Leadership Models - Research Paper Example

Introduction

Jung & Avolio (2000) and Suandi (2013) explain that transactional leadership (TSL) is a convention model that entails setting explicit work-related goals and placing a reward for successfully performing the expected result. Zhu et al. (2012) explain that a transactional leader is not concerned with proactive close cooperation with team members. Obeidat & Tarhini (2016) and Pillai et al. (1999) affirm that the transactional leader uses leadership power to punish or reward subjects for enforcing the attainment of specific goals and objectives. The model does not place effort in evaluating team characteristics, team abilities and limitations, and the team fit with goals. Popli & Rizvi (2015), Washington (2007) and more (2014) describe TSL as a model that conforms to the description in three forms, which are Laissez-faire, management by exception and contingent reward.

The latter represents an exchange process where the team's efforts receive tips. Zareen et al. (2015) argue that a TSL leader leverages the prize to obtain an agreement with followers on tasks that must attain achievement and the rewards given. Rowold (2014) explains that the management by exception model describes corrective criticism, negative feedback and reinforcement. The model describes leadership that focuses on violating rules or the inability to achieve the set goals to enforce disciplinary action. Groves & LaRocca (2011), and Howell & Avolio (1993) explain Laissez-faire is a model where leaders show no contribution to attaining goals.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Fernandes & Awamleh (2004), Howell & Hall (1999), and Jangsiriwattana (2019) provide evidence that TSL, TFL and organization performance have a positive correlation. McCleskey (2014) and Nguni et al. (2006) explain variation in the extent of correlation in those replication elements. Mohamed et al. (2011) assert that long term maintenance of good performance is weaker in TSL. The literature review lacks a strong criticism against the argument that TSL exhibits a weaker correlation to organization performance (Ma & Jiang, 2018). The literature reviewed reveled a gap in defining the most effective leadership style between TFL and TSL.

Perceptions of Organization Performance

Organizational performance is a common subject of interest in all industries. Rowold & Rohmann (2009), and Ojokuku et al. (2012) explain that organizational performance measurement is diverse, because organizations differ in objectives and goals. However, employee perception of how their organization is performing is a factor that most literature reviewed used. Birasnav (2014) and Boerner, Eisenbeiss & Griesser (2007) affirm that leaders that create relationships with team members create loyalty, trust and mutual commitment. Shuck & Herd (2012), and Yahaya & Ebrahim (2016) explain that leaders that supply benefits, either tangible or intangible, receive a positive response. Birasnav (2014) and Ejere & Ugochukwu (2013) indicate evidence of positive relationships between TFL and organizational performance measures, such as commitment to organization and trust in the organization.

Diverse studies have been undertaken in the past to assess the relationship between transformational leadership and transactional leadership in shaping the perception of the employees on the organization performance. Jangrisiwattana (2019), has examined the relationship of the two leadership styles in determining how they influence perception of organization performance in the context of Thai educational setup. The study revealed that transformational leadership style influence on workers’ perception on organizational performance is stronger than transactional leadership style. According to Jangrisiwattana (2019), transformational leadership has a strong influence in shaping employees’ perception on creative, task and contextual performance. Jangrisiwattana (2019), noted from the data collected that transactional leadership style had small effect in influencing employees’ perception of an organization’s performance. Thus, the findings of the study indicate relationship between transformational leadership and transactional leadership in influencing employees’ perception on organizational performance is positive but weak.

Aarons (2006), investigated the relationship between transactional leadership and transformational leader in shaping workers’ attitude in mental health providers on performance to accept innovations and organizational changes. The findings of the study indicated that workers’ attitude of accepting and adopting evidence-based practices were positive in both transactional and transformational leadership styles. Aarons (2006) findings differs with that of Jangrisiwattana in supporting that transformational and transactional leaderships are strongly related in shaping the perception of organization’s performance. However, it is noteworthy that both studies give a positive relationship but with differing margins.

Lo, Songan & Ramayah (2010), have also conducted a study in Malaysia to evaluate the relationship between transactional and transformational leadership styles. The three researchers base their argument on that employees’ perception on performance of an organization is demonstrated by their commitment to support the leader. The authors view commitment as indication that workers are satisfied on the performance of the organization in realizing its core objectives and their interests. Accordingly, Lo, Songan & Ramayah (2010) observe that transformational and transactional leadership styles are positively correlated in shaping the workers’ perception on the performance of an organization. According to the authors, employees in organizations lead through both transformational and transactional leadership styles showed commitment to stay and support the management depending on the extent they perceived set targets have been realized (Prasad & Junni, 2016).

Impact

Fernades & Awamleh (2011), have investigated the impact of transformational and transactional leadership approaches on employees’ self-perceived performance in Arab United Emirates (UAE) foreign companies. The self-perceived performance determining if the workers regard the organization performance as their personal contribution or leadership influence. The study found that transformational leadership did not stimulate self-perceived contribution to organization performance (Fernades & Awamleh, 2011). The respondents in the study indicated that the self-satisfaction they gained from the transformational leadership was responsible for organization performance since it motivated their productivity and commitment (Edelbroek, Peters, & Blomme, 2019). Similarly, respondents from companies led by transactional did not relate their self-contribution to organization performance. The reward and recognition from their leadership determined their morale and commitment in contribution to organization’s performance (Fernades & Awamleh, 2011). Consequently, the study demonstrates that there is a relationship between transformational and transactional leadership in determining employees’ perception on the organizational performance.

Additionally, Fok-Yew (2015) has undertaken an extensive investigation to determine the relationship between the two leadership styles followers’ task performance and work characteristic. The study is crucial since it entails understanding the effect of each leadership style in influencing how employees perceive performance of their tasks and quality of work they offer. The study indicates that task performance in the various organizations targeted was positively related to transformational leadership due to work satisfaction it contributed (Fok-Yew, 2015). Similarly, Fok-Yew (2015) observed that transactional influenced to positive task performance due to recognition and appreciation for effort shown by individuals and teams. The findings of the study indicate that transactional and transformational leadership styles are positively related in influencing workers’ performance. However, Fok-Yew (2015) observed the relationship between task performance and transformational leadership was stronger than in transactional leadership.

In a study conducted by Sirin, Aydin & Bilir (2018), depicts that members’ perception on organization performance differ depending on the leadership style employed. The study was based on application of transactional and transformational leadership styles by sport and physical education teachers in shaping students’ perception on expected performance. The study indicates students led through transactional leadership style perceived performance from the rewards that have realized (Sirin, Aydin, & Bilir, 2018). Thus, team will undertake a task with the objective of earning a reward to measure if they have performed as expected. In contrast, members under transformational leadership style perceived performance based on progress realized from past performances (Sirin, Aydin, & Bilir, 2018). The extent to which the team or an individual is making progress or failing will be employed in determining if performance is as expected from leadership offered. Consequently, the teams will employ diverse approaches in assessing their performance based on the perception instilled by the leadership style.

Conclusion

The various empirical studies that have been reviewed indicate that transformational leadership and transactional leadership approach are related in influencing the workers’ perception on organization’s performance. This aspect implies that employees perceive if an organization is performing as expected depending on the culture and spirit that has been instilled through the leadership style employed.