Professional Documents
Culture Documents
New Paradigm of Leadership
New Paradigm of Leadership
New Paradigm of Leadership
https://books.google.com
A NEW PARADIGM OF LEADERSHIP :
An Inquiry Into
Transformational Leadership
VERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
RIVERSIDE
APR 2 4 1996
LIBRARY
OVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS DEF
U.S. DEPOSITORY
Bernard M. Bass
Alexandria , Virginia
Contents
Page
Foreword xi
1. Introduction .1
Empirical Support .. .9
4. Contingencies of Transformational
and Transactional Leadership .53
A Barometer of Transformational/Transactional
Leadership Training ....80
iii
iv A New Paradigm of Leadership
Training in Transformational
and Transactional Leadership .116
9. Prediction of Transformational
and Transactional Leadership .133
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
Figure 4: From Bass , B.M. , & Avolio , B.J. (in press) . Shatter
the glass ceiling: Women may make better managers . Human
Resource Management Journal.
Figure 6: From Avolio , B.J. , & Bass , B.M. ( 1994) . Evaluate the
impact oftransformational leadership training at individual, group,
organizational, and community levels. Final report to the W.K.
Kellogg Foundation , Binghamton University, Binghamton , NY.
Table 1 : From Avolio , B.J. , & Bass , B.M. ( 1991 ) . The full
range of leadership development: Basic and advanced manuals.
Binghamton, NY: Bass , Avolio , & Associates .
vii
viii A New Paradigm of Leadership
Table 7: Data drawn from Avolio , B.J. , & Bass , B.M. ( 1994) .
Evaluate the impact of transformational leadership training at
individual, group, organizational, and community levels . Final
report to the W.K. Kellogg Foundation , Binghamton University,
Binghamton , NY.
We hope that the new ideas in this research will provide new
insights and approaches to all members of the Army's leader devel
opment community and to the scientists who will pick up the chal
lenge to begin a dialog to arrive at better methods for developing
effective leaders in an age of continuing change and information
explosion.
EDGAR M. JOHNSON
Director
xi
Executive Summary
Requirement
Findings
xiii
xiv A New Paradigm of Leadership
Introduction
1
2 A New Paradigm of Leadership
skeptical about the ideals of just causes and patriotic duty may
be maintained to some degree by the " carrot-or- stick" contingent
reinforcement of transactional leadership , it is argued here that
much more will be achieved if transformational leadership is
added to the leadership .
Empirical Research
1. What are the " mechanisms " that lead to greater commit
ment , involvement, loyalty and performance as a consequence of
transformational leadership?
Background
FIGURE 1
Optimal Profile
EFFECTIVE
I's
CR
MBE-A
Y
C
PASSIVE ACTIVE
N
E
U
MBE-P
Q
E
R
F
LF
INEFFECTIVE
FIGURE 2
Suboptimal Profile
EFFECTIVE
l's
CR
MBE-A
Y
C
PASSIVE ACTIVE
N
E
U
Q
MBE- P
E
R
F
LF
INEFFECTIVE
EMPIRICAL SUPPORT
TABLE 1
Participative Directive
Laissez-Faire "Whatever you think is "If my followers need answers
the correct choice is OK to questions , let them find
with me ." the answers themselves."
Management "Let's develop the rules "These are the rules and this
by-Exception together that we will use to is how you have violated
identify mistakes." them. "
Contingent "Let's agree on what has to "If you achieve the objectives
Reward be done and how you will I've set, I will recognize your
be rewarded if you achieve accomplishment with the
the objectives. " following reward ..."
Individualized "What can we do as a group "I will provide the support
Consideration to give each other the neces you need in your efforts to
sary support to develop our develop yourself in the job."
capabilities ?"
Intellectual "Can we try to look at our "You must reexamine the
Stimulation assumptions as a group with assumption that a cold fusion
out being critical of each engine is a physical impos
other's ideas until all assum sibility. Revisit this problem
ptions have been listed?" and question your assumption."
Inspirational "Let's work together to merge "You need to say to yourself
Motivation our aspirations and goals for that every day you are getting
the good of our group." better. You must look at your
progression and continue to
build upon it over time."
Idealized "We can be a winning team "Alea iacta est" (i.e. , "I've
Influence because of our faith in each made the decision to cross the
other. I need your support to Rubicon, so there's no going
achieve our mission." back”) “You must trust me
and my direction to achieve
what we have set out to do.”
Pseudotransformational Leadership
Commitment , Involvement ,
Introduction
17
18 A New Paradigm of Leadership
Gal ( 1987a) pointed out that the nature of wars has changed
in recent years . The U.S. in Vietnam and the Israeli incursion into
Lebanon in 1982 were cited as examples of wars lacking the pub
lic consensus about goals , lack of civilian support for political
and military decisions which undermined the strength of the
soldiers ' and commanders ' beliefs . This was in contrast to public
support in earlier wars . Troops in these earlier wars did not ques
tion their legitimacy and rarely disobeyed orders , assaulted
officers at the battle front, or engaged in protests for ideological
reasons as occurred in Vietnam and Lebanon .
Commitment, Involvement , Loyalty and Performance 19
Facets of Commitment
menting the professionals ' values and norms , making them will
ing to devote themselves , or even sacrifice themselves , to attain
the goals . Transformational leaders ' commitment additionally
includes the feelings of responsibility for personnel and task
which responsibility derives from the leader's own conscience
and internalized values . When the three modes of commitment
are out of alignment , the leader and the soldier may fall back on
obedience , serve their most important commitment or rationalize
their actions as matters of obedience and professional loyalties
(Gal , 1985 ) .
A Charismatic-Inspirational Approach
the leader can continue to induce fear and promise in the follow
ers either directly or as a consequence of conditioning. Further
more, when commitment is a consequence of the power of a
coercive leader, it may generate hostility, withdrawal and over
reaction (Bass , 1960).
Transference
Disinhibition
Moral Commitment
Transformational Leadership
29
30 A New Paradigm of Leadership
Combat
Handling Conflict
TABLE 2
Stress Burnout
N = 285 N = 296
Transformational
Charisma -.18* -.52 *
Individualized consideration -.18 * -.46 *
Intellectual stimulation -.11 -.36 *
Transactional
Contingent rewards -.18* -.43 *
Management-by- exception .09 .22 *
r= 0.14 * , p <.01
Contingencies of Transformational
Introduction
53
54 A New Paradigm of Leadership
TABLE 3
Environmental
Stable High Low
Unstable Low High
Political/Legal High Low
Not Political/Legal Low High
Collectivistic Low High
Individualistic High Low
Organizational
Consistent With Cultural Values Low High
Inconsistent With Cultural Values High Low
Mechanistic High Low
Organic Low High
Reactive Processing High Low
Proactive Monitoring Low High
Hierarchical Authority High Low
Dispersed Authority Low High
Centralized Decision- Making High Low
Decentralized Decision-Making Low High
Vertical Communication High Low
Lateral Communication Low High
Task Characteristics
Standardized , Routine High Low
Complex, Changing Low High
Well-Defined Performance High Low
Poorly-Defined Performance Low High
Goals
Ambiguous Performance Low High
Extrinsic Rewards High Low
Intrinsic Rewards Low High
Leader-Subordinate Relations
Leader Power Greater Low High
Follower Power Greater High Low
Leader Information Greater Low High
Follower Information Greater HIgh Low
TABLE 4
Charisma
Inspirational Motivation
Reinforcements/Tasks/Goals : Ambiguous
Subordinates : Inexperienced
Leader: Articulate , flexible , emotional, perspicacious
Intellectual Stimulation
Reinforcements/Tasks/Goals: Problems to be solved
Subordinates : Experienced, high
Leader: Rational , unconventional , perspicacious
Individualized Consideration
Reinforcements/Tasks/Goals : Unmet individual needs
Subordinates : Inexperienced , career- oriented
Leader: Caring , empathic , relations - oriented
Contingent Reinforcement
Reinforcements/Tasks /Goals : Controlled by leader
Subordinates : Inexperienced , materialistic , not idealistic
Leader: Materialistic , conventional , not idealistic
Active Management-by-Exception
Passive Management-by-Exception
Reinforcements/Tasks/Goals : Uncontrolled , controlled
by organization
Subordinates : Experienced
Leader: Reactive
Laissez-Faire
Reinforcements/Tasks/Goals : Unimportant
Subordinates : Experienced
Leader: Distracted , indifferent , uncaring
Environmental Contingencies
TABLE 5
Stable Unstable
Transformational Leadership
Charisma 2.2 2.6
Inspirational Motivation 1.7 2.1
Intellectual Stimulation 2.0 2.4
Individualized Consideration 2.3 2.8
Transactional Leadership
Organizational Characteristics
TABLE 6
Transactional
Contingent Reward .46 .20 .46 .50 .46 .58
Management-by-Exception
Active .26 -.27 Differences Differences
Not Significant Not Significant
Passive .32 -.07 Differences Differences
Not Significant Not Significant
Leader-Subordinate Relations
Transactional Transformational
Plans Envisions
Controls Empowers
Contingencies of Transformational/ Transactional Leadership 67
Organizational Culture
Introduction
69
70 A New Paradigm of Leadership
Transactional Model
Transformational Model
FIGURE 3
-14 to -6 -5 to +5 +6 to +14
Organizational Types
A BAROMETER OF TRANSFORMATIONAL/
TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP TRAINING
TABLE 7
Program Subordinates
Participants ofParticipants
N = 130 N = 877
Amount of
Quality Improvement
Introduction
81
82 A New Paradigm of Leadership
EVIDENCE OF DIFFERENCES IN
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
Anecdotal Evidence
the ratings were selected randomly. For the third study, 154
female and 131 male focal leaders were drawn from not- for- profit
health care , social service , government , and other local agencies
as well as small businesses . These focal leaders selected their
own 532 females and 381 males as raters before participating in a
leadership training program for the leaders . In the fourth study,
the subjects - 10 female and 36 male leaders — were superinten
dents , principals and staff from public school districts who had
asked 81 female and 50 male direct reports to rate their leadership
styles .
FIGURE 4
(STUDY 1 )
Inspirational Motivation 21
Intellectual Stimulation 19
.41
Individualized Consideration
TRANSACTIONAL
OUTCOMES
Effectiveness .25
3:3
Satisfaction
FIGURE 5
(STUDY 2 )
TRANSFORMATIONAL
.45
Charisma
TRANSACTIONAL
.19
Contingent Reward
Implications of Transformational
Leadership for
Organizational Policies
Introduction
91
92 A New Paradigm of Leadership
Transformational Leadership
105
106 A New Paradigm of Leadership
Intuitive-Empirical Analysis
Implications
Evaluation of Counseling
before the first day of the Basic Training Workshop . The surveys
are distributed to followers (and superiors) by a neutral party
and returned anonymously. If circumstances preclude advanced
distribution of the MLQ, self-ratings are completed at the start of
training. Then participants near the end of the Basic Training or
personnel staff are asked to distribute questionnaires to the follow
ers of the participants for completion and anonymous return .
such. But, what slowly emerges is that each cluster is one of the
components of the model of the full range of transformational
transactional leadership introduced in Section 1 , with most attrib
utes collecting in the transformational clusters , a few in the
transactional clusters , and none in laissez-faire leadership . The
conclusion is reached that the image of an ideal leader that one car
ries around in one's head , which is linked to one's implicit theory
of leadership , is mainly transformational leadership . And so the
question is posed , if this is true , then why don't we do more of it?
Advanced Workshop
Followups
Evaluation of Training
FIGURE 6
II IM IS IC CR MBE LF
0.4
0.23 0.26
0.2
0.06 0.07
0.02 0.01 Il- Idealized Influence
0 IM -Inspirational Motivation
IS-Intellectual Stimulation
IC- Individualized Consideration
-0.2 CR Contingent Reward
MBE Management-By- Exception
LF -Laissez-faire
-0.4
-0.6
-0.59
-.08
Built into FRLP were several surveys whose data were fed
back to the participants and also provided normative information
about the constraints on learning and applying transformational
leadership . For example , the 489 participants hesitated to dele
gate if they were women working in government agencies (sur
veyed at the beginning of Module 6) . Generally, hesitation to
delegate ( and to be more individually considerate) was a matter
of the tendency of the leaders to be task oriented rather than
oriented to the development of their subordinates . The leaders
hesitated to delegate because the task was too critical . It took too
long to train the subordinate . The leader could do the job faster
and better. The half of the sample of 489 who were men and
who completed Module 11 saw many more stumbling blocks
to intellectual stimulation than did the women participants .
Those from the industrial sector appeared more prone to such
stumbling blocks .
FIGURE 7
II IM IS IC CR MBE LF
0.4
0.26
0.2 -0.14
0.13
II- Idealized Influence
0 IM - Inspirational Motivation
0
-0.01 IS- Intellectual Stimulation
IC - Individualized Consideration
-0.12 CR Contingent Reward
-0.2 MBE - Management- By-Exception
LF - Laissez-faire
-0.4
-0.53
-0.6
People are losing their jobs ... why should I expect them to take
risks and put their job on the line?
Development and Training in Transformational Leadership 129
Other Programs
Transactional Leadership
Introduction
133
134 A New Paradigm of Leadership
TABLE 8
Rate-Rerate Rate-Rerate
Self-Ratings Subordinate Ratings
Transformational
Idealized Influence
(Charismatic Behavior) .60 .79
Inspirational Motivation .45 .66
Intellectual Stimulation .61 .66
Individualized Consideration .70 .77
Transactional
between the sets , each of three items , dealing with the seven
components of the model of transactional and transformational
leadership correlated .35 on the average with the same compo
nents of the MLQ as obtained from the participants ' subordinates
back on the job prior to beginning the Basic Program .
TABLE 9
Esteem
(N = 180-191 ) (N = 130-152)
MLQ
*p < .01
TABLE 10
MLQ Scores
Charismatic Behavior .37* .38*
Inspirational Motivation .28 * .25*
Intellectual Stimulation .34* .31 *
Individualized Consideration .24 * .21 *
Contingent Reward .24 * .20*
Management-by-Exception - Active .28* .22*
Management-by-Exception - Passive -.04 * -.05 *
Laissez-faire -.31 * -.05 *
* p < .01
The Argument
(p< .05 ) with Superstitious Thinking, -.26 (p < .05 ) with Negative
Thinking, and -.26 (p < .05) , and .22 ( p < .05) with Naive Optimism .
Patterns of Traits
Transformational / Transactional
Leadership
Introduction
145
146 A New Paradigm of Leadership
Sources of Power
Table 11
Passive
Status Differences Transformational Contingent Active Management
Reflected in: Leadership Reward Management by-Exception
**
* p < .05 ; p < .01
TABLE 12
Transformational
Charisma 2.40 1.97 2.18
Inspirational Leadership 2.26 2.30 2.27
Intellectual Stimulation 2.47 2.22 2.37
Individualized Consideration 2.50 2.30
Transactional
Nonleadership
Laissez-Faire 1.31 1.37
(Adapted from Yammarino & Bass , 1990a; and Deluga, 1990 , 1991 )
(1.61 for the junior officers vs. 1.34 for the senior officers) , con
tingent rewards were greater ( 2.38 for the junior officers vs. 2.17
and 2.08 for the senior officers) , and active management-by
exception was greater ( 2.65 vs. 2.48 and 2.48) . However, passive
management-by -exception appeared possibly a bit higher among
the senior officers ( 2.26 for the junior officers vs. 2.37 and 2.45 for
the senior officers ) .
Civilian Results
TABLE 13
First-Level Second-Level
Supervisors Managers
Transformational
Charismatic Behavior 2.60 2.82
Intellectual Stimulation 2.54 2.70
Individualized Consideration 2.54 2.77
Transactional
Contingent Reward 1.91 2.32
Management -by-Exception 2.02 1.95
TABLE 14
MLQ Scale
Managers Executives
(N = 60-66) (N = 62-66)
Transformational
Charisma 2.34 2.30
Inspirational Motivation 2.18 2.19
Intellectual Stimulation 2.69 2.60
Individualized Consideration 2.73 2.75
Transactional
Meta-Analytic Results
means for the upper and lower levels are shown in Table 15 .
While no mean differences in charisma and contingent reward
appeared between leaders at the upper and lower organizational
levels , it can be seen that leaders at the lower level were judged
by their followers as somewhat more intellectually stimulating
( 2.51 vs. 2.41 ) and individually considerate ( 2.59 vs. 2.41 ) than
their upper level counterparts . However, they were also seen as
practicing considerably more management-by- exception (2.45
vs. 2.11 ) .
TABLE 15
Lower Higher
Empowerment and
Introduction
Factorial Independence
157
158 A New Paradigm of Leadership
Military Examples
• Behavior-Focused Strategies
•
Cognitive-Focused Strategies
a sense of competence ,
a sense of purpose .
mental imagery,
internal self-talk.
Empowerment and Laissez-Faire Leadership 161
TABLE 16
TABLE 17
TABLE 18
Subordinate Reaction
Sense of
**
* p < .05 ; p < .01
13. Expect that it may initially take longer for the follower
to complete the task than if you did it yourself.
168 A New Paradigm of Leadership
20. Try not to delegate tasks too often that you would
not enjoy performing yourself.
Value of Empowerment
LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP
Examples
173
174 A New Paradigm of Leadership
TABLE 19
Relationship
oriented,
Supportive, Task-oriented,
Substitutes and Other People- Instrumental
centered Job-centered Contingent Contingent
Potential Moderators Leadership: Leadership: Rewards Discipline
A. Subordinate Characteristics
× × ×
and knowledge X
2. Need for independence X X X X
3. "Professional " orientation X X X X
4. Indifference toward
organizational rewards X X X X
B. Task Characteristics
C. Organizational Characteristics
8. Organizational formalization
(explicit goals and areas of
responsibility) X
9. Organizational inflexibility
(rigid, unbending rules and
procedures) X
10. Highly-specified and active
advisory and staff functions X
11. Closely knit, cohesive
work groups X X X X
12. Organizational rewards
not within the leader's control X X X
13. Spatial distance between
supervisor and subordinate X X X X
TABLE 20
Professional Orientation
4. I am a member of a professional group whose standards and values
guide me in my work.
5. I am a member of a professional organization with which I
strongly identify.
6. I am a member of a professional organization which has a code
of ethics that I believe is important to follow.
7. I cannot get very enthused about the rewards offered in
this organization .
8. This organization offers attractive opportunities to its employees . (R)
9. I don't feel that the rewards I receive in this organization are worth
very much.
Table 20 (Continued)
Organizational Formalization
22. My job responsibilities are clearly specified in writing.
23. Written schedules, programs, and work specifications are available
to guide me in my work.
24. My duties, authority, and accountability are documented in policies ,
procedures , or job descriptions .
25. Written rules and guidelines do not exist to direct my work efforts . (R)
Organizational Inflexibility
26. In this organization , violations of rules and procedures are not
tolerated .
27. In this organization anytime there is a policy in writing that fits some
situation, everybody has to follow that policy very strictly.
28. The policies and rules in this organization are followed to the letter.
29. This organization takes a relaxed approach to rules and policies. (R)
Conclusions
Introduction
185
186 A New Paradigm of Leadership
MEASUREMENT OF TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADERSHIP AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP
Levels of Leadership
On Charisma
Training
Contingencies
References
201
202 A New Paradigm of Leadership
Avolio , B.J. , & Bass , B.M. ( 1991 ) . The full range ofleadership
development: Basic and advanced manuals. Binghamton , NY:
Bass , Avolio , & Associates .
Bass , B.M. , & Avolio , B.J. ( 1990b) . Manual for the multifactor
leadership questionnaire . Palo Alto , CA: Consulting Psychologist
Press .
Bass , B.M. , & Avolio , B.J. ( in press ) . Shatter the glass ceiling :
Women may make better managers . Human Resources Manage
ment Journal.
Bass , B.M. , Avolio , B.J. , & Atwater, L. (in press ) . The transfor
mational and transactional leadership of men and women. Inter
national Review ofApplied Psychology.
Burns , J.M. ( 1956 ) . Roosevelt: The lion and the fox. New
York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
Caro , R.A. ( 1974) . The power broker: Robert Moses and the
fall ofNew York. New York: Knopf.
Hater, J.J. , & Bass , B.M. ( 1988 ) . Superiors ' evaluations and
subordinates ' perceptions of transformational and transactional
leadership . Journal of Applied Psychology, 73( 1 ) , 695-702 .
Lee , S.M. , Yoo , S.J. , & Lee , T.M. ( 1991 ) . Korean chaebols :
Corporate values and strategies . Organizational Dynamics, 19
(Winter) , 36-50 .
March, J.G. , & Olsen , J.P. (Eds . ) ( 1976) . Ambiguity and choice
in organizations. Bergen , Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
Nelson , J.E. ( 1978 ) . Child care crises and the role of the
supervisor. Child Care Quarterly, 7, 318-326 .
Niehoff, B.F. , Eng , C.A. , & Grover, R.A. ( 1990) . The impact of
top management actions on employee attitudes and perceptions .
Group and Organization Studies, 15, 337-352 .