Running head: THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

Theoretical Analysis
Meghan Funk
Loyola University Chicago

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

As I continue to better understand and develop my own definition of leadership, I have

come to acknowledge the importance of utilizing leadership theory as a lens to gain perspective
into how and why some individuals may respond to the roles of leader and follower. I have also
come to learn that theory is something I can question and challenge to better determine my
preferred leadership styles. To further my education regarding the establishment of what
leadership means to me, I have defined two leadership theories: transformational leadership and
adaptive leadership. I continued by deconstructing and reconstructing the theories to find deeper
meaning within these specific forms of leadership as a way to incorporate my own critical
thinking and perspective. I then utilized these theories as I analyzed a case study to apply theory
to practice.
Transformative Leadership
Transformational leadership emphasizes the relationship between leaders and followers.
This leadership style requires leaders to push followers to achieve more than followers originally
believed possible for themselves (Northouse, 2016). Northouse (2016) demonstrated how leaders
execute this when he said, transformational leadership is the process whereby a person engages
with others and creates a connection that raises the level of motivation and morality in both the
leader and the follower (p. 162). By building relationships, leaders can motivate followers to
address challenges greater than the ones they face individually in order to impact an organization
or societal structure.
Transformational leadership contains four factors that aid leaders in assisting followers to
reach beyond their own expectations (Northouse, 2016). These factors include idealized
influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration
(Northouse, 2016). These factors focus on leaders abilities to provide positive environments for

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

followers so both leaders and followers can focus on emotions, creativity, morals, and values in
order to form a commitment to a larger institution. To better understand transformational
leadership, I will deconstruct and reconstruct two of the four factors.
Deconstruction and Reconstruction of Inspirational Motivation
Factor two of inspirational motivation emphasizes the importance of leaders and
followers committing to a shared vision in the organization (Northouse, 2016). I question
Northouses failure to address the role of power within this factor. If leaders are expected to set
expectations for followers as they pertain to the larger goal of an organization, does this practice
leave room for followers to provide input throughout the entire process? Are followers expected
to simply carry out the wishes of a leader? Paulo Freire (2000) wrote if what characterizes the
oppressed is their subordination to the consciousness of the master, true solidarity with the
oppressed means fighting at their side to transform the objective reality which has made them
these beings for another (pp. 9-10). A main goal of transformational leadership is that
followers are supposed to develop the ability to overcome obstacles they themselves did not
deem possible. However, part of this process is establishing those obstacles for ones self. By
not allowing followers to establish their own challenges, leaders begin to develop a
pseudotransformational leadership style, in which they become selfish and focus on their own
needs (Northouse, 2016).
In order to reconstruct this theory, I would address what is really meant by shared vision
through the use of commodification. In the case study, the Northeasternish State Universitys
(NSU) administration did include student input regarding the decision of creating the new
Multicultural Student unit, but Raymond makes no attempt to utilize student participation or the
contribution of other university departments. In this case, simply getting the student and

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

administration as followers in the institutions new goal is not enough if these stakeholders do
not continue to have a voice in the overall mission. Transformational leadership cannot simply
rope followers into a cause just to have leaders continue on with their own agenda. According to
Dugan (2016), commodification of people along with an emphasis on increasing production and
consumption at all costs can have a dangerous [effect] on our ability to demonstrate agency as
well as think critically (p. 11). In Raymonds case, he gains his leadership position by gaining
the trust of the university administration but pushes his own goals leaving followers to feel that if
they go against his view, they are going against the long-term goals of the institution.
Raymonds actions could also restrict the NSU community from having the ability to question
the current acts of the administration since Raymond does not provide an opportunity for
community engagement.
In reconstructing this factor of the transformational leadership, I would recommend
building interest convergence. Dugan (2016) stated building interest convergence
acknowledges the difficulty of engaging others in the work of leadership for social change (p.
12). Raymond is so focused on his own path to the universitys goal that he leaves out
administration and student voices in the process leading to others doubting his leadership, as
well as the initial goal of the institution. The factor of inspirational motivation should enable
leaders to encourage followers to discover pathways in which they can overcome challenges and
not simply force followers to carry out orders prescribed by leaders.
Deconstruction and Reconstruction of Individualized Consideration
Another factor of transformational leadership is called individualized consideration
(Northouse, 2016). Northouse (2016) described this factor as representative of leaders who
provide a supportive climate in which they listen carefully to the individual needs of followers

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

(p. 169). I challenge this factor because I believe an organization should work to the betterment
of an entire community through a social justice lens. In the case of NSU, the institution clearly
acknowledges the lack of diversity and cross-cultural knowledge among faculty and staff.
Therefore, in regards to individualized consideration, how can a leader work towards a goal
revolving around diversity if knowledge of diversity and student advocacy is not present in the
follower population? Raymond is not listening to the needs of the current student population let
alone including voices that are not present within the division or at the institution. He also has
made no effort to bring education to university administration since he is refusing to interact with
departments outside his own.
In order to reconstruct this factor, there needs to be an acknowledgement of power
(Dugan, 2016). If transformational leadership only addresses the needs of followers, it runs a
probable risk of leaving out voices not represented within the follower population. Therefore, a
group becomes exclusive and will lean toward dominant views while not recognizing the role of
power. In order for the institution to move towards its goal of creating a more diverse
environment by creating support services available on campus, Raymond not only needs to begin
reaching out to students, faculty, and staff, but outside views as well. He could do this by
agreeing to perform national searches for his new staff instead of searching internally and
locally. By expanding his search, Raymond has the potential to bring additional knowledge to
his team. Even though his team members will probably not encompass all identities, there is a
good chance they may have more experience working with more diverse populations outside the
NSU area.
Adaptive Leadership

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

Similar to transformational leadership, adaptive leadership also involves the leader

motivating followers. Specifically, adaptive leadership involves leaders encouraging followers
to address problems as they relate to change (Northouse, 2016). Northouse (2016) described an
adaptive leader as someone who:
challenges others to face difficult challenges providing them with the space and
opportunity they need to learn new ways of dealing with the inevitable changes in
assumptions, perceptions, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors that they are likely to
encounter in addressing real problems (p. 258)
This leadership theory puts emphasis on the followers. Leaders work with followers to
experience challenges and to better understand how to assist followers in confronting those
hurtles. This idea touches on how leaders within adaptive leadership are not seen as authority
figures, but individuals who mobilize and work with followers to create change (Northouse,
2016).
Northouse (2016) described six adaptive leader behaviors, which include get on the
balcony, identify adaptive challenge, regulate distress, maintain disciplined attention, give the
work back to the people, and protect leadership voices from below. These behaviors are meant
to model positive techniques adaptive leaders can take in order to build relationships with
followers and connect their values with others. By doing so, a group can be formed and that
organization can work towards overcoming challenges. As I continue to find deeper meaning to
adaptive leadership, I will deconstruct and reconstruct two behaviors in order to determine how I
view this specific theory, as well as how I can apply it to my everyday life.
Deconstruction and Reconstruction of Maintaining Disciplined Behavior

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

Northouse (2011) described the behavior of maintaining disciplined behavior as the

leader [needing] to encourage people to focus on the tough work they need to do (p. 269). I
question if this behavior only allows the followers to address the challenges named by the leader,
instead of allowing followers to identify challenges for themselves. If followers are not
encouraged to name problems how can they be expected to address them? As I reconstruct this
theory, I think of cultivating agency. Dugan (2016) said reconstructing theory with this tool
could involve re-centering decision-making, responsibility, and control in those involved in an
activity versus in those with potential authority (p. 12). In order for followers within adaptive
leadership to focus on tough work, they must first be given the opportunity to name it. In the
case of NSU, Donna hires Raymond into the position and immediately wants to see change.
Hearing about a campus culture and experiencing one can have very different outcomes for an
individual. If Donna had allowed Raymond a short adjustment period before implementing
changes, Raymonds approaches may be different. If time is not available for Raymond to adjust
to his new position, Donna could have encouraged him to meet with a variety of students and
staff members in order to get a better understanding of how the campus culture was before he
arrived. Raymond needs the opportunity to assess the challenge and name it for himself before
he can act effectively.
Deconstruction and Reconstructing Regulating Distress
Another behavior of adaptive leadership is regulating distress. Northouse (2016) stated
the adaptive leader needs to monitor the stress people are experiencing and keep it within a
productive range (p. 266). I think this language could be problematic. Stress looks very
different for everybody and I believe it is unrealistic to expect a leader to monitor followers
stress levels. This approach leaves room for leaders to push their own coping mechanisms onto

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

others. For example, I once had a supervisor assume I was frustrated with a project because her
and other team members were becoming stressed with the project. As a result, she kept asking
the other team members and myself to talk in detail with her about our work on the project.
Since I was not stressed by the project and did not know my supervisor was under the impression
I was stressed, I interpreted her reaction as micromanaging and a form of doubt in my ability to
be successful when executing this project. When I finally confronted my supervisor as to why
she seemed more concerned with my abilities on this specific project, she informed me she was
not concerned with my skills but knew several members were frustrated over the project and
decided to take more control of the project in order to try and calm the team. Although I could
understand why she made her decision to alter her normal supervision methods, I could not help
but think her actions were keeping me from challenging myself when it came to problem solving.
It may be easy to say my supervisor should have better evaluated the stress for each
individual team member, but realistically, how could she? She cannot read my mind or the
thoughts of my teammates. Also, even if she could predict our stress levels, how could she be
expected to address the stress in a manner that caters to each of our own individual needs? In
adaptive leadership, Northouse (2016) said rather than seeing the leader as a savior who solves
problems for people, they [conceptualize] the leader as one who plays the role of mobilizing
people to tackle tough problems (pp. 257-258). If this is a goal of adaptive leadership, I do not
think regulating distress can be included, since it contradicts the ideology of leaders not being
saviors. Northouse (2016) also indicated one way leaders can manage stress is to provide
protection for followers. By providing protection, a leader is expressing savior qualities,
which diminishes a pivotal goal of adaptive leadership.

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

Similar to the adaptive leadership behavior of maintaining disciplined behavior,

regulating distress can be reconstructed utilizing the idea of cultivating agency. When leaders
determine the level of stress of another person and the actions to take to address that distress,
they are weakening followers sense of agency. If leaders are to empower followers to tackle
difficult situations, leaders must first empower followers to address their own challenges.
Leaders can help create positive environments for followers to acknowledge stress, but they
cannot project their own opinions onto followers. For example, the case study indicates one of
Raymonds staff members voiced her lack of confidence in the office providing diversity
education and student advocacy with current staffing and funding structures. Instead of being
asked why she feels this way, the worker was silenced. The case study hints that another party
may have told her to get over her doubts and get on board with the offices planned initiatives. If
this is true, as the leader, Raymond should listen to the workers concerns and ask what she feels
comfortable working on and what would be the best steps for her moving forward so she is not
effected by great amounts of stress.
Addressing the Case Study
In moving forward with NSU, it is important to consider both transformational and
adaptive leadership. Considering transformational leadership, I would make two
recommendations in order to address the current predicament. First, I would encourage
Raymond to network with other departments on campus, as well as with a variety of students and
student organizations in order to receive different perspectives regarding the current thoughts
around diversity knowledge and student advocacy. In accordance with transformational
leadership, Raymond will need to build connections with others in order to motivate individuals
to come together as a community to address the challenges faced by the institution. According to

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

10

Wheatley (as cited in Boggs, 2012) the real engine of change is never critical mass; dramatic
and systemic change always begins with critical connections (p. 50). Raymond needs to focus
on creating an atmosphere where individuals can utilize critical thinking with others, instead of
pushing his own ideas on everyone and assuming they will rally behind him. By connecting with
the NSU community, Raymond can move away from the pseudotransformational leadership style
he has developed and move towards actively working with others in creating change at the
university.
Considering transformational leadership, I would take the next step of recommending
Donna to address her concerns with Raymond. Donna expressed some of her apprehensions but
not to the people who really needed to hear them including Raymond who is the root of Donnas
worries. Bass (as cited in Northouse, 2016) argued transformational leadership motivates
followers to do more than expected by getting followers to transcend their own self-interest for
the sake of the team or organization (p. 166). As a leader, Donna cannot expect change to occur
if she is unwilling to have a conversation with Raymond. Donna needs to confront her concerns
around Raymond addressing his own interests instead of the divisions overall diversity mission.
This idea ties to a recommendation I would make through an adaptive leadership lens.
I would encourage Donna, Raymond, and Raymonds staff to have a meeting where they
outline tangible steps that can be taken in the upcoming semester to aid the divisions diversity
goals. During this meeting I think it is important to discuss their roles as student affairs
professionals at NSU. It is vital the team addresses Northouses (2016) words pertaining to
adaptive leadership:
Leadership revolves around work and how people are mobilized to do work. It is not
defined by position, so anyone can exhibit leadership. In contrast, authority revolves

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

11

around power and how it informally and informally conferred to leaders by followers (p.
258)
I think it would be very helpful to bring in an outside facilitator to work with this team
regarding the definitions of leadership and authority, as well as the differences between the two.
It would also be beneficial to relate these terms to how they work and relate with students.
The last recommendation I would make is getting students involved in the process of
working toward providing diversity education on campus, as well as student advocacy. One
behavior I believe is crucial to adaptive leadership is giving the work back to the people
(Northouse, 2016). If a central goal of adaptive leadership is for the theory to be focused on the
followers (Northougse, 2016), the division of student affairs needs to include the students in the
process of creating support services and programs available on campus. Raymond and the
Multicultural Office could create student intern positions in which students organize programs
such as diversity workshops and trainings, affinity spaces, and open forums where university
administrators can hear the students voices. By involving the student population, Raymond and
his team can engage students as part of a resolution in working towards spreading diversity
knowledge and advocacy across the NSU campus.
Conclusion
Although I have made great progress in my discovery of transformational and adaptive
leadership, I understand there is more to learn as I continue to grow and gain new experiences
within my own life. A fellow classmate told me to think of my leadership knowledge as a
journey and not a finite answer. I believe this idea to be true. For if I determine my leadership
style without taking into account my own experiences and seeking to understand the experiences
of others, how can I ever expect to be someone who pushes myself beyond what I believe is

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

possible? Therefore, if I do not push myself as a leader, I will be unable to motivate others. I
hope that by continuing to question and challenge a variety of leadership theories, I can better
relate them to my own life and the world around me.

12

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

13

References
Boggs, G. L., & Kurashige, S. (2012). The next American revolution: Sustainable activism for
the twenty-first century. University of California Press.
Dugan, J.P. (2016)
Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Bloomsbury.
Northouse, P. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.