The paper "Transformational Leadership and Leader Moral Orientation" is an outstanding example of management coursework. It has been pointed out that recent decades have seen increased attention to the connection between leadership and ethics. This is best epitomized by studies in the past which have made extensive efforts to examine the linkage between moral reasoning and transformational leadership. It has been pointed out that there is some sought of difference in regard to the ethical basics of transformational and transactional leadership. This is founded on the fact that despite both of these styles of leadership possessing apparent philosophical elements and basics, there is a divergence in their precise nature.
This is because the ethical issues which are salient in the wider paradigm of transformational leadership are those which portray a concept of self that is connected and the moral compulsions of an individual are founded in the perception of an individual in the wider society. These qualities are principle to the transformational style of leadership as well as being central to the ethic of care. This is contrasting with the ethic of justice in which the idea of independence would be integral.
It is imperative to note that transformational leadership has been purported to possess four central components namely idealized influence, individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, and inspirational motivation. The inclination of transformational leadership towards ethics of care has thus led to the hypothesis that leaders who exhibit a higher predisposition towards the utility of an ethic of care are viewed by their followers as being more transformational when juxtaposed with a lower inclination towards an ethic of care. Key findings The first finding is that there is a clear difference between transformational leadership and transactional leadership.
This is whereby transactional leadership has been revealed to refer to exchanges that seek to progress the purposes of each distinct party with respect to political, psychological, or economic paradigms. On the contrary, transformational leadership surpasses benefits which are accumulated to each individual through this process of social exchange. In this case, the followers and their leader are preoccupied with personal exchanges through a common purpose in different forms which transform and heighten their motivational level, behavior as well as ethical aspirations (Simola et.
al, 2010). These differences also spill over to the moral inclination of either type of leadership. This is whereby whereas transactional leadership is more inclined towards the ethic of justice, transformational leadership is greatly inclined towards ethics of care. This latter reality is underpinned by the fact that the leader and the followers in the transformational model of leadership are bound to have more intimate interpersonal exchanges which culminate in the development and maintenance of the ethic of care. Thus, the greater inclination of transformational leadership towards an ethic of care, as opposed to an ethic of justice, has been perceived as explaining the discrepancies among the inferences of the studies in yesteryears which exhibit limited or absolute non-support for the intersections which are theorized between transformational leadership and an ethic of justice. The second finding is the there are four basic behavior dimensions that characterize transformational leadership in diverse institutional frameworks.
These are idealized influence, individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, and inspirational motivation. In regard to idealized influence, the leader operates as an example to the followers as well as proving a vision and mission for the team.
On the other hand, inspirational motivation is characterized by the stimulation towards a common vision by the team members. In this regard, the spirit of the team is projected towards the achievement of common goals and objectives at the group level. In relation to intellectual stimulation, this refers to the mechanisms through which the leader of a particular group is engaged in the stimulation of the interest and aspirations of the followers towards elevated levels of care in the problem-solving processes, heightened levels of creativity and novelty.
Lastly, individualized consideration becomes apparent when a leader develops an accommodating environment under which he/she carefully focuses on the distinct needs of the individuals in their respective groups. All these behavior dimensions in transformational leadership mold the ethical orientation of the leaders in this group which is characterized by shared goals and objectives. This ethical orientation thus tends to lie towards an ethic of care as opposed to an ethic of justice which is characteristic in transactional leadership as mentioned in the preceding discourse.
Daniel, C.L., (2005). The relationship between levels of moral reasoning and transformational
leadership behaviors of West Virginia public school administrators. (PhD Dissertation). Retrieved January 28th 2013 from http://library.ciis.edu/information/handouts/citing%20dissertations.htm
Riaz, A. & Haider, M.H., (2010). Role of transformational and transactional leadership on job
satisfaction and career satisfaction. Peer-reviewed & Open access journal, 1.1: 29-38.
Simola, S.K., et. al, (2010). Transformational leadership and leader moral orientation:
Contrasting anethic of justice and an ethic of care. The Leadership Quarterly, 21: 179–188.
Simola S.K., et. al (2012). Transformational Leadership and Leaders’ Mode of CareReasoning,
Journal of Business Ethics, 108:229–237.
Stashevsky, S. &Koslowsky, M., 2006. “Leadership team cohesiveness and team performance”,
Top of Form International Journal of Manpower, 27(1): .63-74