From Transactional to Transcedental Toward an Integrated Theory of Leadership

http://jlo.sagepub.com

Studies Journal of Leadership & Organizational

DOI: 10.1177/107179190300900402 2003; 9; 21 Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies

Joseph E. Sanders, Willie E. Hopkins and Gary D. Geroy From Transactional to Transcendental: Toward An Integrated Theory of Leadership

http://jlo.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/9/4/21 The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Midwest Academy of Management

can be found at:Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies Additional services and information for

http://jlo.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

http://jlo.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://jlo.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/9/4/21SAGE Journals Online and HighWire Press platforms):

(this article cites 19 articles hosted on the Citations

© 2003 Baker College. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. by Tomislav Bunjevac on August 3, 2008 http://jlo.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://www.midwestacademy.org/

http://jlo.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://jlo.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://jlo.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/9/4/21


From Transactional to Transcendental: Toward

An Integrated Theory of Leadership

Joseph E. Sanders IIIWillie E. HopkinsGary D. Geroy

Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO

In this article we explore the spiritualdimensions of leadership by setting forth a

theory that both integrates and extends thetransactional and transformational theories ofleadership. Specifically, we propose that the

transcendental theory of leadership set forth inthis article comprises three dimensions ofspirituality (consciousness, moral character,and faith) that incorporate the managerialaspects of transactional theory and thecharismatic aspects of transformational theoryto enhance leader effectiveness.

Utilizing a conceptual model, we show thehierarchical relationship that exists betweentranscendental, transformational, andtransactional theories of leadership and set forthseveral propositions related to the developmentof spiritual dimensions as leaders develop alongthe hierarchical continuum. Implications of themodel for leadership theory and practice arediscussed.

It has been suggested, in several studies (cf.Wheatley, 1999; Jaworoski, 2000; Kouzes &

Posner, 1999), that the journey of leadership isprimarily an internal plight to connect with ahigher influence. Further suggested in thesestudies is that in order to truly understand thenotion of leadership, we must focus on theinternal development of the leader. Otherstudies (cf. Kelly, 1995; Pargament & Park,1995) suggest that a core component of internaldevelopment is spirituality. Emmons’ (1999)treatise on &dquo;ultimate concerns&dquo; defines

spirituality as that aspect of life concerned withultimate purpose and meaning in life, whichtranslates into a commitment to God or a higher

power, recognition of the transcendent in

everyday experience, a selfless focus, and a setof beliefs and practices that facilitates a

relationship with the transcendent.One might infer from this definition that

spirituality is the gestalt of all manifestations ofan individual’s essence, and conclude that

spirituality mobilizes the individual towards

meaningful or &dquo;transcendental&dquo; accomplishment.Thompson (2000) posits that transcendental

accomplishment cannot occur without

spirituality. We conceptualize Thompson’spostulation in a model of &dquo;transcendental

leadership,&dquo; which proposes that hierarchicallevels of spirituality are associated withhierarchical levels of desired leadershipaccomplishments. The model proposes threestructural levels of leadership accomplishment:(1) transactional, (2) transformational, and (3)transcendental. Essentially, the model proposesthat leaders’ development along threedimensions of spirituality (consciousness, moralcharacter and faith) is associated with

development along these three levels of

leadership accomplishment.Golden-Biddle and Greenwood (2000)

contend that traditional approaches to

understanding leadership lack depth, and are

limited in scope. Moreover, research on

traditional levels of leadership accomplishment- transactional and transformational - (e.g.,Bass, 1985; Bycio, Hackett, & Allen, 1995;Howell & Avolio, 1993) has neglected or onlypassively addressed the internal components ofthe leader, perhaps causing many to ask: &dquo;Is

there more to leadership?&dquo; Although an

emerging body of research (cf. Blackaby, 2000;Greenleaf, 1991; Hawley, 1999; Wilkes, 1999)



22

has begun to provide insightful answers to thisquestion by focusing on internal componentssuch as spirituality, a framework that links thisemerging approach to traditional approaches hasyet to be developed. Such a framework wouldprovide a lens for viewing leadership in a

broader context. Our proposed theory oftranscendental leadership is intended to providesuch a framework. Our theory is not an attemptto redefine leadership; instead this theorypurports to provide a more comprehensive viewof leadership by connecting traditional theoriesto a meaningful domain, spirituality.

We divide our discussions into three majorsections. In the first section we lay down thefoundation for our theory by examining the

supporting literature, and by identifying the gapsuch a theory will fill in existing leadershipliterature. Through a conceptual model, we thenexplore the relationship of our theory to thetransactional and transformational theories of

leadership and demonstrate the integrating rolethat spirituality plays in the relationship. In thesecond major section we explore the threedimensions of spirituality (consciousness, moralcharacter, and faith) and set forth propositionsabout their relationship to the transactional,transformational, and transcendental theories ofleadership. In the last major section we discussimplications for further theory development andmanagement practice.

TRANSCENDENTAL LEADERSHIPTHEORY

Based on our search of the leadershipliterature, the idea of transcendental leadershipwas first broached by Cardona (2000), whodescribes the concept as a contribution-basedexchange relationship. He views thetranscendental leader as being concerned withhis or her followers and tries to contribute totheir personal development. Specifically,Cardona views the transcendental leader as

developing followers’ transcendent motivation

(i.e., the motivation to do things for others; themotivation to contribute). While Cardona’s

perspective of transcendental leadership is on

the development of followers’ intrinsic

motivation, so that their needs are aligned withthe needs of the leader, our perspective is on the

spiritual development of the leader him or

herself.Cardona’s treatment of transcendental

leadership hints at the spiritual dimension ofleadership by viewing the transcendental leaderas a &dquo;servant-leader.&dquo; However, his treatment

only allows one to infer about the possibleimplications of this aspect for leadereffectiveness. Moreover, although Cardonaviews transcendental leadership as incorporatingaspects of transactional and transformational

leadership, the relationship between thesetheories is not clearly established. In this section,we explore in more detail the spiritual dimensionof transcendental leadership, the linkagesbetween transcendental, transactional, andtransformational leadership and incorporate ourfindings into an integrated theory oftranscendental leadership.

Theoretical FoundationsThe work of Kant (1997) associates the

term &dquo;transcendental&dquo; with whatever an

individual’s mental and spiritual nature

conceives as above experience or beyondego. Kant’s work and a series of recent writingsrelated to spirituality provide the foundation

upon which we begin to develop our theory oftranscendental leadership. For example, it hasbeen argued that our society is experiencing aspiritual revolution (Haasnoot, 2000) and

spirituality is a complex phenomenon that canno longer be ignored by society and its

organizations (Judge, 1999). Moreover,Thompson (2000) contends that good andeffective leadership is a developmental processof growth and maturation that is fed by theleader’s inner spirit more than his or her outerstrivings. Finally, Harmon (1991) contends thatno need is more compelling than the need forour lives to have meaning. Our theory oftranscendental leadership recognizes the internalforce (spirituality) that compels leaders to fulfillthis ultimate need.

For the most part, our theory’s emphasis onspirituality is rooted in Kantian thought. Kant(1997) taught that time and space are not

external realities but ways in which the internaldimensions of a person makes sense and

meaning of the world. Kant further asserted thatstriving to understand and connect to the



23

concepts of God, freedom, and immortality areinevitable intuitions of human development.

Kant generally espouses that in order forindividuals to experience meaningfuldevelopment, they (1) need consciousness ofpassing into a higher sphere of being, (2) possessa deepened conviction, (3) make sense of

spaciousness, (4) seek clarity between realityand the relative unreal, (5) seek moral harmony,and (6) integrate the immaterial - i.e., spirit -with the material - i.e., body. These basic tenetsrepresent the heart of our transcendental

leadership theory. We distilled these tenets intoa definition of transcendental leadership, whichbasically translates into the &dquo;developing ofleaders beyond the ego towards a higherinfluence in order to comprehend an

extraordinary, spiritual presence in their lives.&dquo;Our specific objective in this article is to

capture the essence of transcendental leadershipdevelopment by focusing on three core

dimensions of spirituality: consciousness, moralcharacter and faith. We argue that developmentalong these dimensions increases the capacityfor leaders to experience meaning andtranscendental fulfillment. Maslow ( 1971 )suggests that spiritual development is a

prerequisite to transcendental fulfillment, and

Thompson (2000) argues that without

spirituality transcendental fulfillment cannot

occur.

Basically, our theory incorporates the ideathat developing spirituality along these threedimensions allow leaders to become less

concerned about the constraining realities of theexternal environment, which can limit leader

effectiveness, and more concerned about an

internal development that transcend realities asdefmed by the environment. Such an idea hasnot been thoroughly incorporated into theoriesof leadership such as transactional andtransformational. We incorporate this idea into aconceptual model that shows linkages amongour theory of transcendental leadership andtransactional and transformational theories alongseveral continua, including spirituality.

Theory ContinuaAs indicated in Figure 1, our conceptual

model of transcendental leadership both

integrates and builds on existing leadershiptheories. Specifically, the model presentstransactional, transformational, andtranscendental theories of leadership as beinglinked together along common continua.



r

213 ’0)LL

24



25

Locus of Control Continuum. The firstcontinuum shown in the model, locus of control,concerns the extent to which leaders are

internally or externally oriented. Research (cf.Anderson, 1977; Kipnis, 1976; Miller, Kets deVries, & Toulouse, 1982; Miller & Toulouse,1986) suggests that leaders with an internallocus of control are more capable of dealingwith stressful situations and generate highergroup and company performance than do leaderswith an external locus of control. As shown inthe model, transactional theory is positioned atthe external end of the locus of controlcontinuum. Such a positioning is consistent withcontentions (cf. Howell & Avolio, 1993) thatleaders characterized as transactional tend to

have an external orientation and they exhibit lessconfidence in their ability to influence the

environment, and believe that organizationalevents are due to luck, fate, or chance.

This belief is in contrast to Bass’ (1995)notion of transformational leaders, who havemore of an internal locus of control (i.e., theyhave confidence in their ability to influence thedirection of organizational events). The strongerinternal locus of control for leaderscharacterized as transformational is indicated bythe positioning of transformational leadershiptheory on the locus of control continuum.

However, as indicated by the positioning of thetranscendental theory of leadership, the modelsuggests that leaders characterized as

transcendental may have an even strongerinternal locus of control than leaderscharacterized as transformational. We proposethat this stronger internal locus of control is aresult of such leaders being spiritually focused,which compels them to consciously placegreater importance on the dynamics of theimmaterial (i.e., inner spirit) as opposed to thematerial (i.e., the body).

Effectiveness Continuum. The modelindicates that effectiveness is also associatedwith the theories. As shown in the model,transactional leadership is positioned at the lowend of the effectiveness continuum. This low

position might be partly explained byobservations that transactional leadership isbased on an exchange process in which theleader provides rewards in return for followers’effort and performance (Bass & Avolio, 1993).The exchange process involves a leader-follower

relationship that is impersonal; there is littleaffect (Yammarino, Dubinsky, Comer, & Jolson,1997), and the relationship is maintained only ifthe benefits of the exchange accruing to theleader and follower outweigh the costs (Graen &

Scandura, 1987).While Bass (1995) clearly identifies

transactional leadership as being based on

material or economic exchange, he just as

clearly identifies transformational leadership asbeing based on social exchange. A central thesisof Bass’ theory is that transformational

leadership goes beyond exchanging inducementsfor desired performance by developing,intellectually stimulating, and inspiringfollowers to transcend their own self-interestsfor a higher collective purpose, mission, or

vision. Such activities on the part oftransformational leaders are argued to renderthem more effective than transactional leaders

(Bass, 1995). Thus, the model positionstransformational leadership theory at a higherlevel of development on the effectivenesscontinuum.

We argue in this article that transcendentalleaders possess the same effectiveness-

producing traits as transformational leaders. Wealso argue that because they have a strongerinternal locus of control and a more focused

spiritual orientation than transformational

leaders, the effectiveness of transcendentalleaders may be greater than the effectiveness oftransformational leaders. Subsequently,transcendental leadership theory is positioned ata higher point on the effectiveness continuumthan transformational leadership theory.

Spirituality Continuum. Research (cf.Bass, 1985; House, 1977) suggests that traitssuch as high self-confidence, self-determination,inner direction, and a strong conviction in themoral righteousness of his or her beliefscharacterizes the charismatic leader; charisma isa key construct underlying transformational

leadership behavior (Howell & Avolio, 1993).Other research (e.g., Sanders, Geroy, &

Hopkins, 2001; Sheldon & Kasser, 1995)suggests that traits such as these may play animportant role in motivating the spiritual andtranscendental behavior of leaders. Such traitshave also been used to distinguish transactionalleaders from transformational leaders (Bass,1985; House, 1977). This distinction is reflected



26

in the model by the positioning of thetransactional and transformational leadershiptheories on the spirituality continuum.

The lower positioning of transactional

leadership theory on the spirituality continuumsuggests that leadership at this level is likely tobe associated with a relatively low sense ofdivine awareness, a pre-conventional level ofmoral development, and faith in rational

authority. By the same token, the higherpositioning of transcendental leadership theoryover transformational leadership theory on thecontinuum suggests that leadership at this levelis likely to be associated with a highlydeveloped sense of divine awareness, a post-conventional level of moral development, andfaith in a higher, spiritual authority. Indeed, weview transcendental leadership as operating at

the highest level of spirituality.

Linking the TheoriesOur attempt to integrate transcendental

leadership theory with the transactional andtransformational theories is reflected by theintersections represented by (A), (B), and (C).The (A) intersection represents that aspect oftransactional leadership that interfaces withtransformational leadership, and that aspect oftransformational leadership that interfaces withtransactional leadership. For example, studies

(cf. Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1996; Podsakoff,Mackenzie, Moorman, & Fetter, 1990;Yammarino & Dubinsky, 1994) have found highintercorrelations between transformational andtransactional leadership. These studies andothers (cf. Avolio & Bass, 1988; Bass, 1985;Bass & Avolio, 1990; Koh, Terborg, & Steers,1991; Tosi, 1982) suggest that transformationaland transactional leadership behaviors can bedisplayed by the same leader in differentamounts of intensities while also complementingeach other.

These studies further suggest that while

many transformational leaders engage intransactional behaviors (e.g., they engage in

managerial activities such as acquiring resourcesand assigning responsibilities), they often

supplement those behaviors with some elementsof transformational leadership. The concept of&dquo;contingent reward leadership,&dquo; which Bass

(1985) associates with transactional leaders andfocuses on positive exchange between leaders

and followers, suggests that transactional leadersmay also supplement their primary behaviorswith elements of transformational leadership.

Similar to transformational leadership,transcendental leaders also engage intransactional activities such as acquiringresources and assigning responsibilities. This

aspect of transcendental leadership is

represented by the (C) intersection. Thisintersection also represents that aspect oftransactional leadership that interfaces withtranscendental leadership. Earlier we suggestedthat leadership at the transactional level is likelyto be associated with a relatively low sense ofdivine awareness, a pre-conventional level ofmoral development, and faith in rational

authority. The operative word here is &dquo;relative,&dquo;suggesting that although transactional leadershiptheory is at the low end of the spiritualitycontinuum leaders characterized as transactionalnevertheless possess some measure of the

spirituality traits possessed by leaderscharacterized as transcendental.

Finally, the (B) intersection represents thataspect of transcendental leadership that

interfaces with transformational leadership, andthat aspect of transformational leadership thatinterfaces with transcendental leadership. On theone hand, we view this intersection as an

indication that transcendental leaders possess thesame measure of charisma as transformationalleaders while operating at the highest level ofspirituality. This aspect of transformational

leadership (i.e., charisma), when combined withthe spiritual aspect of transcendental leadership,is viewed in the present research as increasingthe amount of faith, respect and inspirationengendered by the transcendental leader. On theother hand, we view the (B) intersection as anindication that transformational leaders

incorporate some measure of the spiritual focuspossessed by transcendental leaders. This is

suggested by their possession of traits such asinner direction and a strong conviction in themoral righteousness of his or her beliefs (cf.Bass, 1985; House, 1977).

SPIRITUAL DIMENSIONS ANDPROPOSITIONS

The various studies cited thus far providesupport, albeit theoretical, for the existence of a



27

positive association between the transcendentaldevelopment of leaders and their effectivenessas leaders. There is also support in these studiesthat spirituality is a major conduit for thetranscendental development of leaders (cf.Maslow, 1971; Thompson, 2000). Spirituality isalso a factor we propose links transcendental

leadership theory with transactional andtransformational theories of leadership. This

integrating aspect of spirituality was discussedin an earlier section of this article, representedby the (A), (B), and (C) intersections in themodel.

Based on the literature and discussions

presented up to this point in this article, thefollowing statements can be supported: (1) Thenature of the relationship between transactional,transformational, and transcendental theories ofleadership is defined along a hierarchical

continuum, and (2) as leaders develop along thehierarchical continuum there will be a

commensurate development in their spirituality.For purposes of advancing three dimensions

(i.e., consciousness, moral character and faith)that contribute to the spiritual development ofleaders, we developed the second statement intoseveral propositions. These propositions are setforth in the next several sections of this article.

The Consciousness DimensionAssagioli (1976) asserts that humans are

not complete without spiritual dimensions, andtranscendence is the most inclusive level ofconsciousness. Boucouvalas (1993) admits thatas a concept, the term consciousness can

frustrate those looking for conceptual precision.However, she also states that exploration of thisconcept is imperative to understanding humandevelopment and the wide range of &dquo;awareness&dquo;that is available to humanity. She suggests that&dquo;levels of consciousness&dquo; indicate the degree towhich an individual’s awareness is focused

internally or externally, and that shifts in levelsof consciousness are associated with brain

rhythms and brain wave frequencies. Thisassociation reflects the relationship betweenconsciousness and the mind, which is argued tooccupy a central part in a leader’s spiritualdevelopment. Moreover, the use of the termconsciousness to describe the mind is prevalentin human development literature (cf. Assagioli,1976).

Boucouvalas also suggests that shifts in&dquo;states of consciousness&dquo; are essentially a majoralteration in the way that the mind functions, aseach state of consciousness has its uniqueconfiguration and pattern. Finally, she arguesthat shifts in &dquo;structures of consciousness&dquo;involve progressive transformations of thecontextual foundation of the conscious. Thesetransformations are argued by Boucouvalas toentail movement toward more complexity,greater awareness, and less egocentrism. Our

model embraces the latter of these three types ofshifts in consciousness - structural shifts.

Our interest in structural shifts inconsciousness is shared with several

transpersonal models of human development.Transpersonal models focus on human

development with the realization of unitized,spiritual, and transcendent states ofconsciousness. Transpersonal theorists haveadvanced several models that suggest stages andmechanisms of consciousness development. Forinstance, Wilber (1977) proposed a spectrum ofconsciousness that includes thirteen structural

stages. Each stage progressively moves towardsa spiritual end. His model suggests movementbeyond the ego level of understanding to anexpanded sense of identity and awareness, andthat all humans are divine (Acker, 1999). Thisspiritual journey through transcendencefacilitates a more inclusive perspective, which ismore adequate and more conscious.

In addition to Wilber’s thirteen-stagemodel, Kegan (1994) advances a five-stagemodel suggesting that humans evolve throughorders of consciousness, and that they constructtheir own meaning and reality. From a

leadership perspective, Kegan’s model suggeststhat the more adequate a leader’s sense of

meaning-making is, the more developed andconscious he or she becomes. Finally, it hasbeen suggested that as leaders develop along thisdimension they become more divinely aware byawakening deeper intuitive areas ofconsciousness (Maslow, 1971; Nelson, 1993).With respect to the relationship between thetransactional, transformational, andtranscendental theories of leadership,spirituality, and leader effectiveness, theliterature on consciousness would support the

following proposition:



28

Proposition 1: As leaders develop alongthe transactional-transformational-transcendental

hierarchy continuum, the consciousnessdimension of spirituality and thus leadereffectiveness will become more developed.

The Moral Character DimensionGreek philosophers, such as Socrates and

Aristotle, provide us with a foundational

understanding of moral character. They focusedon the disposition that causes individuals to

make choices between right and wrong, and thehabitual actions that follow. Since then severalscholars have built on their philosophies andeven suggested developmental models for moralcharacter. Kohlberg’s (1981) three-stage model,for example, provides useful insights into moralcharacter development. Although this modeldoes not specifically address spirituality, itsfocus on &dquo;common good&dquo; at the highest levelparallels the moral destiny of a leader’s spiritualj ourney.

At the most basic level of Kolberg’s moraldevelopment model, pre-conventional,leadership is concerned with the disposition ofrewards and punishment. This level, as

previously discussed, is mostly associated withtransactional leadership. At the next level,conventional, leadership is concerned with

social obligations and adherence to establishedcorporate norms. This level might be moreclosely associated with transformational

leadership. Post-conventional is the highest levelof moral development. It suggests that

leadership is guided by an internalized set of

principles universally recognized as right or

wrong (Hughes, Ginette & Curphy 1999).Leadership at this level places more value onthese internal principles than on external or

social laws, and is most closely associated withour concept of transcendental leadership.

Thomas Aquinas advanced a moral

development model consisting of three levels ofvirtues: intellectual, moral, and theological(Sadlin, 1992). Intellectual virtues seek rationaltruth in a practical and speculative manner.Intellectual virtues include: wisdom, science,understanding, and prudence. Moral virtuesinclude: justice, prudence, fortitude, and

temperance. The highest level of virtue

prescribed by Aquinas, theological, goes beyondthe moral virtues, which can be naturally

developed. Theological virtues are divinelyinfused, and include: love, faith, and hope.Aquinas further asserts that love is thecornerstone of all virtues, and a leader who leadswith love provides a sense of meaning andfulfills the higher needs of the heart (Daft,1999). Ryrie (1984) acknowledges theconnection between moral character and theheart by asserting that the heart reflects socialresponsibility and the promotion of fairness andstands for the center and seat of life.

Ryrie (1984) also contends that leaders witha highly developed sense of heart or moralcharacter are likely to possess a unique set ofvalues and virtues. Bums (1978) similarlycontends that the essence of a spiritualexperience for leaders is evident when theyidentify with higher levels of values, or virtues.Suggested by these writers is that the leader’scapacity to make moral choices is related to theirlevel of spiritual development. As moralcharacter is argued to be the essence of spiritualexperiences (Kanungo & Mendoca, 1994), weassociate development along the transactional-transformational- transcendental leadershiphierarchy with development of this dimension ofspirituality. Thus,


hierarchy continuum, the moral characterdimension of spirituality and thus leadereffectiveness will become more developed.

The Faith DimensionFowler (1981) argues that faith is not

necessarily a religious matter, but a universallyhuman way of making sense of one’s existence.In Fowler’s six-stage model, which describes ashift in authority focus from outside the self towithin, the final stage (universalizing faith)characterize individuals as becoming incarnatesand actualizers of the spirit of the fulfilledhuman community. His model also characterizesfaith as a matter of composing an image of howwe holistically grasp the conditions of ourexistence. This is done through the commitmentof the soul to a center of value and power, givingit coherence. In addition, faith denotes a way ofgiving order and understanding to the force fieldof life, while describing the investment of life-grounding trust and life-orienting commitment(Palmer, 1998).



29

Several studies (c£ Emerson, 1990; Fox,1994; Miller, 2000; Parker, 1998) contend thatthe soul reflects the faith of an individual, andunderstanding the development of an

individual’s faith provides an indication of thematurity of his or her soul. While discussion ofthe human soul has been relatively limitedbecause of its &dquo;religious&dquo; connotation, thesestudies suggest that one cannot comprehensivelydiscuss human development without recognizingthe phenomenon of spirituality and

acknowledging the existence of the human soul.Miller (2000), for instance, argues that the soulis a deep and vital energy that gives meaningand direction to our lives. He proposes that thesoul connects the human with the Divine in a

spontaneous and mysterious way that istranscendent.

Parks (2000) describes the emotional

development of the soul as four stages of faith.The first stage is the dependent stage, where theleader depends on an outside authority for

feelings of assurance, rightness, hope, loyalty,and fear. However, as the leader evolves, he orshe becomes more inner-dependent and

eventually interdependent. This final stage of

interdependence constitutes a qualitativetransformation in the balance of vulnerability,trust, and faith. Such development makes it

possible for leaders to depend on others withoutfear of losing the power of self, thus fostering adeeper trust of self and a profound awareness ofrelatedness to others. Suggested here is thatattention to the development of the soul, as

defmed by faith, provides some access to howthe essence of a leader thinks and feels as he orshe composes meaning in life.


hierarchy continuum, the faith dimension of

spirituality and thus leader effectiveness willbecome more developed.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Transcendental leadership is a new andmore comprehensive way of viewing effectiveleadership. As noted earlier in this article,spirituality is a complex phenomenon that canno longer be ignored by society and its

organizations (Judge, 1999). Suggested by thisnote is the notion that society and its

organizations are changing, and new demandsand requirements have emerged. Thus, in orderfor society and its organizations to meet currentand future challenges, it is imperative that theyembrace the notion of spirituality. Within thepast decade, many companies have adoptedsome type of &dquo;learning organization&dquo; (e.g.,Arthur & Aiman-Smith, 2001; Schulz, 2001) or&dquo;empowerment&dquo; (e.g., Argyris, 1998; Burpitt &

Bigoness, 1997; Ford & Fottler, 1995) strategyto accommodate these changes. Although thesestrategies have had tremendous positive impacton organizational development and leadershipeffectiveness, they have not fully addressed thegrowing spiritual demands and requirements ofour changing society. Our model embodies thespiritual demands of society and its

organizations by explicitly suggestingspirituality as an important component of

leadership.Our model also helps to fill some of the

gaps that currently exist in traditional leadershiptheories. Traditional theories, for a large part,tend to focus on external manifestations of

leadership. Our model suggests that the essenceof leadership is better grasped by exploring theleader’s internal components in addition to theexternal manifestations of leadership. Instead of

just asking, &dquo;What are the behaviors of aneffective leader?&dquo; our model asks &dquo;Whatcontributes to effective leader behavior?&dquo;

Exploring the answer to the latter will add a

qualitative richness to the concept of leadershipthat we feel has not been thoroughly developedin prior research.

At the personal/individual level, the modelbridges the gap between spirituality and

leadership by stimulating practical and scholarlyconsideration about their relationship. For

example, many leaders may feel that they haveto &dquo;check their spirituality in the closet beforethey enter the office,&dquo; and by doing so they areunable to be authentic and &dquo;whole&dquo; in their rolesas leaders. Our model provides an alternativeway of characterizing spiritually oriented

leaders, as they strive to integrate spiritualityinto all aspects of their life. It brings spiritualityout of the &dquo;closet&dquo; and places it where it belongs- in the mind (i.e., consciousness), the heart (i.e.,moral character), the soul (i.e., faith) and dailyaccomplishments of the leader.



30

Our theory is by no means intended to be adefmitive theory on leadership; however, it isinstead intended to evoke ideas and discussionabout the role that spirituality can play in

leadership. As with other new theories that are inthe developmental process, there are bound to beshortcomings and corollary criticisms. That it is&dquo;too idealistic,&dquo; that it lacks practical applicationin universal contexts, and that it is too

qualitative in nature are likely to be majorcriticisms of our theory. We would argue that&dquo;too idealistic&dquo; is relative and should not

preclude the notion of potential reality. For

example, when viewed from a traditional

perspective of leadership our theory would beseen as &dquo;too idealistic.&dquo; However, when viewedfrom a nontraditional perspective, transcendentalleadership represents potential reality.

While our theory remains to be empiricallytested in a variety of social and organizationalenvironments, we view this as an opportunity forfuture research. Empirical research would

provide evidence of the role that spiritualitymight actually play in leader effectiveness, aswell as a practical framework of the nature andtraits of transcendental leadership that might beapplied in organizational settings. However,empirical research must be careful not to limitour understanding of the concept oftranscendental leadership by analyzing it too

narrowly through the lens of traditionalscientific methods. According to Thompson(2000), these traditional methods sometimes usemicroscopes to search for something that canonly by grasped in panorama. In addition,leadership is the natural expression of a fullyintegrated human being, and thus can only beseen through a broader lens of the leader’s totaldevelopment.

Finally, we acknowledge that spiritualexperiences are very subjective and oftentimessubtle. Although we have broadly employed theterm spirituality, our use of the term is still

potentially limiting. For instance, one leader’sspiritual experience may be very different thananother’s, and there may be many manifestationsof spirituality depending on the person’sbackground. However, the belief in relatingoneself with a higher-order influence is commonin almost all spiritual experiences (Kanungo &

Mendoca, 1994). The challenge oftranscendental theory of leadership, within both

research and practical contexts, is how to

integrate spirituality into leadership without

offending those who may not appreciate or

understand how this aspect of leading relates toeffectiveness. Another, and perhaps more

involved, challenge is how to make visible anduseful the reality of spirituality that is hidden inplain sight. It is our hope that our model willhelp clarify this relationship, as well as helpleaders in their journey toward transcendentalaccomplishment.

REFERENCES

Acker, K. 2000. Developmental processes and structures:

Requisite to the integration of spirituality and work. Ann

Arbor, MI: Bell and Howell - UMI.Anderson, C.R. 1977. "Locus of control, coping behaviors, and

performance in a stress setting: A longitudinal study."Journal of Applied Psychology , 62: 446-451.

Argyris, C. 1998. "Empowerment: The emperor’s new clothes."Harvard Business Review 76: 98-105.

Arthur, J.B., & Aiman-Smith, L. 2001. "Gainsharing and

organizational learning: An analysis of employeesuggestions over time." The Academy of ManagementJournal, 4: 737-754.

Assagioli, R. 1976. Psychosynthesis: A manual of principles andtechniques. New York, NY: Penguin Books.

Avolio, B.J., & Bass, B.M. 1988. "Charisma and beyond." In J.G.Hunt, B.R. Baliga, H.P. Dachler, & C.A. Schriesheim

(Eds.), Emerging leadership vistas: 29-49. Lexington, MA:Heath.

Avolio, B.J., Bass, B.M., & Jung, D.I. 1996. Construct validationof the multifactor leadership questionnaire MLQ-Form 5X.Binghamton, New York; Center for Leadership Studies,Binghamton University Report: 96- 1.

Bass, B.M. 1985. Leadership and performance beyondexpectations. New York: Free Press.

Bass, B.M. 1995. "Transformational leadership redux." LeadershipQuarterly, 6: 463-478.

Bass, B.M., & Avolio, B.J. 1990. Manual for the Multifactor

Leadership Questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: consultingPsychologists Press.

Bass, B.M., & Avolio, B.J. 1993. "Transformational leadership: Aresponse to critiques." In M. M. Chemers & Ayman (Eds.),Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and directions :49-80. San Diego: Academic Press.

Blackaby, H. T., & Blackaby, R. 2001. Spiritual leadership:Moving people on to God’s agenda. Nashville, TN:Broadman & Holman.

Boucouvalas, M. 1993. "Consciousness and learning: New andrenewed approaches." New Directions for Adult and

Continuing Education, 57, 57-69.Bums, J.M. 1978. Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Burpitt, W.J., & Bigoness, W.J. 1997. "Leadership and innovationamong teams: The impact of empowerment." Small GroupResearch, 28: 414-423.

Bycio, P., Hackett, R., & Allen, J. 1995. "Further assessments ofBass’s (1985) conceptualization of transactional andtransformational leadership." Journal of AppliedPsychology, 80: 468-478.

Cardona, P. 2000. "Transcendental leadership." "Leadership andOrganizational Development Journal, 21: ##.

Daft, R. L. 1999. Leadership: Theory and practice. Fort Worth,TX: Dryden Press.



31

Emerson, R. W. 1990. Ralph Waldo Emerson: Selected essays,lectures, and poems. New York, NY: Bantam.

Emmons, R. A. 1999. The psychology of ultimate concerns:Motivation and spirituality in personality. New York, NY:The Guilford Press.

Findlay, J. N. 1981. Kant and the transcendental object: Ahermeneutic study. New York, NY: Oxford Press.

Ford, R.C., & Fottler, M.d. 1995. "Empowerment: A matter ofdegree." Academy of Management Review, 9: 21- 31.

Fox, M. 1994. The reinvention of livelihood for our time. San

Francisco, CA: HatperCollins.Fowler, J. W. 1981. Stages of faith: The psychology of human

development and the quest for meaning. San Francisco,CA: HarperCollins.

Golden-Biddle, K., Greenwood, R. 2000. "Nontraditionalresearch: Editor’s introduction." Journal of ManagementInquiry, 9: 146.

Graen, G. B., Scandura, T. A. 1986. Toward a psychology ofdyadic organizing. In B.M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.),Research in organizational behavior, Vol 9. Greenwich,CT: JAI Press.

Greenleaf, R. K. 1991. Servant leadership: A journey into thenature of legitimate power and greatness. Mahwah, NJ:Paulist Press.

Haasnoot, R. 2000. The new wisdom of business: Nine guidingprinciples from today’s leaders. Chicago, IL: Dearborn.

Harmon, W., 1991 Global mind Change. Boston, MA: Sigo Press.Hawley, J. 1993. Reawakening the spirit in work: The power of

dharmic management San Francisco, CA: Berrett-KoehlerPublishers.

House, R.J. 1977. "A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership." InJ.G. Hunt & L.L. Larsons (Eds.), Leadership: The cuttingedge: 189-207. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UniversityPress.

Howell, J.M., & Avolio, B.J. 1993. "Transformational leadership,transactional leadership, locus of control, and support forinnovation: Key predictors of consolidated business- unitperformance." Journal of Applied Psychology , 78: 891-902.

Hughes, R.L., Ginnett, R.C., & Curphy, G.J. 1999. Leadership:Enhancing the lessons of experience. Boston, MA: IrwinMcGraw-Hill.

Jaworski, J. 1996. Synchronicity: The inner path of leadership.San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Judge, W. Q. 1999. The leaders shadow: Exploring and developingexecutive character. Thousand Oaks, CA: SagePublications, Inc.

Kant, I 1997. Prolegomena to any future metaphysics. Edited andtranslated by Gary Hatfield. New York, NY: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Kanungo R. N., & Mendoca, M. 1994. "What leaders cannot dowithout: The spiritual dimensions of leadership." In J. A.

Conger (Ed.), Spirit at work. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kegan, R. 1994. In over our heads: The mental demands ofmodern life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kelly, E. E., Jr. 1995. Spirituality and religion in counseling andpsychotherapy. Alexandria, VA: American CounselingAssociation.

Kipnis, D. 1976. Powerholders. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress.

Koh, W.L., Terborg, J.R., & Steers, R.M. 1991. The impact oftransformational leadership on organizational commitment,organizational citizenship behavior, teacher satisfaction andstudent performance in Singapore. Paper presented at theAnnual Academy of Management Meeting, Miami, FL.

Kohlberg, L. 1981. The philosophy of moral development: Essayson moral development. San Francisco, CA: Harper & Row.

Kouzes, J. M.. & Posner, B. Z. 1999. Encouraging the heart: Aleader’s guide to rewarding and recognizing others. SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Maslow, A. H. 1971 The farther reaches of human nature. New

York, NY: Penguin.Miller, J. P. 2000. Education and the soul: Towards a spiritual

curriculum. Albany, NY: State University of New York.Miller, D., Kets de Vries, M.F.R., & Toulouse, J.M. 1982. "Top

executive locus of control and its relationship to strategy-making, structure, and environment." Academy of

Management Journal, 25: 237-253.Miller, D., & Toulouse, J.M. 1986. "Strategy, structure, CEO

personality and performance in small firms." AmericanJournal of Small Business 15: 47-62.

Nelson, A. 1993. Living the wheel: Working with emotion, terror,and bliss through imagery. York Beach, ME: SamuelWeiser.

Palmer, P. J. 1998. "Evoking the spirit in public education."Educational Leadership Journal, 56: 7 -11.

Pargament, K. I., & Park, C. L. 1995. "Merely a defense: Thevariety of religious means and ends." Journal of Social

Issues, 51: 13-32.

Parks, S. D. 2000. Big questions, worthy dreams: Mentoringyoung adults in their search for meaning, purpose, and faith.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Moorman, R.H., & Fetter, R.1990. "Transformational leader behaviors and their effectson followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction and organizationalcitizenship behaviors." Leadership Quarterly, 1: 107-142.

Ryrie, C. C. 1999. Basic theology: A popular systematic guide tounderstanding biblical truth. Chicago, IL: Moody Press.

Sanders, J. E., Geroy, G. D., & Hopkins W. E. 2001. Looseningthe constraints on individual potential: Toward a theory ofinter-group movement. Paper presented at the thirteenthannual conference of the Western Decision Sciences

Institute, Vancouver, Canada.Sandlin, R. T. 1992. Rehabilitation of virtue: Foundations of

moral education. New York, NY: Praeger.Schulz, M. 2001. "The uncertain relevance of newness:

Organizational learning and knowledge flows." TheAcademy of Management Journal, 4: 661-681.

Sheldon, K. M., & Kasser, T. 1995. "Coherence and congruence:Two aspects of personality integration." Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 68: 531- 543.Thompson, M. C. 2000. The congruent life: Following the inward

path to fulfilling work and inspired leadership. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Tosi, H.J. 1982. "Toward a paradigm shift in the study of

leadership." In J.G. Hunt, U. Sekaran, & C.A. Schriesheim

(Eds.), Leadership: Beyond establishment views: 222-233.Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Wheatley, M. J. 1999. Leadership and the new science. San

Francisco, CA: Barrett-Koehler.Wilber, K. 1977. The spectrum of consciousness. Wheaton, IL:

The Theosophical Publishing House.Wilkes, C. G. 1999. Jesus on leadership: Becoming a servant

leader. Nashville, TN: LifeWay Press.Yammarino, F.J., & Dubinsky, A.J. 1994. "Transformational

leadership theory: Using levels of analysis to determine

boundary conditions." Personnel Psychology, 47: 787-811.Yammarino, F.J., Dubinsky, A.J., Comer, L.B., & Jolson, M.A.

1997. "Women and transformational and contingent rewardleadership: A multiple-levels-of-analysis perspective."Academy of Management Journal, 40: 205-222.



Documents

From Transactional to Transcedental Toward an Integrated Theory of Leadership