PPA 577 - Leadership Lecture 4a – Transformational Leadership

PPA 577 - Leadership

Lecture 4a – Transformational Leadership

Introduction

Although theorists acknowledge that leadership occurs at all levels of the organization and that the impact of all leaders contributes to organizational performance, a fascination has always existed with the larger-than-life, earth-shaking leaders who do more than transact the mundane concerns of everyday activity, leaders who foment revolutions in politics or commerce and divert the streams of history.

Introduction

Despite the glamour of heroic leadership and the long-standing interest of social philosophers in the subject, the scientific literature largely ignored the topic because:– The theme has mystical and quasi-religious overtones that do

not fit well with empiricism of social psychology.– The concepts that define heroic leadership are difficult to

define and operationalize.– Heroic leaders are not easily available for study.

Introduction

Two forces coalesced to bring transformational leadership to the fore:– Frustration with the limitations of contemporary

leadership theory.– Increased levels of business competition increased

interest in ways to improve organizational and personal functioning.

The Concept of Charisma

Max Weber (The Theory of Social and Economic Organization) – three types of leadership differentiated by the bases of legitimacy on which the leader’s authority rested.– Rational – Based on collective belief that orderly

organizations and other social systems were governed by a set of normative rules. Rules define positions and rights and responsibilities of incumbents. Obedience was to the legal authority of proper occupants of positions.


Max Weber (contd.).– Traditional – legitimacy rests in sanctity and timelessness of

social order. Loyalty to the order and to its hereditary occupants produced obedience.

– Charismatic – Legitimacy rests on the follower’s recognition of the sanctity, heroism, or exemplary character of the individual person as a sign of that person having been chosen by supernatural authority. Obedience based on the moral duty to the mission for which the charismatic leaders was chosen rather than to rules, social order, or the person.


Max Weber (contd.).– Charismatic (contd.).

• Powers and capabilities of divine origin.• Follower response a duty rather than a transaction.• Leader creates obligations, not exchanges.• Charismatic’s appeal is irrational or antirational.• Goal chosen for a moral imperative.• Charismatic leadership repudiates the past and is a

revolutionary force for change.


James McGregor Burns.– Transactional – leadership based on the exchange of

benefits based on self-interest.– Transformational – leadership that transforms

followers into leaders and leaders into agents of social change.


House’s 1976 Theory of Charismatic Leadership.– An empirically testable set of hypotheses about the

nature and forms of charismatic leadership.– Assumption: charismatic leadership must be defined

by its effects on followers.– The evidence for charisma is the extraordinary levels

of devotion, identification, and emulation that are aroused in followers.


House (contd.).– Characteristics or concomitants of charismatic

leadership.• Personal.

– Extremely high levels of self-confidence.– Dominance over others.– A strong conviction in the moral righteousness of his or her

beliefs.– A high need to influence others.


House (contd.).– Characteristics or concomitants of charismatic leadership.

• Behaviors related to the leaders ability to gain the devotion of followers and turn that devotion into performance.

– Role modeling – Demonstrating publicly the commitment to key values.– Image building – Creating in followers the perception of giftedness.– Goal articulation – Transcendent, ideological, and moral call to a higher

duty.– High expectations of followers.– Confidence in followers’ ability to achieve the goals.– Motive arousal behaviors – Induce cognitive and emotional states with

the behaviors necessary to accomplish the goal.


House (contd.).– Situational determinants that facilitate the rise of

charismatic influence (useful but not necessary).• Followers are most likely to be susceptible to charismatic

influence when the surrounding situation if very stressful.– People under stress are especially responsive to clear and

definitive answers.• Second, because charismatic leaders must present a

transcendent vision, situations that foster the opportunity to express goals in ideological terms are helpful.

Broadening the Scope of Transformational Leadership

Popular Theories.– Bennis and Nanus (1985), Tichy and Devanna (1986),

Kouzes and Posner (1987) have several shared characteristics.

• Interested in leaders involved in major changes from the top of organizations.

• Used small, nonsystematic, nonrepresentative unstructured interviews with leaders.

• Analysis nonsystematic and idiosyncratic.• No corroborative data, must be considered compilations of what some

leaders say is the key to successful organizational transformation.


Bennis and Nanus (1985).– Articulate a compelling vision.– Communicate the vision in a way that allowed others in the

organization to understand the vision at a visceral as well as an intellectual level.

– The leaders were able to evoke strong perceptions of their trustworthiness among members of their organization, enhanced by their commitment to the vision.

– Make the fullest use of their personal resources and capacities because they were extremely self-confident in their own abilities and optimistic about the outcomes of their actions.


Kouzes and Posner (1987).– Challenging the process - searching for opportunities to do

things in better ways, risking experimentation.– Inspiring a shared vision – goal for future, enlisting followers.– Enabling others to act – Fostering participation and

collaboration and by strengthening subordinates abilities to participate.

– Modeling the way – setting an example and planning small wins to dramatize the process.

– Encouraging the heart – create emotional momentum for motivation.


Tichy and Devanna (1986). – Three acts.– Revitalization: recognizing the need for change.

• Use of compelling imagery to convince the organization to give up security and resistance to change.

– Creating a new vision and mobilizing commitment.– Institutionalizing change.


Problems with popular theories.– Not very specific in describing how a leader can

develop the inspirational qualities and communication abilities necessary.

– The popular theories also tend to gloss over the the contingent situational and subordinate factors that influence the feasibility or utility of a particular set of behaviors or course of action.


Conger and Kanungo’s Behavioral Theory.– Charisma should be definable in purely behavioral terms.– Charisma is an attributional phenomenon, defined by the

perceptions held by followers.– Attributions of charisma depend on four variables.

• The degree of discrepancy between the status quo and the future goal or vision advocated by the leader.

• The use of innovative and unconventional means for achieving the desired change.

• The leader’s success in assessing the environmental resources and constraints for effecting the change.

• The type of articulation and impression management used by the leader to inspire subordinates in the pursuit of the vision.


Conger and Kanungo (contd.).– Emphasis on successful assessment of strategic factors

affecting the successful attainment of the vision.– Placed great importance on leader’s technical expertise.– Neither of these are important in Weber’s theory.– Places charismatic leadership on a continuum of

effectiveness rather than a separate type of leadership.


Bass’s Transformational Leadership Theory.– Multi-factor leadership questionnaire.– Confirmatory factor analysis revealed seven stable factors.– Transformational leadership factors.

• Charisma – Follower perceptions that the leader is trustworthy and capable of achieving the vision.

• Inspirational motivation – quality and emotional appeal of the leader’s vision.• Intellectual stimulation – The extent to which the leader both encourages the

follower to question past ideas and supports the subordinate for thinking independently and creatively.

• Individualized consideration – the degree to which the leader treats each follower in a way that is equitable and satisfying, but differentiated from the way other followers are treated.


Bass’s Transformational Leadership Theory.– Transactional leadership factors.

• Contingent reward – assesses a positively reinforcing interaction with the leader and is quite similar in emphasis to the principles of reciprocal exchange.

• Management by exception – the extent to which the leader intervenes only when things go wrong.

– Nonleadership factor.• Laissez-faire – leadership is absent, with the superior avoiding

intervention and procrastinating decisions or action.


Bass’s Transformational Leadership Theory.– Bass and Avolio (1993).

• The first five factors represent active leadership• Factors six and seven represent passive leadership.

– Empirically, evidence suggests that active leadership is associated with effectiveness and follower satisfaction while passive leadership is not.


Bass’s Transformational Leadership Theory.– Problems.

• How to integrate a transformational model that supposedly fits all situations to leadership situations that are usually contingent.

• Descriptions may reflect learned behavior about good leadership rather than actual leadership behavior by leaders.

• How do the leader behaviors actually work?


House and Shamir’s (1993) Self-Concept Theory of Transformational and Charismatic Leadership.– Transformational leaders transform the needs,

values, preferences, and aspirations of followers from self interests into collective interests.

– They cause followers to become highly committed to the leader’s mission, to make significant personal sacrifices in the interests of the mission, and to perform above and beyond the call of duty.


House and Shamir.– Leaders do this by engaging follower’s self-concepts

and linking valued aspects of those self-concepts to the leader’s vision and mission, and by arousing unconscious motives relevant to mission accomplishment.

– The motivational bases for subordinate effort and commitment are made intrinsic (self-concept) rather than extrinsic (transaction).


House and Shamir (1993).– Path goal theory. P1 P2

• IVb IVa EV

• IVb = intrinsic value of relevant behavior or effort.

• IVa = intrinsic value of goal attainment or performance.• EV = value of extrinsic outcomes.• P1 = probability that effort will lead to goal attainment.• P2 = probability that goal attainment will lead to outcomes.


House and Shamir.– Followers are motivated to work hard when they think that

they can accomplish the required levels of performance, which will in turn lead to valued outcomes.

– In path-goal theory, leaders affect subordinate motivation by enhancing the extrinsic value of outcomes and by making the attainment of outcomes easier by clarifying paths to the goals and reducing roadblocks.


House and Shamir.– Transactional leaders do this through coaching and guidance

to improve the perception of the probability of success and clarifies the relationship of performance to reward through goal setting and feedback.

– Transformational leaders attach the followers self-concept to the vision by stating the vision in ideological terms, which places the goal in a spiritual or moral context, and by raising the salience of collective interests and group goals at the expense of more selfish interests.


House and Shamir.– The follower’s desire to enhance self-esteem and to maintain

a consistent personal identify raises the intrinsic value of personal effort and goal accomplishment and reduces or makes irrelevant the value of extrinsic rewards.

– The follower becomes self-regulating, monitoring performance levels and adjusting effort to achieve goals, because it is the follower’s own self-esteem and personal satisfaction that are at stake.


House and Shamir.– The leader also engages in selective motive arousal through the use

of symbolic communication.– The motives are selective in the sense that the specific motive (power,

achievement, affiliation, etc.) are those that are consistent with mission accomplishment.

– The enhancement of relevant motives further engages the follower’s self-concept and increases the intrinsic value of goal accomplishment. Goal-directed efforts not only seem like the right thing to do (morally correct), they also feel right (result in motive satisfaction).

– Commitment to the mission and desire for participation are elevated.– Example: civil rights movement.


House and Shamir.– Charismatic leader’s vision is not negotiable nor are

the basic features of personality or values changeable.

– Charismatic effects can only happen in receptive cultures and appropriate milieus.

– In other words, charismatic leadership is contingent.

Ethical Considerations

Charismatic leadership can be used for both good and evil.Charismatic leaders’ strengths can have negative impacts on their organizations.– Personal needs make dictate the vision, which is projected on followers

without consultation.– Self-confidence may encourage unrealistic assessments of the resources

needed to accomplish the goal, the availability of resources, and the receptivity of the environment to the strategy.

– Leader’s communication skills may oversell the strategy even if these flaws are evident.

– The referent power of transformational leaders may lead followers to use “soft” influence strategies rather than direct approaches, further inflating the self-image of the leader and interfering with the followers’ goals and desires.

Summary

Much of transformational leadership theory comes from transactional and contingency theory.What is unique is the extent to which a transcendent vision is the source of motivation for followers and the degree to which followers can meld their personal identities to that mission.

Documents

PPA 577 - Leadership Lecture 4a – Transformational Leadership