developed system of beliefs—responds to these in an appropriate fashion. That is

why leaders must know their own mind. (Depree, 1989: xxi)

Equally importantly, the context or ‘terrain’ (Sandy, 1990: 63) in which leaders must operate, and the teams they have to build—the situation and context, shapes leaders. In 1991, Jaques and Clement promoted a move back to leadership basics, where leadership is analysed and developed ‘requisite for a particular time and place, both individual and circumstantial’ (1991: xiv).

Some view leadership as being tied to the ability to influence and motivate people to achieve goals. This view focuses on the act, occurring in a setting, linked to culture.

Leadership is defined broadly [as] influencing task objectives and strategies,

influencing commitment and compliance in task behavior to achieve these

objectives, influencing group maintenance and identification, and influencing the

culture of an organization. (Yukl, 1989b: 252)

Another aspect of leadership is the ability to impart a vision that has meaning:

Strong leaders want to find that special vision that will shift their organizations

into over-drive; that will speed things up in the right direction while conserving

energy and power. To be effective, to truly inspire and motivate excellence and

Introduction to LeadershipSession 1

achievement in organizations, leaders must find the right vision from among the

many good and bad possibilities always available. (Nanus, 1992: 25)

While transformational leadership may incorporate aspects of the above perspectives, we will show that it is the act of creating and engaging people in a vision that distinguishes transformational leadership theory from all other leadership approaches.

READING 1.2

Lashway, L., Mazzarella, J. & Grundy, T. (1997). ‘Portrait of a leader’, in S. C. Smith & P. K. Piele (eds). School leadership, pp. 9–27. Accessed November 2008 at http://eric.uoregon.edu/pdf/samples/SL/SL.ch1.pdf

ACTIVITY 1.3

Reading 2 focuses on school principals and provides a very early view on transformational practice as part of a leader’s profile. The education sector was the first to undertake extensive work on transformational leadership. This work contributed significantly to our later knowledge. Complete Reading 2, then respond to the following questions.

1. List all the factors that the authors suggest have been proposed as components

to profile a leader.

2. How do peoples’ positions in the organisational hierarchy affect their leadership

skill requirements?

(a) Does any one way of profiling a leader stand out for you as the best to

determine who has the ability to lead?

(b) Is leadership approach a reasonable basis on which to develop different

leadership learning and development programs?

Now undertake some personal reflections on the role of a leader.

3. Try to identify a situation in which a supervisor has performed a role as a leader.

4. Reflect on the latest news releases (print, television or other medium). Can you

identify someone who is playing a significant leadership role in the community or

in a company?

5. In both the above situations, consider what made you identify these people as

leaders?

What do modern organisations want from leaders?

The first years of the 21st century confirmed the demise of the industrial age and the dominance of the knowledge age and the associated information economy. In the 1990s this difference was less apparent. Leadership experts noted that how leaders performed, and the environments within which they operated, had significantly changed from the inter-war period (1918–1939). Experts and long-serving practitioners could identify how prevailing leadership styles and models had evolved, but they still seem to echo back to traits of managers in an industrialised society. This inconsistent with what is required in the knowledge age. At the start of the 21st century, the global need to compete in the global markets and information-based economies has crystallised the re-evaluation of how we develop effective leaders.

Some immediately apparent changes in the operational environment for organisational leaders in the last 60 years include:

Page 6

Unit: Lead Transformational Change Session 1

flatter, faster-moving, market-driven, cost-conscious, complex organizational environments;

more organizational ‘surface’ exposure to environment;

increasingly decentralized and fragmented organization;

integration of business strategy with organizational culture;

increasing importance of ‘horizontal’ management relative to ‘vertical’ management in order to manage quality, service, and technological imperatives;

increasingly international environment; and

unprecedented emphasis on people as organization’s most vital resource. (After Barham, Fraser & Heath, 1988: 37)

These organisational and environmental developments have implications for how individuals both manage and lead. The implications also apply to leaders in other sectors and types of enterprise, such as the service industries, government agencies, and small businesses.

Changes to leadership can be set against a backdrop of six decades of industrial change (see Table 1).

Table 1 Leadership change over decades

Decade

Major external factors

Management and translation focus

1940s Military–industrial-driven growth

War-driven industrial mass production and focus on improved technology

1950s Search for production efficiency

Industrial expansion; shortage of resources (labour and inputs); growth of new manufacturing industries and businesses

1960s Science and technology innovations and expansions

Extensive introduction of new science and technology, research and development-driven solutions to consumer and industry production needs

1970s Market expansion and competition

Market forces shape production; search for new markets; globalisation of commodities

1980s Financial markets and consolidation of ownership in larger businesses

Global financial markets emerge and impact upon local markets; consolidation of larger businesses into trading blocs and conglomerates; emergence of new breed of mega-multinational businesses

1990s Emergence of the Internet and information technology

Evolutions form data to information focus and allocation and organisation of markets, businesses and people to maximise technology- and information-driven markets

2000s Consolidation of the knowledge-based business

Movement beyond information to knowledge that is tied to purpose; markets cross national and artificial industry or occupational boundaries; knowledge as a commodity; presence of virtual communities (knowledge workers, teams, organisations, markets, education, etc.); and rapid transfer of technology and codified knowledge across the globe.

(Bowles & Graham, 1993)

Some aspects of a wide array of changes faced by organisations in the transformation from an industrial to an information age are outlined below.

Industrial Age Knowledge Age

Introduction to LeadershipSession 1

Industry-wide conformity Unique competitive advantage

Mass production Mass customisation

Control of people Control of process

Functional departmentalisation Integration (cross-function)

More of the same (vertical progression) Continual change (process improvement)

Logical–deductive thinking Logical–creative thinking

Life-long employment Contracted (self-) employment

National industrial awards Local-enterprise agreements

Career progression Career diversification

Paternalism Self-determination

’Them’ and ‘Us’ (Confrontation) Partnership (cooperation)

New merchant class New information class

Figure 2 Differences within organisations transforming from the industrial age to the information age

The speed of business and supply cycles accelerated. Cycles of planning and responsiveness to changing customer demands had compressed. One of Australia’s largest companies (a Forbes 500 company) noted that the average shelf-life (before complete re-ordering and renewed production was required) of a non-perishable supermarket product had evolved:

from 4 years in 1950

to 1 year in 1980

to 40 days in 1993

to 4 days in 1999

to 26 hours in 2006

(Bowles 1999: 23)

It was identified in the late 20th century that Australian corporate leaders could no longer focus the majority of their effort on internal issues. Major external factors, some of which are listed in Table 2, required constant translation into the organisation’s current activities and future directions.

Table 2 Major external factors requiring management and translation

External factors

Impact on organisations

Government legislation and policy

Shifting tax base

Privatisation trends

Global, not local, best practice benchmarks

Centralisation of major agencies

The shift to Total Quality Service and improvement systems

Continual improvement

Flatter organisation

Customer focus

Staff responsibility

End-to-end supply chain solutions

Added value

Global competition with shrinking local markets

Compulsory competitive tendering for public contracts

Growing presence of major corporations and multinationals in regional markets

Decentralised markets and suppliers

Industrial relations Teamwork

Decentralised workplace agreements

Multi-skilling

Compliance (e.g. Health and safety)

Customer needs and Increased customer expectations Satisfying needs

Page 8

Unit: Lead Transformational Change Session 1

expectations

Value offer of brand and life of product

Budget and finances Shrinking funding

Doing more with less

Activity-based financial management and improvement

Technological change Work practices

Cost efficiencies

Convergence

Rapid innovation cycles

Virtual networks

Accelerated high speed information exchange and transfer

Transformational leadership—A 21st century approach

Transformational leadership has a basis in the theory of transactional leadership. Reading 3 will assist our examination of the distinction between transactional and transformational leadership. These two leadership approaches provoke the most direct comparison and theoretical dispute.

READING 1.3

Bass, B. M. (1999). ‘Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership’, European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology. vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 9–32. Accessed December 2008 at http://members.home.nl/bjjluttikhuis/4437836.pdf.

Transactional leadership

Transactional leadership focuses on the relationship between the leader and the staff or direct reports (that is, subordinates in a direct reporting relationship). This leadership approach places an emphasis on the leader:

setting clear goals

establishing performance targets for each individual and the team

identifying performance gaps

coaching the direct reports

gaining commitment to performance and goals through pay, reward, recognition and praise.

The transactional leadership approach strongly links leadership and the ability to motivate for goal attainment and improved performance through reward structures. Emphasis is therefore placed on interpersonal communication and contingent reinforcement (Bass, 1985). At its foundation are path–goal theory and the expectancy theory of motivation (topics covered later in Sessions 3 and 6), and the importance of the leader emphasising the path to the goal and the rewards gained for successful effort (House, 1971; Bass, 1985: 127).

Initial theories often inform and are integrated into subsequent theories. The theories themselves can be useful in the categorisation of leadership activities. Reading 4 provides an excellent example of one such case, and introduces the concept of servant leadership. This theoretical approach is often aligned with stewardship and transactional leadership approaches. Reading 4 can assist us better understand how servant leadership is may be compared to transformational leadership.

Introduction to LeadershipSession 1

READING 1.4

Matteson, J.A. & Irving, J.A. (2005). ‘Servant versus Self-Sacrificial Leadership: A Behavioral Comparison of Two Follower-Oriented Leadership Theories’, International Journal of Leadership Studies. Vol. 2 [1], 15 pages. http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/ijls/new/vol2iss1/matteson/mair.htm, accessed November 2006 ( 2005, Regent University, by permission).

ACTIVITY 1.4

Complete Reading 4 and answer the following questions.

1. Does servant leadership overlap with transformational leadership?

2. If the servant leader’s focus is on the followers, is servant leadership more aligned with transactional leadership than transformational leadership?

3. Do leaders care which theory most comprehensively explains their tasks and activities? Given your response, does it matter if more than one theory is used to explain leadership tasks and activities?

Transformational leadership

James MacGregor Burns writing in his book Leadership (1978) was the first to put forward the concept of “transforming leadership”.

To Burns transforming leadership “is a relationship of mutual stimulation and elevation that converts followers into leaders and may convert leaders into moral agents”. This approach places on emphasis on the leader’s behaviours stimulating commitment from the employees. Burns went on to also further define it by suggesting that transformational leadership:

… occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that

leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and

morality…(1978:20)

Beyond all other attributes, the transformational leader is intensely passionate about involving others and inspiring them to achieve a vision. Avolio, Waldman and Yammarino (1991) described four main behaviours that have come to delimit the transformational leader:

idealised influence (or charismatic behaviour)

inspirational motivation

intellectual stimulation, and

individualised considerations.

Later, Bass and Avolio (1994) extended and further explained transformational leadership styles and behaviours (see Table 3). Aspects of these behaviours were also examined in Reading 4 from Stone, Russell and Patterson.

Page 10

Unit: Lead Transformational Change Session 1

Table 3 Transformational leadership styles and behaviours

Style Leader behaviour

Idealised influence

Living one’s ideals

Talks about their most important values and beliefs

Specifies the importance of having a strong sense of purpose

Considers the moral and ethical consequences of decisions

Champions exciting new possibilities

Talks about the importance of trusting each other

Inspirational motivation

Inspiring others

Talks optimistically about the future

Talks enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished

Articulates a compelling vision of the future

Expresses confidence that goals will be achieved

Provides an exciting image of what is essential to consider

Takes a stand on controversial issues

Intellectual stimulation

Stimulating others

Re-examines critical assumptions to question whether they are appropriate

Seeks differing perspectives when solving problems

Gets others to look at problems from many different angles

Suggests new ways of looking at how to complete assignments

Encourages non-traditional thinking to deal with traditional problems

Encourages rethinking those ideas which have never been questioned before

Individualised considerations

Coaching and development

Spends time teaching and coaching

Treats others as individuals rather than just as members of the group

Considers individuals as having different needs, abilities, and aspirations from others

Helps others to develop their strengths

Listens attentively to other’s concerns

Promotes self development

Idealised attributes

Respect trust, and faith

Instills [sic] pride in others for being associated with them

Goes beyond self-interest for the good of the group

Acts in ways that build others’ respect

Displays a sense of power and competence

Makes personal sacrifices for others’ benefit

Reassures others that obstacles will be overcome

(Bass & Avolio, 1994; Bolden, Gosling, Marturano & Dennison, 2003: 16)

Table 4 identifies some critical differences between transactional leadership and transformational leadership.

Table 4 Comparison of transactional and transformational leadershipTransactional leadership… Transformational leadership…

builds on man’s [sic] need to get a job done and make a living

builds on man’s [sic] need for meaning

[is] preoccupied with power and position, politics and perks

is preoccupied with purposes and values, morals, and ethics

is mired in daily affairs transcends daily affairsis short-term and hard data oriented is oriented towards long-term goals without

compromising human values and principlesfocuses on tactical issues focuses more on missions and strategiesrelies on human relations to lubricate human interactions

realises human potential—identifying and developing new talent

follows and fulfils role expectations by striving to work effectively within current systems

designs and redesigns jobs to make them meaningful and challenging

supports structures and systems that reinforce the bottom line, maximise efficiency, and guarantee short-term profits

aligns internal structures and systems to reinforce overarching values and goals.

(Covey, 1992)

Beyond the 1990s focus on charisma and the passionate selling of a vision associated with the transformational leader, our study will establish a more solid, human view of the characteristics of a transformational leader.

Introduction to LeadershipSession 1

Transformational leadership is no longer just the domain of charismatic leadership styles and activities that win the hearts and minds of individuals, important though these factors are. In the first decade of the 21st century the view of transformational leadership has broadened to include:

sharing the formation of visions and meaning in the workforce

creating cultures and identity that endure beyond individual, team and even organisational goals

creating trust and empowering people

role modelling ethical and inclusive practices, and

creating a focus on shared futures while stimulating agility through a workforce able to embrace change and innovation throughout change or innovation processes.

Compared to many of the original works on transformational leadership which focused on leadership in school settings, these additional perspectives may sound esoteric. This course will review the esoteric concepts alongside the original research to analyse, critically evaluate and understand what transformational leadership means in a contemporary, applied context.

A ‘full range’ view of transformational leadership

Transformational leadership will not be seen as an exclusive approach to leadership. Effective leadership may, and usually will, require adoption of a full range of leadership As such this module will not try to define transformational leadership in absolute, universally agreed terms. This does not mean that we cannot use a framework and definitional basis to guide our study.

ACTIVITY 1.5

The ‘full leadership range’ concept proposed by Bass and Avolio (Avolio, 1997; Bass & Avolio, 2002) suggests that transformational leadership encompasses past theory and discussion and much more. The ‘full range’ of leadership behaviours and styles suggests that transactional and transformational aspects may occur in the same person and leadership role. This infers that any study of transformational leadership should not be bounded by theories and styles or behaviours which one transformational leader may require in a specific situation. Bass and Avolio also developed a bank of questionnaires—a tool set called the MultiFactor Leadership Questionnaire—to test a person’s full leadership range. To get to grips with this concept, explore some of the following links:

Full Leadership Range model http://www.ianrpubs.unl.edu/epublic/pages/index.jsp

Full Range Leadership web portal http://www.fullrangeleadership.com/

Singapore Army and the FRL model http://www.mindef.gov.sg/safti/pointer/back/journals/2001/Vol27_3/5.htm

The MultiFactor Leadership Questionnaire http://www.transformasia.com.au/article-003.html

The MFQ: a benchmark measure of transformational leadership http://www.mindgarden.com/products/mlq.htm

NB: Although they are only available on a commercial basis, as part of this course it would be very useful for participants to complete an MFQ.

Leadership can be viewed within an integrated framework (Figure 3) which reinforces how it will occur in a continuums of variables that include: current/future and participative/coercive influence occurring within situational dimensions that include personal/self, team/group, organisational, and cross-organisational levels.

Page 12

Unit: Lead Transformational Change Session 1

Figure 3 A framework for the study of transformational leadership in this course

Our study of transformational leadership will not be limited to any one segment but will be applicable to all levels inside the organisation and beyond. Figure 4 will guide our study of transformational leadership by outlining transformational leadership’s four main dimensions and linking the sessions in our study to their respective quadrant (summarised below).

Personal MasteryThe personal awareness and acumen in the qualities (role, traits, behaviours, competencies,) and style (values, beliefs) necessary to lead in a given context

Interpersonal MasteryThe ability to influence and engage with people (followers, stakeholders, teams, or communities) to gain commitment to an agreed vision and purpose

Change Process MasteryThe ability to lead systematic change processes and to set up, manage, implement, standardise, improve and sustain transformation

Systems Mastery

The ability to tale a system-level view whereby harnessing individual and collective capacity to change improves the organisation’s agility and builds sustainable competitive advantage

This module will allocate three session to each of the above four dimensions.

As depicted below, the theory underpinning transformational leadership will substantially be covered in the first 6 sessions on the Self mastery and Interpersonal mastery dimensions. We will then move to applied learning showing in the last 6 sessions how to lead change to attain process and systems level mastery. In combination all sessions should reinforce how leading change is never just about processes and tools, it is about people.

Introduction to LeadershipSession 1

Figure 4 Transformational leadership dimensions

(© Institute for Working Futures 2004, modified and used with permission.)

Transformational leaders create visions that instigate, sustain and impel others to achieve outcomes. Our perspective will permit an overview of multiple leadership models while considering what constitutes an effective transformational leader. The study will carry lessons that students can apply or test in their own settings, rather than in a setting we impose or contrive.

To broaden our study of transformational leadership, the next session will review the different schools of thought on leadership. This session has opened up the subject of leadership and attempted to establish a few parameters. Leadership is an ephemeral concept. The more we study it within a specific context, the more we can lose perspective on the mass of variations used to forge a macro-level study. Nevertheless, while methodology and epistemology may vary with each major study of leadership we will derive a view on the consistent messages that span cultural, geographic and organisational boundaries.

The study of leadership seems to provoke an ongoing search for a definition. To define transformational leadership we would have to remove all the variables and issues that affect our understanding; an impossibility. As variables increase, so do the factors that shape how a leader leads in a specific situation.

This session has noted some of the factors—the person and the situation within which they lead—that shape leadership and leaders. We have confirmed that leadership certainly is about much more than a role managers or supervisors perform. As we progress through this module we will promote a forward-looking view of transformational leadership within an organisational setting (private enterprise, public sector, regional, and community). While acknowledging the study’s origins in older concepts and sometimes outmoded approaches to leadership, it will encourage the student to place all lessons into a contemporary, personal context.

Page 14

Unit: Lead Transformational Change Session 1

References

Avolio, B. J. (1997). ‘The great leadership migration to a full range leadership development system’, Transformational Leadership Working Papers. Kellogg’s Leadership Studies Project, Academy of Leadership Press, http://www.academy.umd.edu/publications/klspdocs/bavol_p1.htm, accessed March 2005.

Avolio, B. J. & Bass, B. M. (2002). Developing Potential Across a Full Range of Leadership Cases on Transactional and Transformational Leadership. Lawrence Erlbaum: NJ.

Avolio, B., Waldman, D. & Yammarino, F. (1991). ‘Leading in the 1990’s: The four I’s of transformational leadership’, Journal of European Industrial Training. vol. 15, no. 4,pp. 9–16.

Barham, K., Fraser, J. & Heath, L. (1988). Management for the Future, Ashridge Management Research Group, Berkhamsted, Hampshire.

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. Free Press: New York.

Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving Organizational Effectiveness through Transformational Leadership. Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA.

Bennis, W. & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge. Harper and Row: New York.

Bolden, R., Gosling, J., Marturano, A. & Dennison, P. (June, 2003). A Review of Leadership Theory and Competency Frameworks, Centre for Leadership Studies, University of Exeter: UK. Access November 2008 at http://eric.exeter.ac.uk/exeter/handle/10036/17494

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. Harper & Row: New York.

Bowles, M. (1999). Learning the True Value of Strategic Knowledge: Valuing Capabilities and Knowledge Assets in the Knowledge Based Economy. Major White Paper, Huon Institute, Melbourne.

Bowles, M. & Graham, C. (1993). Leadership and Management Communication. Consortium of Management Schools, Melbourne.

Covey, S. (1992). Principle-Centred Leadership. Fireside—Simon & Schuster: New York.

Depree, M. (1989). Leadership is an Art. Australian Business Library: Sydney.

Ehrlich, S. B., Meindl, J. R. & Viellieu, B. (1990). ‘The charismatic appeal of a transformational leader: An empirical case study of a small, high technology contractor’ Leadership Quarterly. vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 229–248.

House, R. September, (1971). ‘A path-goal theory of leadership effectiveness’, Administrative Science Quarterly. vol. 16, pp. 321–338.

Jacques, E. & Clement, S. (1991). Executive Leadership. A Practical Guide to Managing Complexity. Cason Hall: Cambridge.

Nanus, B. (1992). Visionary Leadership. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.

Sandy, W. (1990). Forging the Productivity Partnership, McGraw Hil: New York.

Sayles L. R, (1979). Leadership: What Effective Mangers really Do and How They Do It. McGraw-Hill: New York.

Tannenbaum, R. & Schmidt, W. H. (May, 1972). ‘How to choose a leadership pattern’, Harvard Business Review. vol. 51, pp. 162–164.

Yukl, G. (1989). ‘Managerial leadership: A review of theory and research’, Journal of Management. vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 251–289.