RUNNING HEAD: Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select 1 Leadership Models

Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models Louise Courtemanche March 16, 2008

Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models! Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models The leadership phenomenon has been studied and discussed for many centuries. Throughout the ages, scholars and practitioners have pondered all aspects of leadership, from personality traits to exhibited behaviors, from authoritative styles to empowerment and

creativity. The ability for a leader to build a dynamic organization that will thrive and prosper in an increasingly complex and changing world will directly influence an organizations longevity. As Collins and Porras (2003) indicated, effective leaders focus primarily on developing the skills of their followers, and putting the right tools in place to ensure the organization will succeed well beyond the leaders tenure. The recent scandals such as the trading debacle of Socit Gnrale in France, or the now classic case of Enron have turned the spotlight on leaders and the practice of leadership. Perhaps especially in times of turmoil, the leader is expected to steer the organization in the right direction, avoiding obstacles while inspiring trust and confidence. But what kind of leadership and leaders are needed to accomplish this feat? In this paper, four leadership models are examined: situational, transactional, transformational, and servant. Each model will be discussed separately, followed by a discussion of their differences and similarities. The analytical perspective adopted will focus on the needs of the practicing leader, in addressing contemporary leadership issues and challenges in the course of his or her tenure. Leadership Models Situational Leadership Hersey and Blanchard (2003) developed the situational theory in the late seventies. McFadden, Eakim, Beck-Frazier, and McGlone (2005) classified this model in the group of contingency theories, which emphasize the importance and influence of internal and external

Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models!

situational factors on leadership effectiveness. In order to be successful, leaders must adapt their behavior to take these factors into consideration. Hersey and Blanchards (2003) situational theory focuses on how leaders behave in relation to their followers, while adapting to situational factors. In this model, the situational factors refer for example to the leaders personality, the followers expectations, levels of individual competency, the organizations structure, and the pressures of time. As described in Hersey and Blanchard (2003), the model is projected into two behavioral dimensions that the leader can display depending on the situation. The first dimension relates to task behavior, i.e. the level of task organization and control the leader exerts on the followers. The second dimension refers to relationship behavior, i.e. the amount of communication and support directed towards the followers. The leader will select the appropriate level within these two dimensions depending on follower readiness, described as the extent to which a follower demonstrates the ability [knowledge, experience, skills] and willingness [confidence, commitment, motivation] to accomplish a specific task (Hersey &Blanchard, 2003, p. 114). The leaders objective, in adapting his or her leadership style, is to influence the followers and accomplish the set tasks and goals. Transactional Leadership Burns (in Judge & Piccolo, 2004) developed the theory of transactional leadership in the late seventies. McFadden, Eakim, Beck-Frazier, and McGlone (2005) classified this model in the group of social exchange theories, a sub-set of the power and influence theories (McFadden et al., 2005, para. 5). Social exchange theories are characterized by a reciprocal relationship between the leader and the group in exchange for the groups approval and compliance with the

Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models! leaders demands (McFadden et al., para. 5). According to Hood (2003,) transactional leadership is based on bureaucratic authority and legitimate power in the organization (p. 264). As described in Judge and Piccolo (2004), the transactional leadership model reveals three dimensions of leader behavior: contingent reward, management by exception active, and management by exception passive. Contingent reward refers to the leaders ability to specify expectations and determine rewards for met expectations. Management by exception is the level of corrective action the leader takes as per the results of the transaction. When choosing active management, the leader will monitor the followers and take corrective action before the consequences of the followers behavior become unmanageable. In passive management, the leader will postpone action until problems arise. Transformational Leadership Positioning the transactional model at one end of the continuum, Burns (in Judge & Piccolo, 2004) also developed the transformational leadership theory, placing it at the other end. Burns defined the transformational leader as one who inspires followers to identify with a vision that reaches beyond their own immediate self-interest (Judge & Bono, 2000, p. 751). Bass (in Judge & Piccolo, 2004 expanded on this model and suggested four leader behavior

dimensions: idealized influence (or charisma), inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (p.755). Judge and Piccolo (2004) described these dimensions as follows. Idealized influence is the way a leader appeals to his or her followers emotional side through admirable behavior. The leader will inspire confidence and trust and followers will identify with him or her. Through inspirational motivation, the leader will communicate a vision and inspire followers to achieve more than what is expected of them. Intellectual stimulation will solicit the followers input, encourage them to question assumptions, and think creatively.

Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models! Through individualized consideration, the leader will demonstrate genuine concern for every follower and support them as needed. Servant Leadership Also in the late seventies, Greenleaf (2003) identified the concept of servant leadership, in which the leader is a servant to others. In this model, the leader is barely visible, acting as a facilitator to ensure the personal development and well being of his or her followers (Smith, Montagno & Kuzmenko, 2004). Although difficult to categorize, Smith, Montagno and Kuzmenko (2004) and Humphreys (2005) draw a parallel between the servant model and charismatic leadership theories. Smith et al. (2004) also refer to Laubs research that identified six dimensions for the model: valuing people, developing people, building community, displaying authenticity, providing leadership, and sharing leadership. The following section highlights the differences and similarities in the models exposed. Leadership Models: A Comparison

Intuitively it would seem logical that different situations and contexts would benefit from different leadership approaches. However, practitioners rarely have time to sift through the large amount of leadership literature and identify a model that would suit their organization or a particular situation. The appendix summarizes some of the attributes that characterize the leadership models presented. This appendix is not meant to be exhaustive but rather it is designed for practitioners as a quick guide to compare key aspects of the leadership models that are contrasted in this section. Model Focus and Leader Behaviors The situational and transactional models are similar in that they both focus on managerial aspects aiming to get things done. The situational model allows for adjustments in the leaders

Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models! adopted position between task and relationship behaviors, according to the situation. The transactional model will determine exchanges or transactions that will be closely monitored, corrected if necessary and rewarded. In both cases, equilibrium is sought to achieve the

prescribed goals. These models present a relatively short-term perspective, focusing primarily on the achievement of operational goals. The transformational and servant models adopt a longer term outlook. While both focus on the development of their followers, they differ in their reason for doing so. The transformational model places the good of the organization above everything, and leaders will adopt behaviors that will ensure its timelessness. Leaders will form a vision, inspire and empower followers to achieve more than what is expected of them. The servant model places the good of the individuals above everything, including the organization, and leaders will exhibit behaviors that will favor the followers welfare (Smith, Montagno & Kuzmenko, 2004). Leaders will aim to perpetuate the model by forming new servant leaders. Motivation While not the only factor, the leaders motivational attitudes will influence the type of models favored in the leaders respective organizations. Hood (2003) claimed that the transformational and servant theories support values that are rooted in the leaders character. Although she did not extend this affirmation to the transactional model, it could also be relevant. Kanungo (2001) examined the transactional and transformational leaders motives, stating that the transactional leader demonstrates mutual altruistic motives (p. 260), while the transformational leader shows genuine or moral altruism (p. 261). Smith, Montagno and Kuzmenko (2004) indicated that the servant leaders motive stemmed from an underlying attitude of egalitarianism (p. 86). Referring to the transformational and servant models, they

Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models! contended the leaders motivation for behaving is a critical distinction between the two theories (Smith, Montagno & Kuzmenko, 2004, p.85). Effect of Context In their comparison of the transformational and servant leadership models, Smith, Montagno and Kuzmenko (2004) examined the role of context in the efficiency of the models.

Both theories are considered by many researchers to be universal, applicable in any situation, but Smith et al. (2004) contended that because of the leaders very different motivational base, the models might not be successful in every context. Their findings are particularly interesting because they confirmed what practitioners had already intuited and experienced with regard to the context, and they attempted to provide an explanation for this variation. Seeking to validate Smith, Montagno and Kuzmenkos (2004) conclusions regarding context, Humphreys (2005) used a historical approach to evaluate the implications of context in the effectiveness of the transformational and servant leadership models. In two similar military crisis situations, he compared both leader behaviors, transformational and servant, and assessed the outcomes. He was able to corroborate the findings of Smith et al., confirming that in a fast changing environment, transformational behavior will be more successful, while the servant behavior will flourish in a more stable, stationary environment. Augmentation effect An important contribution to the transactional-transformational models was the concept of augmentation that Bass identified. He found that the best leaders are both transactional and transformational (Judge & Piccolo, 2004, p. 755), building the relationship with their followers first through the transactional model then, once the objectives have been reached, encourage them to move beyond the basic expectations with the introduction of the transformational model.

Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models! This contribution encourages scholars and practitioners to permeate the models borders and explore the juxtaposition and possible overlapping of various theories, according to

organizational situations and context. The attributes of the models presented and the possibilities offered by the concept of augmentation will help practitioners in their quest for the most appropriate model. Addressing Contemporary Leadership Issues and Challenges Although every leadership model discussed in this essay would probably cater to some aspect of the organization at one time or another, practitioners would benefit from some indication as to which leadership model to favor in dealing with certain contemporary leadership challenges. This section addresses some of these issues and suggests the most relevant model. Rapidly Changing Global Environment Perhaps the most difficult challenge for companies and organizations today resides in the highly dynamic, increasingly global environment. Many authors agree (Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Smith, Montagno, & Kuzmenko, 2004; Humphreys, 2005) that the transformational model is very effective in a quickly changing environment. The ability for the leader to form a vision, motivate, and empower his followers to achieve organizational goals beyond basic expectations is the key to a rapid adaptation. As each individual is mentored and given the opportunity to develop, new ideas will emerge, propelling the organization forward. In this context, the servant model would not be appropriate due to its lack of dynamism, and longer decision-making process that tends to favor a consensus. Increased Diversity A global environment also implies increased diversity of people within a same organization or partner network. This diversity can include for example, different cultural origins

Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models! or varying technical skills. Depending on the followers levels of competence, motivation and understanding of their leaders expectations, a leader might move through various models as needed. The situational and transactional models will give both the leader and the followers a basis from which to reach an understanding about expectations and organizational goals. Afterwards, the leader might choose the transformational model. As per Bass (in Judge & Piccolo, 2004), the transformational model augmented or added to the transactional model. Sustainability Especially since the Enron scandal, building sustainable organizations has been at the forefront of discussions among scholars and practitioners. In addition, shareholders and stakeholders have become weary of the short-term orientation many organizations have favored in the past. If a long-term approach is encouraged, the transformational and in some cases, the servant models should be considered, rather than shorter term orientation models such as the transactional model. The servant model is most successful in a static or slowly changing environment (Humphreys, 2005) therefore, the type of organization and its industry should be carefully evaluated. Otherwise, the transformational model, favoring the organizations survival could be considered. Ethical Behavior Closely related to the sustainability challenge, the question of ethical behavior reveals heightened concern among stakeholders and shareholders. Considering that the transformational

and servant models are influenced by the leaders highly moral set of values, these models would tend to limit probability that leaders will seek personal gain or get involved in scandalous situations. In these models, the good of the organization and of others is placed above self.

Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models! Conclusion

10

Practitioners will appreciate firsthand the challenges of leading an organization in the 21st century. Abundant research and case studies documenting the best leadership models is available but leaders might not find the time to peruse every scholarly book or article. This essay has contrasted four leadership models, situational, transactional, transformational, and servant, suggesting a useful approach to address some of the many current leadership challenges. Practitioners should retain two important aspects related to the use of leadership models. First, leadership models provide guidance and should be viewed as dynamic where the various model dimensions will be emphasized depending on the situation and context. Second, more than one model can be used at the same time or in rapid succession within an organizational structure, again depending on the situation and context. An effective leader, a great leader will be able to adapt his or her style of leadership to overcome challenges and steer the organization into the future.

Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models!

11

Appendix A: Comparison of the Situational, Transactional, Transformational and Servant Leadership Models
Leadership Models Attributes Initial Scholar(s) and period Group of Theories Model Focus Model Dimensions Situational Hersey and Blanchard (70s) Contingency Transactional Burns (70s) Power and Influence : Social Exchange Focus on managerial aspects - Contingent reward - Management by exception (active) - Management by exception (passive) Transformational Burns (70s) Bass (80s) Power and Influence : Social exchange Charismatic Focus on developing follower into leader - Idealized influence - Inspirational motivation - Intellectual stimulation - Individualized consideration Servant Greenleaf (70s) Charismatic

Focus on managerial aspects - Two dimensions: Task and relationship oriented behaviors - Follower readiness (ability and willingness)

Focus on serving followers -People valuation -People Development -Community building -Authenticity display -Providing leadership -Sharing leadership Egalitarianism Altruism Others

Leader Motivation (Kanungo) Leader Orientation Leader Goal

Not reported Implied: Utilitarian Not reported Implied: Self Influence followers to accomplish a task or objective

Utilitarian Mutual Altruism Self and Others Seek group approval and compliance with demands

Genuine Moral Altruism Others

Organizational Serve others survival in a first, lead by complex external accident environment Leader Will adapt leadership Will set up transactions Will form vision, Will help others Behaviors style to situation with rewards and inspire and become servants punishments to achieve empower followers organizational goals to achieve more than what is expected Note: The appendix is discussed in the text with appropriate referencing which has been omitted here for the sake of legibility.

Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models! References

12

Collins, J. C., Porras, J. I. (2003). Clock building, not time telling. In The Jossey-Bass Business and Management Series (Series Ed.), Business Leadership: a Jossey-Bass Reader (1st ed., pp. 373-403). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Greenleaf, R. K. (2003). The servant as leader. In The Jossey-Bass Business and Management Series (Series Ed.), Business Leadership: a Jossey-Bass Reader (1st ed., pp. 117-136). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (2003). Situational leadership. In The Jossey-Bass Business and Management Series (Series Ed.), Business Leadership: a Jossey-Bass Reader (1st ed., pp. 111-116). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hood, J. (2003). The relationship of leadership style and CEO values to ethical practices in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(4), 263-273. Humphreys, J. H. (2005). Contextual implications for transformational and servant leadership. A historical investigation. Management Decisions, 43(10), 1410-1431. Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2000). Five-factor model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 751-765. Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A metaanalytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 755-768. Kanungo, R. N. (2001). Ethical values of transactional and transformational leaders. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 18(4), 257-265. McFadden, C., Eakin, R., Beck-Frazier, S., & McGlone, J. (2005). Major approaches to the study of leadership. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 9(2), 71-76.

Contemporary Leadership Challenges: A Comparison of Select Leadership Models! 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.

13