This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
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
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.
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 Leadership
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. 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 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. 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 , 15 pages. http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/ijls/new/vol2iss1/matteson/mair. htm, accessed November 2006 (© 2005, Regent University, by permission).
• 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/Transfor mationalLeadership/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
• • • • •
Unit: Lead Transformational Change
transformational and transactional leadership’, Journal of Organisational Behaviour, vol. 21, pp. 949–964. • 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.
• • • • • • • 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 Leadership
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.
Unit: Lead Transformational Change
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 welldeveloped 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
Introduction to Leadership
energy and power. To be effective, to truly inspire and motivate excellence and 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
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.
Unit: Lead Transformational Change
Some immediately apparent changes in the operational environment for organisational leaders in the last 60 years include: • 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 1940s 1950s 1960s Major external factors Military–industrialdriven growth Search for production efficiency Science and technology innovations and expansions Market expansion and competition Financial markets and consolidation of ownership in larger businesses Emergence of the Internet and information technology Consolidation of the knowledge-based business Management and translation focus War-driven industrial mass production and focus on improved technology Industrial expansion; shortage of resources (labour and inputs); growth of new manufacturing industries and businesses Extensive introduction of new science and technology, research and development-driven solutions to consumer and industry production needs Market forces shape production; search for new markets; globalisation of commodities 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 Evolutions form data to information focus and allocation and organisation of markets, businesses and people to maximise technology- and information-driven markets 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.
Introduction to Leadership
Industrial Age Industry-wide conformity
Knowledge Age Unique competitive advantage Mass customisation Control of process Integration (cross-function) Continual change (process improvement) Logical–creative thinking Contracted (self-) employment Local-enterprise agreements Career diversification Self-determination Partnership (cooperation) New information class
Mass production Control of people Functional departmentalisation More of the same (vertical progression) Logical–deductive thinking Life-long employment National industrial awards Career progression Paternalism ’Them’ and ‘Us’ (Confrontation) New merchant 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 reordering and renewed production was required) of a non-perishable supermarket product had evolved: from to to to to 4 years 1 year 40 days 4 days 26 hours in 1950 in 1980 in 1993 in 1999 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 Government legislation and policy The shift to Total Quality Service and improvement
Shifting tax base Privatisation trends Continual improvement Flatter organisation Customer focus
Impact on organisations
Global, not local, best practice benchmarks Centralisation of major agencies Staff responsibility End-to-end supply chain solutions Added value
Unit: Lead Transformational Change
systems Global competition with shrinking local markets Industrial relations Customer needs and expectations Budget and finances Technological change
Compulsory competitive tendering for public contracts Growing presence of major corporations and multinationals in regional markets Teamwork Decentralised workplace agreements Increased customer expectations Value offer of brand and life of product Shrinking funding Doing more with less Work practices Cost efficiencies Convergence Rapid innovation cycles Activity-based financial management and improvement Virtual networks Accelerated high speed information exchange and transfer Multi-skilling Compliance (e.g. Health and safety) Satisfying needs Decentralised markets and suppliers
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 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.
Introduction to 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.
Unit: Lead Transformational Change
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 , 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. 2. 3. Does servant leadership overlap with transformational leadership? If the servant leader’s focus is on the followers, is servant leadership more aligned with transactional leadership than transformational leadership? 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?
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.
Introduction to Leadership
Table 3 Transformational leadership styles and behaviours
Style 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 Expresses confidence that goals will be achieved Provides an exciting image of what is essential to consider Takes a stand on controversial issues 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 Helps others to develop their strengths Listens attentively to other’s concerns Promotes self development
Inspirational motivation Inspiring others
Talks optimistically about the future Talks enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished Articulates a compelling vision of the future 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
Intellectual stimulation Stimulating others
Individualise d consideratio ns Coaching and development Idealised attributes Respect trust, and faith
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 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 leadership Transactional leadership… Transformational leadership… builds on man’s [sic] need to get a job done and make a living [is] preoccupied with power and position, politics and perks is mired in daily affairs is short-term and hard data oriented focuses on tactical issues relies on human relations to lubricate human interactions follows and fulfils role expectations by striving to work effectively within current systems supports structures and systems that reinforce the bottom line, maximise efficiency, and guarantee short-term profits builds on man’s [sic] need for meaning is preoccupied with purposes and values, morals, and ethics transcends daily affairs is oriented towards long-term goals without compromising human values and principles focuses more on missions and strategies realises human potential—identifying and developing new talent designs and redesigns jobs to make them meaningful and challenging aligns internal structures and systems to reinforce overarching values and goals.
Unit: Lead Transformational Change
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. 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/article003.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
Introduction to Leadership
participative/coercive influence occurring within situational dimensions that include personal/self, team/group, organisational, and cross-organisational levels.
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). The personal awareness and acumen in the qualities (role, traits, behaviours, competencies,) and style (values, beliefs) necessary to lead in a given context The ability to influence and engage with people (followers, stakeholders, teams, or communities) to gain commitment to an agreed vision and purpose The ability to lead systematic change processes and to set up, manage, implement, standardise, improve and sustain transformation 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
Change Process Mastery
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.
Unit: Lead Transformational Change
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.
Introduction to Leadership
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.