# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Transformational leadership theory is all about leadership that creates positive change in the followers whereby they take care of each other's interests and act in the interests of the group as a whole. James MacGregor Burns first brought the concept of transformational leadership to prominence in his extensive research into leadership.

"Essentially the leader's task is consciousness-raising on a wide plane. The leader's fundamental act is to induce people to be aware or conscious of what they feel - to feel their true needs so strongly, to define their values so meaningfully, that they can be moved to purposeful action."

In this leadership style, the leader enhances the motivation, moral and performance of his follower group. So according to MacGregor - transformational leadership is all about values and meaning, and a purpose that transcends short-term goals and focuses on higher order needs.

At times of organisational change, and big step change, people do feel insecure, anxious and low in energy - so in these situations and especially in these difficult times, enthusiasm and energy are infectious and inspiring.

And yet so many organisational changes fail because leaders pay attention to the changes they are facing instead of the transitions people must make to accommodate them.

In my view it is the responsibility of the director leading the change to supply an infusion of positive energy.
The transformational approach also depends on winning the trust of people - which is made possible by the unconscious assumption that they too will be changed or transformed in some way by following the leader.

The transformational approach also depends on winning the trust of people - which is made possible by the unconscious assumption that they too will be changed or transformed in some way by following the leader.

This is often seen in military commanders and wartime political leaders. An example of this would be the way in which Lady Thatcher - as Prime Minister of the UK Government during the Falklands War in 1982 - was able to engender an enhanced feeling of British national identity amongst the UK population.

Sounds like this leadership style is ideally suited to change management, doesn't it? However - this approach requires absolute integrity and personal behaviour that is consistent and resonant with your vision and message.

I can recall a ridiculous situation, at one UK company I was involved with, where the directors were attempting to effect a culture change of greater inter-departmental trust and communication yet still retained a separate directors dining room and specially allocated car parking places closest to the office front door!
OK here's the important bit - how NOT to apply transformational leadership theory to change management
- Be preoccupied with power, position, politics and perks
- Stay focused on the short-term
- Be hard data oriented
- Focus on tactical issues
- Work within existing structures and systems
- Concentrate on getting the job done
- Focus processes and activities that guarantee short-term profits

Doesn't all this just sound like a description of a typical good project manager with a task driven mentality?

And hey, I have nothing against this style of leadership and management. There is a time and place for the Attila the Hun school of leadership. I have done it many times myself and very effectively - and with no regrets.

But, this leadership style is not enough in a change management situation and particularly in the current climate.
The four components of the transformational leadership style are:
(1) Charisma or idealised influence - the degree to which the leader behaves in admirable ways and displays convictions and takes stands that cause followers to identify with the leader who has a clear set of values and acts as a role model for the followers.

(2) Inspirational motivation - the degree to which the leader articulates a vision that is appeals to and inspires the followers with optimism about future goals, and offers meaning for the current tasks in hand.

(3) Intellectual stimulation - the degree to which the leader challenges assumptions, stimulates and encourages creativity in the followers - by providing a framework for followers to see how they connect [to the leader, the organisation, each other, and the goal] they can creatively overcome any obstacles in the way of the mission.

(4) Personal and individual attention - the degree to which the leader attends to each individual follower's needs and acts as a mentor or coach and gives respect to and appreciation of the individual's contribution to the team. This fulfills and enhances each individual team members' need for self-fulfillment, and self-worth - and in so doing inspires followers to further achievement and growth.

Transformational leadership applied in a change management context, is ideally suited to the holistic and wide view perspective of a programme based approach to change management and as such is key element of successful strategies for managing change.

And, to ensure that you ARE employing successful strategies for managing change - that are appropriate to your organisation - you need to know how to apply: (a) these transformational leadership skills, AND (b) how to apply the supporting programme management based processes - to ensure that you avoid the catastrophic 70% failure rate of ALL business change initiatives.

Source by Stephen Warrilow

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Transformational Leadership Theory - The 4 Key Components in Leading Change & Managing Change - Business Mantraa

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Transformational leadership theory is all about leadership that creates positive change in the followers whereby they take care of each other's interests and act in the interests of the group as a whole. James MacGregor Burns first brought the concept of transformational leadership to prominence in his extensive research into leadership.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Do you believe that you can adapt your style? Harvard University professor Ron Heifetz and leadership experts David Rooke and William Torbert say that you can. So let's look in more depth at Lewin's leadership styles, their strengths and risks, and how you might become more skillful in using them.

Authoritarian, Autocratic Leadership

This approach is helpful when your team needs to follow a process "to the letter," to manage a significant risk. It's also effective when you need to be hands-on with people who miss deadlines, in departments where conflict is an issue, or in teams that rely on quick decisions being made.

But you need to be aware that relying on control and punishment to maintain standards will likely drive people away. Similarly, if you always demand that your team works at top speed, you can end up exhausting everyone.

Instead, you can show respect for team members by providing the rationale for your decisions. And they will more likely comply with your expectations if you take the trouble to explain Why the Rules Are There.

You can improve your ability to "lead from the front" by Planning for a Crisis, Thinking on Your Feet, and making good decisions under pressure. But be sure to balance these skills with an awareness of their potential negative impact on creativity, ideas gathering, motivation, and trust within the team.

Being too autocratic can also mean that you'll find it hard to stand back from the detail and take a wider, more strategic view.

Democratic, Participative Leadership

With this approach, you set goals, guide team discussions, and make the final decision. But you also acknowledge that your people can have valuable insight into a problem or process, so you actively consult them. As a result, you'll likely gain creative input and fresh ideas that you wouldn't have come up with if you were working alone.

You might wonder how to manage differing opinions in the team, once you've invited participation in this way. Your goal is to build a culture in which people can have healthy debates with one another. So:

Be aware that processes could become dangerously slow if you involve your team members in every decision. You'll need to judge carefully whether you need to adopt a more autocratic approach, even if it's only briefly.

The Delegating, "Laissez Faire" Leader

"Laissez faire" is a French phrase adopted into English that means, "Let (people) do (as they choose)." It describes a policy of leaving situations to run their own course, without interfering.

By adopting this style of leadership, you empower your team to make decisions and to organize its own processes, with little or no guidance. The danger of this approach is that situations can collapse into chaos if your people have low motivation or poor skills. It can work, however, if they are experienced, knowledgeable, confident, creative, and driven, or if deadlines are flexible and processes are simple.

Be in no doubt, though, that as the leader you will still be held accountable for the outcome! So you might want to organize team decision making processes to support your people while you take a "hands off" approach. Just be sure to delegate the right task to the right person, as a mismatch could mean that the whole team fails.

Avoid becoming too remote, even with a high-performing, highly autonomous team. Change can occur at any time in business, so your organization's requirements for your team might shift after your initial brief. If this happens, stay in touch with your people, and communicate clearly and promptly. Remember, you can offer your support without becoming a micromanager!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What's Your Leadership Style? - Learn About the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Way You Like to Lead

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Leadership styles. Strengths and weaknesses.

# data[].attributes.headline
Take this quiz to find your leadership style

# data[].attributes.subject
Take this quiz to find your leadership style

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Leadership styles describe the differing types of leadership that leaders use. But what's your leadership style? Are you like a tech CEO or a world leader? More like Steve Jobs or Gandhi? Take this Leadership Styles Quiz and see what style of leadership you have!

Some are leaders and managers are competitive, others collaborative, and others structured. Research identifies four types of leadership styles: Pragmatist, Idealist, Steward and Diplomat.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

It's time to really understand your style. We're going to dig deep into leadership styles, but feel free to jump to any section that interests you:

Now that you have your personal leadership styles results, let's dig deeper into each of the four fundamental leadership styles: Pragmatist, Idealist, Steward and Diplomat. Here's a quick overview of the 4 types of leadership styles:

Pragmatists are driven, competitive, and they value hitting their goals above all else.

Idealists want to learn and grow, and they want everyone else on the team to do the same.

Stewards are dependable, loyal and helpful, and they provide a stabilizing and calming force for their team members.

Diplomats are the affiliative force that keeps groups together and typically build deep personal bonds with their employees.

Remember that leaders can be effective or ineffective within each of these four styles, and there are a million subtle variations, but these four leadership styles give us a way to pinpoint some major philosophical differences between leaders. Now let's take a deeper dive...

The Pragmatist Leadership Style

Pragmatists have high standards, and they expect themselves, and their team members, to meet those standards. Pragmatists are driven, competitive, and they value hitting their goals above all else. They can be bold thinkers, unafraid of visionary leadership, even when others feel anxious). They are also hard-driving and often enjoy smashing through obstacles.

Pragmatists rate very high on Challenge, moderately high on Directiveness and Structure, and much lower on Feeling.

Working for Pragmatists can be difficult but rewarding. The job is not for the faint-of-heart or thin-skinned, but the opportunities to learn and become expert under the Pragmatist's tutelage are second-to-none. The job can sometimes feel like an apprenticeship to a master artist or professor. This offers the potential for exceptional intellectual growth, but also for burnout and criticism. Their leadership skills provide a great situation for the right individuals, but employees who work for Pragmatists may find that bottom-line results can sometimes outpace softer measures like employee engagement.

The Pragmatist style is the least common of all the leadership styles, accounting for around 8-12% of American leaders. But, it's interesting to note that top-level executives have a higher percentage of Pragmatists than other groups, like Managers, Directors and Vice Presidents. Based on my observations, I consider Franklin D. Roosevelt, Jeff Bezos (CEO of Amazon) and Steve Jobs to be Pragmatists.

The Idealist Leadership Style

Idealists are high-energy achievers who believe in the positive potential of everyone around them. Idealists want to learn and grow, and they want everyone else on the team to do the same (they're very much a coaching leader). They're often charismatic, drawing others to them with their intuition and idealism. Their leadership skills are often quite refined, they're open-minded and prize creativity from themselves and others.

Working for Idealists offers the chance to be creative and to express oneself. Team members find they have an equal voice and that they learn by doing. Working for the Idealist often provides a very democratic experience. There isn't as much process and structure as with some other leaders (like Stewards), and that can be a plus or minus depending on the employee. Idealist leaders are often found doing creative work, brainstorming around a table with like-minded individuals. For the appropriate people, working for the Idealist is a great situation.

The Idealist leadership style accounts for about 15-20% of American leaders. And based on my observations, famous Idealists include Sheryl Sandberg (COO of Facebook), Tony Hsieh (Founder of Zappos) and Meg Whitman (CEO of Hewlett-Packard).

The Steward Leadership Style

Stewards are the rocks of organizations. They're dependable, loyal and helpful, and they provide a stabilizing and calming force for their employees. Stewards' leadership behavior value rules, process and cooperation. They believe that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and they move only as fast as the whole chain will allow, taking care and time to help those who struggle to keep up.

Working for Stewards offers the chance to be part of a well-oiled machine. Here, employees find security, consistency and cohesion. The job may not offer great opportunities for individual glory or an adrenaline rush, but it does provide great opportunities for team success. Stewards can often be found in mission-critical areas of the organization and they are often relied-upon by leaders in other divisions. For the appropriate people, working for the Steward is a great situation.

Similar to the Idealist, the Steward leadership style accounts for about 15-20% of American leaders. And based on my observations, famous Stewards include George Washington, Mother Teresa and Ginni Rometty (CEO of IBM).

The Diplomat Leadership Style

Diplomats prize interpersonal harmony. They are the social glue and affiliative force that keeps groups together. Diplomats are kind, social, and giving, and typically build deep personal bonds with their employees. They're often known for being able to resolve conflicts peacefully (and for avoiding conflicts in the first place).

Working for Diplomats is often more fun and social than working for other leaders (especially the Pragmatists). Diplomats put less emphasis on challenging their employees, focusing instead on putting their people in positions that leverage their strengths in order to achieve success. Diplomats work to avoid having people feel uncomfortable or anxious. The Diplomat is an affiliative leader. Traditional measures of employee satisfaction are often very high for Diplomats. For the appropriate people, working for the Diplomat is a great situation.

The Diplomat is the most common of all the leadership styles, accounting for around 50-60% of American leaders. And it's interesting to note that, unlike the Pragmatists, top-level executives have a lower percentage of Diplomats than other groups, like Managers, Directors and Vice Presidents. Based on my observations, Mohandas Gandhi and David Glass (former CEO of Wal-Mart) would be examples of Diplomats.

One of the most popular questions about leadership styles is whether different departments employ different styles of leadership. And the answer is YES. As you can see in the chart below, for example, in Operations departments the Pragmatist style is twice as common as in Human Resources. And Finance uses considerably less of the Diplomat leadership style than for example, Marketing departments.

Contrary to what most business books would have you believe, there is no one right way or one perfect way to be a great leader (or even an effective leader). Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Dwight D. Eisenhower were both incredibly successful leaders, but their styles were a study in contrasts. And leaders like Tim Cook from Apple, Sheryl Sandberg from Facebook, and Jeff Bezos from Amazon, are all successful leaders with wildly different approaches.

It seems intuitively obvious that leaders should embody and employ different leadership styles; companies aren't all the same, so why should their leaders be the same? And yet, every year there are a wealth of books purporting to illuminate the "one path" to great leadership. It's an absurd conceit, and a damaging one.

A different leadership style will be necessary at a hard-charging Wall Street investment bank than at a small community hospital in Mississippi.

The leadership style that works best for a team of ambitious, competitive go-getters (the Pragmatist) is not the style that works best for a group of affiliative collaborators (the Diplomat) or detail-oriented, rule-followers (the Steward).

Truly great leaders understand their leadership style, when to embrace it fully or dial it back, in which environments they are most likely to succeed, and how to choose followers who fit well with their leadership style.

It's great for every leader and manager and executive to be transformational rather than use transactional leadership or authoritarian leadership. And few people love working for autocratic leaders. But you can still be a transformational leader with any of the four primary leadership styles.

The essence of the situational leadership model is that there's no one perfect leadership style or one path to effective leadership. Instead, managers and executives should adjust their approach to the task at hand, including the abilities and willingness of the employees being led. In that regard, situational leadership and leadership styles are similar.

But one key difference in the leadership theory is that a good leader doesn't just adjust to the tasks and abilities of their followers; they also take into account the personalities, histories, and motivations of their people. The situational leader will evaluate the knowledge of their employees, but they typically miss their employees' unique personality styles. Here's what we mean:

If you're leading a team of ambitious, competitive, demanding and audacious goal-setters, the Pragmatist style is a good choice. This doesn't mean using an autocratic leadership style, it simply means that when you've got these types of followers, you can use a Pragmatist style and challenge them to achieve really big goals.

If your followers are driven by affiliation and teamwork, and if they're harmonious, forgiving, and highly collaborative, then the Diplomat style is ideal.

If your employees are detail-oriented, rule-following, consistent performers, then try the Steward leadership style. The Steward's emphasis on formal procedures, rules and policies, and on setting clear expectations, will work well here.

If your employees love learning, and they've thrived under more democratic leaders or a boss who practiced participative leadership, they'll generally respond very well to the Idealist's coaching leadership style.

The creator of servant leadership, Robert K. Greenleaf postulated that the servant leader should ask, "Do those served grow as persons? Do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants?"

With that definition, the Idealist and Diplomat leadership styles most closely resemble the servant leader.

Idealists are the closest style to servant leadership. They're high-energy achievers who believe in the positive potential of everyone around them. Idealists want to learn and grow, and they want everyone else on the team to do the same. They're often charismatic, drawing others to them with their intuition and idealism. They're open-minded and prize creativity from themselves and others.

Second would be the Diplomats, who put less emphasis on challenging their employees, focusing instead on putting their people in positions that leverage their strengths in order to achieve success. Diplomats work to avoid having people feel uncomfortable or anxious, and Diplomats are typically thought of as highly likable.

Transformational leadership describes leaders who inspire, empower, and stimulate followers to exceed normal levels of performance. And the research shows that a transformational leadership style delivers better results, like employee engagement, job satisfaction and even productivity, than does transactional leadership (a style whereby leaders foster compliance through punishments and rewards).

Now, here's the surprising part: All 4 types of leadership styles can act as transformational leaders; they each just do it in their own unique ways.

Pragmatists evidence transformational leadership by challenging and inspiring their team members to achieve bigger goals. For example, in the study Are SMART Goals Dumb? we discovered that only 14% people say that their goals for this year will help them achieve great things. But with the Pragmatist, those numbers can increase significantly.

Idealists are transformational by continually learning and growing, and encouraging everyone else to do the same. For example, in the study The State Of Leadership Development, we learned that only 20% say their leader always takes an active role in helping employees to grow and develop their full potential. But with the Idealist, that improves greatly.

Diplomats display transformational leadership by empowering and building deep personal bonds with their employees. For example, in the study The State Of Leadership Development, we see that only 26% of employees say their leader always responds constructively when employees share their work problems. But with a Diplomat, employees' concerns would always be responded to constructively.

Stewards act as transformational leaders by providing a stabilizing and calming force for their team members. For example, in the study Fewer Than Half Of Employees Know If They're Doing A Good Job, we know that only 29% of employees know whether their performance is where it should be, and that's causing major problems for employee engagement. But the Steward corrects that issue almost immediately.

Transactional leadership is focused on controlling and organizing, using primarily rewards and punishments as motivation. Unlike transformational leadership, which inspires and empowers followers, a transactional leader focuses on more on ensuring compliance.

Transactional leadership generally involves using formal power, reward power and coercive power. Formal power comes from having a title. It generally comes from a place in a hierarchy, so I have more power as a VP than I did as a director. I have more power as a director than I did as a manager, and so forth. Coercive power is the power that comes from being able to punish people; 'If you don't do this thing by Friday you will be fired.' Reward power is the flip side of that; 'If you do this by Friday, then you can take Monday off.'

The two leadership styles most susceptible to using transactional leadership are the Pragmatist and the Steward.

The Pragmatist is not someone who gives assignments and, as long as the work gets done well, leaves it up to the employee to determine how. The Pragmatist uses structured and directive leadership, and people who work for a Pragmatist can expect to receive clear and detailed instructions on exactly how tasks and projects should be performed. Like a transactional leader, this can include equally strong communications regarding performance expectations and the consequences of unsatisfactory work.

The Steward stresses stability and predictability, typically retains the final decision-making authority, tells employees exactly how tasks and projects should be performed and works harder and longer than anyone else on the team. If you work for a Steward, then there's no mystery around what happens if you fail to do your work satisfactorily; this management style makes consequences abundantly clear, before poor work has a chance to occur.

Participative leadership means that employees are involved in decision-making that would typically be the sole purview of managers and executives. This involves sharing the challenges facing the organization and then accepting input and responding constructively when employees share suggestions, ideas or information.

Democratic leadership takes participative leadership one step further. A democratic leadership style means that leaders actually allow employees to vote or determine a course of action. The democratic leader doesn't just solicit input, they let employees make the decisions.

The Diplomat is the style most likely to use democratic leadership. Here's an example. Sam Walton founded Wal-Mart, but his successor, David Glass, grew sales more than tenfold, to $165 billion and earnings soared from $628 million to $5.4 billion.

David Glass was quiet and egoless. In a Fortune interview, he said, "Most people have enough ego that they want to distinguish themselves from a charismatic leader, and that's what creates the problem. I've never had much ego, and I'm not worried about things like that. I'm more interested in the satisfaction that we are doing the right things and we're getting it done and being a part of it. I like being part of a winning team. I don't have to be the winning team."

One of the hallmarks of Diplomats is their tendency to put the needs of others ahead of their own. They're likely to care deeply about people, and support and cheer their success. And that is going to involve lots of participative leadership (and even democratic leadership).

Charismatic leadership occurs when a leader uses persuasiveness, influence and communication skills to motivate and inspire others. The charismatic leader's power comes not from their formal authority but from the power of their personality. It's very closely related to referent power. [You can test whether you're someone who uses referent power on the quiz Which Types Of Power Do You Use?]

But every one of the four leadership styles can display charismatic leadership. George Washington and Mother Teresa were Stewards and incredibly charismatic leaders. Mohandas Gandhi was a Diplomat and a historically charismatic leader. Franklin D. Roosevelt was a Pragmatist, and I think we would all agree that he had a remarkably charismatic leadership style.

That being said, of the 4 different leadership styles, the one that is likely to find charismatic leadership most natural is the Idealist.

Remember that Idealists are high-energy achievers who believe in the positive potential of everyone around them. Idealists want to learn and grow, and they want everyone else on the team to do the same. They're often charismatic, drawing others to them with their intuition and idealism. The Idealist is a collaborative leader, and they're open-minded and prize creativity from themselves and others.

Two of the characteristics that make someone charismatic are optimism and empathy, and Idealists have both of those qualities in spades. Optimism reflects the belief outcomes of events or experiences will generally be good or positive. And when the Idealist tells employees, "I believe you can be great at this," they're connoting optimism.

And empathy comes from being to see the world through another's eyes, to take their perspective. [You can test your empathy with the quiz Do You Know How To Listen With Empathy?] When the Idealist says to employees, "I love your creativity, walk me through your great idea," they're employing empathy.

Famous CEOs like the late Steve Jobs, Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are all Pragmatists. Why? Because each one is incredibly hard working, a visionary leader, focused on BHAGs (big hairy audacious goals), and they're willing to leave their comfort zone.

The Pragmatist pushes employees to work on strengthening their weaknesses, not just focus only on their strengths, and to give maximal, 100% effort. The Pragmatist doesn't ask employees to do anything that they're not willing to do themselves. They typically work harder and longer than anyone else on the team.

Elon Musk, a famously hard-working CEO, certainly challenges his people to a high level of performance, but he has also admitted in interviews to personally putting in long hours, even up to 100-hour work weeks, to achieve his big goals. (He can also be considered a pacesetting leader).

Jeff Bezos said, "If you want to be a pioneer, you have to get comfortable being misunderstood. In some ways it's a much more pleasant life, probably, we wouldn't know from personal experience, to not - you know, once you have something good just to hone it and hone it and hone it and not try anything new."

Steve Jobs offered one of the most famous statements of a visionary leader ever, noting, "At Apple, people are putting in 18-hour days. We attract a different type of person: a person who doesn't want to wait five or ten years to have someone take a giant risk on him or her. Someone who really wants to get in a little over his head and make a little dent in the universe. We are aware that we are doing something significant. We are here at the beginning of it and were able to shape how it goes. Everyone here has the sense that right now is one of those moments when we are influencing the future."

The Pragmatist style is the least common of all the leadership styles, accounting for around 8-12% of American leaders. But, it's interesting to note that top-level executives have a higher percentage of Pragmatists than other groups, like Managers, Directors and Vice Presidents.

This does not mean that CEOs can't employ other leadership styles. But, at least in the realm of legendary CEOs, a Pragmatist leadership style is fairly common.

Most people want a manager or executive who evidences a modicum of common decency, tolerates at least a bit of disagreement, and minimally shares some occasional good news. These are fundamental leadership behaviors that most followers desire and that, ideally, are embraced by all leaders, regardless of their leadership style.

There are also leadership behaviors that are fundamentally bad. I regularly receive emails from managers whose bosses are mentally and cognitively unfit to be leaders, and they'll ask something like, "Is there a management style that encompasses 'crazy?'" The answer is simply, "No." To even enter the discussion about one's leadership style, a person must first demonstrate some foundational mental, emotional and cognitive competence. We can discuss the leadership styles of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Dwight D. Eisenhower because, even though they both made mistakes, they were mentally, emotionally and cognitively competent.

Perhaps you've witnessed someone in a leadership role who didn't cope well with ordinary stresses such as basic criticism or unflattering news. Or they lacked a basic grip on reality. Or they consistently demonstrated belligerent, instigating and vitriolic behavior. A person like that does not have a leadership style; they don't even deserve the moniker of leader. They may hold an impressive title, but they are not a leader. And aside from the rare masochist, no one loves following someone who displays those kinds of behaviors.

Autocratic leaders like control over decisions, like to control how people perform their work, and no, they're not especially warm-and-fuzzy. But while it's not a universally idealized leadership style, the study, "Autocratic Leadership: New Data Reveals Who Likes It" revealed that some people actually like autocratic leaders.

That being said, being an autocratic leader is best avoided, except in certain circumstances. Two of the key characteristics of autocratic leaders are that they believe that people should do what they're told and that they generally retain the final decision making authority. Unlike laissez faire leadership, these managers and executives maintain strict control. One note: This not the same as being an authoritarian leader, who wants personal dominance and obedience.

Of the 4 types of leadership styles, the Steward and Pragmatist are most susceptible to veering towards autocratic leadership.

In the ideal state, Stewards are dependable, loyal and helpful, and they provide a stabilizing and calming force for their employees. Stewards value rules, process and cooperation (To some people, Stewards can feel a bit like a bureaucratic leader). They believe that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and they move only as fast as the whole chain will allow, taking care and time to help those who struggle to keep up. This is the opposite of a laissez faire leadership style.

But when Stewards take that style too far, their rules can be overly rigid and their control can be stifling. Again, the Steward leadership style can be just as effective as any of the others, but when this style becomes extreme, autocratic leadership could become a dangerous temptation.

The same can be said of Pragmatists. Working for Pragmatists is often intense and not for the faint-of-heart or the thin-skinned. Bottom-line results will always outpace softer measures such as employee engagement. In the ideal state, the opportunities to learn and become expert under the Pragmatist's tutelage are second to none. The job can sometimes feel like an apprenticeship to a master artist or professor. But in the extreme, it can be exhausting and dictatorial. The Pragmatist is not a laissez faire leader, so lots of participation from employees is unlikely.

Recommended For You

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Leadership styles describe the differing types of leadership that leaders use. Some are leaders and managers are competitive, others collaborative, and others structured. Research identifies four types of leadership styles: Pragmatist, Idealist, Steward and Diplomat.But what's your leadership style? Are you like a tech CEO or a world leader?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There is never a one-size-fits-all leadership style for every business - all companies operate differently and certain traits will be more successful in some environments than others.

However, having a thorough understanding of various leadership styles enables senior executives to not only adopt the correct characteristics for themselves, but also choose better managers throughout the organisation.

Here is a list of nine common leadership styles and a brief summary of their advantages and disadvantages.
Transformational leadership
Often considered among the most desirable employees, people who show transformational leadership typically inspire staff through effective communication and by creating an environment of intellectual stimulation.

However, these individuals are often blue-sky thinkers and may require more detail-oriented managers to successfully implement their strategic visions. For more information on transformational leadership traits, please click here.
Transactional leadership
Transactional leadership is focused on group organisation, establishing a clear chain of command and implementing a carrot-and-stick approach to management activities.

It is considered transactional because leaders offer an exchange; they reward good performances, while punishing bad practice. While this can be an effective way of completing short-term tasks, employees are unlikely to reach their full creative potential in such conditions.
Servant leadership
People who practice servant leadership prefer power-sharing models of authority, prioritising the needs of their team and encouraging collective decision-making.

Research by Catalyst has claimed this style, described as altruistic leadership by the company, can improve diversity and boost morale. However, detractors suggest servant leaders lack authority and suffer a conflict of interest by putting their employees ahead of business objectives.
Autocratic leadership
A more extreme version of transactional leadership, autocratic leaders have significant control over staff and rarely consider worker suggestions or share power.

Ruling with an iron fist is rarely appreciated by staff, which can lead to high turnover and absenteeism. There can also be a lack of creativity due to strategic direction coming from a single individual.

This leadership style is best suited to environments where jobs are fairly routine or require limited skills. It is also common in military organisations.
Laissez-faire leadership
More commonly used to describe economic environments, laissez-faire literally means "let them do" in French. This is typically translated to "let it be". As such, laissez-faire leaders are characterised by their hands-off approach, allowing employees to get on with tasks as they see fit.

This can be effective in creative jobs or workplaces where employees are very experienced. However, it is important that leaders monitor performance and effectively communicate expectations to prevent work standards slipping.
Democratic leadership
Also known as participative leadership, this style - as the name suggests - means leaders often ask for input from team members before making a final decision.

Workers usually report higher levels of job satisfaction in these environments and the company can benefit from better creativity. On the downside, the democratic process is normally slower and may not function well in workplaces where quick decision-making is crucial.
Bureaucratic leadership
Bureaucratic leadership models are most often implemented in highly regulated or administrative environments, where adherence to the rules and a defined hierarchy are important.

These leaders ensure people follow the rules and carry out tasks by the book. Naturally, this works well in certain roles - such as health and safety - but can stifle innovation and creativity in more agile, fast-paced companies.
Charismatic leadership
There is a certain amount of overlap between charismatic and transformational leadership. Both styles rely heavily on the positive charm and personality of the leader in question.

However, charismatic leadership is usually considered less favourable, largely because the success of projects and initiatives is closely linked to the presence of the leader. While transformational leaders build confidence in a team that remains when they move on, the removal of a charismatic leader typically leaves a power vacuum.
Situational leadership
Developed by management experts Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard in 1969, situational leadership is a theory that the best leaders utilise a range of different styles depending on the environment.

Factors such as worker seniority, the business process being performed and the complexity of relevant tasks all play an important role in what leadership style to adopt for any given situation. For example, situational leaders may adopt a democratic leadership style when discussing commercial direction with senior executives, but switch to a bureaucratic strategy when relaying new factory protocols to workers.

However, many people have a natural leadership style, which can make switching between roles challenging. It can also be difficult to gauge what style is most suitable for certain circumstances, holding up decision-making processes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
9 common leadership styles: Which type of leader are you?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There is never a one-size-fits-all leadership style for every business - all companies operate differently and certain traits will be more successful in some environments than others.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Leadership styles are classifications of how a person behaves while directing, motivating, guiding, and managing groups of people. There are many leadership styles. Some of the most widely discussed include: authoritarian (autocratic), participative (democratic), delegative (laissez-faire), transformational, transactional, and situational.

Great leaders can inspire political movements and social change. They can also motivate others to perform, create, and innovate. As you start to consider some of the people who you think of as great leaders, you can immediately see that there are often vast differences in how each person leads.

Fortunately, researchers have developed different theories and frameworks that allow us to better identify and understand these different leadership styles.

Lewin's Leadership Styles

In 1939, a group of researchers led by psychologist Kurt Lewin set out to identify different styles of leadership.﻿﻿ While further research has identified more distinct types of leadership, this early study was very influential and established three major leadership styles that have provided a springboard for more defined leadership theories.

In Lewin's study, schoolchildren were assigned to one of three groups with an authoritarian, democratic, or laissez-faire leader. The children were then led in an arts and crafts project while researchers observed the behavior of children in response to the different styles of leadership. The researchers found that democratic leadership tended to be the most effective at inspiring followers to perform well.

Authoritarian Leadership (Autocratic)

Authoritarian leaders, also known as autocratic leaders, provide clear expectations for what needs to be done, when it should be done, and how it should be done. This style of leadership is strongly focused on both command by the leader and control of the followers. There is also a clear division between the leader and the members. Authoritarian leaders make decisions independently, with little or no input from the rest of the group.

Researchers found that decision-making was less creative under authoritarian leadership.﻿﻿ Lewin also concluded that it is harder to move from an authoritarian style to a democratic style than vice versa. Abuse of this method is usually viewed as controlling, bossy, and dictatorial.

Mental Health in the Workplace Webinar

Authoritarian leadership is best applied to situations where there is little time for group decision-making or where the leader is the most knowledgeable member of the group. The autocratic approach can be a good one when the situation calls for rapid decisions and decisive actions. However, it tends to create dysfunctional and even hostile environments, often pitting followers against the domineering leader.

Participative Leadership (Democratic)

Lewin's study found that participative leadership, also known as democratic leadership, is typically the most effective leadership style. Democratic leaders offer guidance to group members, but they also participate in the group and allow input from other group members. In Lewin's study, children in this group were less productive than the members of the authoritarian group, but their contributions were of a higher quality.

Participative leaders encourage group members to participate, but retain the final say in the decision-making process. Group members feel engaged in the process and are more motivated and creative. Democratic leaders tend to make followers feel like they are an important part of the team, which helps foster commitment to the goals of the group.

Delegative Leadership (Laissez-Faire)

Lewin found that children under delegative leadership, also known as laissez-faire leadership, were the least productive of all three groups. The children in this group also made more demands on the leader, showed little cooperation, and were unable to work independently.

Delegative leaders offer little or no guidance to group members and leave the decision-making up to group members. While this style can be useful in situations involving highly qualified experts, it often leads to poorly defined roles and a lack of motivation.

Lewin noted that laissez-faire leadership tended to result in groups that lacked direction and members who blamed each other for mistakes, refused to accept personal responsibility, made less progress, and produced less work.

Observations About Lewin's Leadership Styles

In their book, The Bass Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications, Bass and Bass note that authoritarian leadership is often presented solely in negative, often disapproving, terms. Authoritarian leaders are often described as controlling and close-minded, yet this overlooks the potential positives of stressing rules, expecting obedience, and taking responsibility.

While authoritarian leadership certainly is not the best choice for every situation, it can be effective and beneficial in cases where followers need a great deal of direction and where rules and standards must be followed to the letter. Another often overlooked benefit of the authoritarian style is the ability to maintain a sense of order.

Bass and Bass note that democratic leadership tends to be centered on the followers and is an effective approach when trying to maintain relationships with others. People who work under such leaders tend to get along well, support one another, and consult other members of the group when making decisions.

Additional Leadership Styles and Models

In addition to the three styles identified by Lewin and his colleagues, researchers have described numerous other characteristic patterns of leadership. A few of the best-known include:

Transformational Leadership

Transformational leadership is often identified as the single most effective style. This style was first described during the late 1970s and later expanded upon by researcher Bernard M. Bass. Transformational leaders are able to motivate and inspire followers and to direct positive changes in groups.

These leaders tend to be emotionally intelligent, energetic, and passionate. They are not only committed to helping the organization achieve its goals, but also to helping group members fulfill their potential.

Research shows that this style of leadership results in higher performance and more improved group satisfaction than other leadership styles. One study also found that transformational leadership led to improved well-being among group members.

Transactional Leadership

The transactional leadership style views the leader-follower relationship as a transaction. By accepting a position as a member of the group, the individual has agreed to obey the leader. In most situations, this involves the employer-employee relationship, and the transaction focuses on the follower completing required tasks in exchange for monetary compensation.

One of the main advantages of this leadership style is that it creates clearly defined roles. People know what they are required to do and what they will be receiving in exchange. This style allows leaders to offer a great deal of supervision and direction, if needed.

Group members may also be motivated to perform well to receive rewards. One of the biggest downsides is that the transactional style tends to stifle creativity and out-of-the-box thinking.

Situational Leadership

Situational theories of leadership stress the significant influence of the environment and the situation on leadership. Hersey and Blanchard's leadership stylesis one of the best-known situational theories. First published in 1969, this model describes four primary styles of leadership, including:

1. Telling: Telling people what to do

2. Selling: Convincing followers to buy into their ideas and messages

3. Participating: Allowing group members to take a more active role in the decision-making process

4. Delegating: Taking a hands-off approach to leadership and allowing group members to make the majority of decisions

Later, Blanchard expanded upon the original Hersey and Blanchard model to emphasize how the developmental and skill level of learners influences the style that should be used by leaders. Blanchard's SLII leadership styles model also described four different leading styles:

1. Directing: Giving orders and expecting obedience, but offering little guidance and assistance

2. Coaching: Giving lots of orders, but also lots of support

3. Supporting: Offering plenty of help, but very little direction

4. Delegating: Offering little direction or support

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It seems like there are as many different styles of leadership as there are leaders. Discover some of the most common leadership style frameworks.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
11 Successful Leaders: How They Achieved It

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Successful leaders come from all walks of life. Seldom do they follow some predetermined path to leadership. Few are “born leaders.”

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Successful leaders are the power and intellect behind their organizations. They are the visionaries charged with steering their brand around pitfalls. They must know when to seize opportunities and how to rally employees to work hard toward their company's goals.

Effective leaders transcend the title of "manager" or "boss." They have found a way to achieve the right combination of charisma, enthusiasm and self-assurance, probably with a healthy dose of luck and timing.

It may seem like some people are just gifted with these skills, but the truth is most leadership traits can be learned and sharpened with time and practice. You can begin building your success by developing these 11 must-have traits of a powerful and successful leader.
1. Self-Managing
It's hard to manage others effectively if you can't manage yourself. Self-managing means being able to prioritize your goals and being responsible for accomplishing those objectives. As an effective leader, you must be able to regulate your time, attention and emotions, while remaining aware of your strengths, weaknesses and potential sources of bias.

Exceptional leaders are adept at handling stress and balancing their personal and professional lives. But you must also remember the importance of compassion and be able to respond to people and events in an appropriate way. Remember to maintain self-control and discipline in your actions, though you should avoid becoming overly reserved or inflexible.
2. Acting Strategically
A forward-thinking, open-minded approach is necessary for today's leaders. According to a Harvard Business Publishing report, Leading Now: Critical Capabilities for a Complex World, "Leaders must always be prepared to adjust their strategies to capture emerging opportunities or tackle unexpected challenges." Thinking strategically is an ongoing process that involves assessing your business environment. You can cultivate strategic thinking by:

* Being curious and genuinely interested in your company and wider business environment,

* Being flexible in your mindset and trying new approaches and ideas,

* Focusing on the future and thinking about your company's operational conditions, and

* Maintaining a positive outlook.
3. Being An Effective Communicator
Powerful leaders know when to talk and when to listen. They are effective communicators and are able to clearly and succinctly explain to their employees everything from organizational goals to specific tasks. If people don't understand or aren't aware of your expectations, they will fall short, so the more specific you can be, the better.

You need to be able to communicate on all levels: one on one, to the department and to the entire staff, as well as via phone, email and social media. Communication is built on a steady flow of verbal and nonverbal exchanges of ideas and information, so work on being approachable and involving people from different levels.
4. Being Accountable And Responsible
Successful managers know how to use power and authority appropriately without overwhelming or overpowering employees. Effective leaders hold themselves accountable and take responsibility for their own mistakes-and they expect others to do the same. They can work within established procedures, and be productive and efficient in their decisions.

They appreciate the importance of supporting and encouraging individuality while also understanding organizational structures and the need to follow rules and policies. They are able to balance different perspectives while taking appropriate action.
5. Setting Clear Goals And Persisting In Achieving Them
Here is a boiled-down version for acquiring charisma: Set clear goals and be determined and purposeful in achieving them. Back it all up with unshakable self-confidence. If you radiate enthusiasm and are truly excited about what you're doing, people will be naturally drawn to you.

Remember that writing your goals down is key to the success of both you and your company. But accomplishing those goals takes time. If you give up, so will everyone around you. To be a successful leader, you must be willing to keep going when others are tempted to throw in the towel.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
11 Powerful Traits Of Successful Leaders

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Successful leaders are the power and intellect behind their organizations. They are the visionaries charged with steering their brand around pitfalls. They must know when to seize opportunities and how to rally employees to work hard toward their company's goals. Effective leaders transcend the title of "manager" or "boss."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over the past several years, one of the most important contributions psychology has made to the field of business has been in determining the key traits of acknowledged leaders. Psychological tests have been used to determine what characteristics are most commonly noted among successful leaders.

# data[].attributes.headline
 How to find your core beliefs for educational leadership.

# data[].attributes.subject
 How to find your core beliefs for educational leadership.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As leaders, we each need our own simple, profound leadership philosophy that is grasped easily and modeled consistently.

I believe the most authentic leadership is organic. Yes, it may borrow from various influences, but your most real philosophy is as individual as your fingerprint.

Your philosophy shapes your personal leadership statement. The statement can cover how you lead and influence, what you value, what you expect from team members, what you do not accept, and/or what type of environment you are committed to creating.

Let's look at how to get there.
8 Prompts to Your Core Beliefs and Behaviors
The following prompts can help drill down to your core beliefs and behaviors, as you can see by the examples that I have included from notable leaders.

By answering these, you will collect valuable insight that can help point to your unique leadership philosophy.

Example: "Always be fair and consistent in the principles that guide your decisions, because there will be people who disagree. If you are consistent, they will at least respect you when you make your decisions."- Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
2. I spend time....
Example: "I've made a point of spending a lot of time walking the building at HUD and listening to employees."- Julián Castro, secretary of Housing and Urban Development, who describes himself as a 'man in the crowd' type of leader.
3. I value.... 4. I am curious about... Example: "By nature I am curious about life, and this extends to my business."-business magnate Richard Branson. 5. I respect.... Example: "[I] respect employees [by] making myself available to try to answer questions they have. It gives me a chance to educate, but it also gives me a chance to be educated."- U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. 6. I listen with.... 7. I care about.... Example: "The only thing I care about is winning. That's all. If you don't want to win, you don't want to be around me."-Los Angeles Laker legend Jerry West Your Game Changer Takeaway
Be inspired to fill in the blanks! Go deep with your 8 answers. Which ones resonate? Hone your philosophy to its simplest form, and practice it daily. You are taking a big step closer to your leadership potential, and that benefits everyone on your team.

Game Changers Podcast - Authentic Leadership

Kat Cole, Group President of FOCUS Brands, is keenly aware of how to hone and evolve her leadership style to inspire many different types of teams. Take a listen below to hear her story or visit the Game Changers Podcast page for more in-depth interviews with successful business leaders and athletes.
Molly Fletcher helps motivate and equip game changers to dream, live and grow fearlessly. A , Molly draws on her decades of experiences working with elite athletes and coaches as a sports agent, and applies them to the business world. Her Game Changer Negotiation Training™ has helped organizations and individuals across all industries more effectively ask for what they want, build stronger relationships and close more deals faster.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
These 8 Answers Will Fill Your Leadership Philosophy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As leaders, we each need our own simple, profound leadership philosophy that is grasped easily and modeled consistently. I believe the most authentic leadership is organic. Yes, it may borrow from various influences, but your most real philosophy is as individual as your fingerprint. Your philosophy shapes your personal leadership statement.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Three Ways Leaders Make Emotional Connections.pdf

# data[].attributes.headline
 Book Review- The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

# data[].attributes.subject
 Book Review- The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Differences between managers and leaders.pdf

# data[].attributes.headline
Leadership Traits that lead to success in higher education

# data[].attributes.subject
Leadership Traits that lead to success in higher education

# data[].attributes.headline
Current Issues in Higher Education Leadership

# data[].attributes.subject
Current Issues in Higher Education Leadership

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Colleges Shouldn’t Be Handling Sexual-Assault Complaints - The Chronicle of Higher Education.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Describe the Characteristics of a Proactive Leader _ Chron.com.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
Everyone needs to be held accountable for their role, even the leaders.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Accountability | Accountability | Church | Church Health | Church Health | Church Planting | Conflict | Courage | Decision Making | Decision making | Disciple | Guidance | Lead | Leadership | Leadership | Leadership | Leadership Skills | Leadership Styles | Leadership styles | Leadership Styles | Ministry | Mission | Pastoral Care | Pastoral Care | Pastoral Care | Pastoral Care | Pastor's Role | Perseverance | Practices | Reach | Spiritual Gifts | Vision | Vision | Vision & Planning | Vision, Leadership | Women Leaders

# data[].attributes.body
This picture is interesting to me because you can see that the leader at the front leader his employees is the one that reached the top and was successful. The leader that rode on the wagon is struggling and the employees do not look happy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When it comes to determining which leadership style is the best leadership style, there is no end to the different theories and suggestions on how to lead others. The truth of the matter is, no matter how fervently certain individuals believe in their preferred style of leadership, there is no one right way to lead others.

While experienced leaders may have found success with a specific type of leadership style - whether it be charismatic, transformational, or transactional leadership - sometimes different situations and different team members require different approaches to leadership. This is why it is so important to understand the different types of leadership out there and how they compare to other leadership styles.

When it comes to traditional forms of leadership, one of the most common approaches used is known as transactional leadership. This form of leadership can have a great effect on many types of individuals as it values both order and structure, which can often deliver results. As a manager, boss, coach, team member or leader, understanding the values of transactional leadership and what makes this leadership style so effective can only help you in your future pursuits.

What is Transactional Leadership Theory?

Simply put, transactional leadership theory believes that leaders should conform to the existing structure of an organization.

It focuses on results, on measuring success based on existing rewards and penalties, and maintaining formal authority positions.

In order for transactional leadership to work, it depends on self-motivated individuals to do their jobs as instructed in a very directed and structured environment.

Typically, when transactional leadership theory is utilized, you will see the following:

Performance reviews to judge employee performance

Focus on short-term goals

Emphasis on following rules

Focus on policies and procedures

Detailed work criteria that meets previously defined requirements

Structured routines

Reward-penalty system

Focus on the status quo of an organization

Overall, the transactional leadership theory operates under the assumption that people are motivated by a reward or by punishment and that everything works best under a clear chain of command.

There is a great emphasis on managers holing power and those "under" them to cede to that power as a subordinate.

Advantages and Disadvantages of a Transactional Leadership Style

In some work environments, especially large work environments, transactional leadership is the only way to get things done and its emphasis on structure can be very beneficial. However, in other more open, creative, or laid-back environments, this type of leadership may not be best for everyone involved.

You will typically find transactional leadership styles applied in the military, law enforcement, large corporations, or in multinational organizations where not all employees speak the same language. This is because the transactional leadership approach is so straightforward, easy to learn, and easy to understand.

Before either applying this type of leadership style or completely ruling it out, it is essential to take a look at some of the advantages and disadvantages of transactional leadership.

Here are some of the advantages of transactional leadership:

It rewards individuals who are self-motivated and follow instructions

It tends to work when quickly achieving short-term goals

Workers have clearly defined rewards and penalties

It encourages productivity

It provides clear and easy to understand structure

It is great for work environments where structure and systems need to be reproduced

It keeps everyone in large organizations on the same page

On the other hand, here are some of the disadvantages of transactional leadership:

It does not work well in flexible work environments

It only rewards workers with perks or money, no other real motivators are used

It does not reward individuals who take personal initiative

It is often seen as limiting and not personal

Creativity is limited

It can be rigid

There is no room for flexibility with goals and objectives

Traits of a Transactional Leader

One of the best ways to describe a transactional leader is someone who values order and structure - similar to a military commander. These are not the types of leaders that you traditionally find in more creative workspaces, but rather those who you see in more traditional settings with larger corporations. Some of the traits of a transactional leader include:

Very left-brained

Inflexible

Not welcome to change

Loves to follow rules

Very detail oriented

Thrives in efficiency

Transactional leaders also tend to be passive, because their focus typically lies in maintaining the status quo. They are directive and want to make sure everything goes as planned but typically they only react to things that happen, and are not of the proactive type.

Examples of Transactional Leadership

Many times, the best way to truly understand leadership theory in action is to see examples of how this leadership style has been utilized in the past. One of the most commonly referenced transactional leaders in our world today is Bill Gates, who has been known for his emphasis on rigid structure, hierarchy, and on his reward and punishment system in order to achieve results. He had strict standards of what he wanted in order to make Microsoft the success that it is today, and he worked to make sure that employees did not deviate from these standards.

A great way to describe the effectiveness of transactional leadership is to use the coaching example. The coach of a basketball team will likely set up rigid rules regarding expectations on everything from showing up on time to abiding by evening curfews. There is typically little flexibility with these rules and it is key that all players adhere to the organizational norms. Punishments (such as running) are doled out to those who do not adhere to the rules, while rewards are used as motivators. Although coaches may be strict, effective coaches can motivate their team members to play and win without using fear; they simply rely on the structure and the system.

How Does Transactional Leadership Compare?

One of the best ways to truly understand transactional leadership style and to determine how it will work in a certain environment is to compare it to other popular types of leadership to see how this approach stacks up.

Transactional Leadership Vs. Charismatic Leadership

Charismatic leadership is all about using personality to influence a group or an organization. The goal is often on improving not only the organization, but the world. Transactional leadership, on the other hand, emphasizes individual performance, instead of group performance and looks at how well that person does in a structured environment.

Transactional Leadership Vs. Authoritative Leadership

Transactional leadership is sometimes confused with authoritative or autocratic leadership styles. While they do have some similarities, these two approaches to leadership are not the same. Autocratic leadership is even more rigid and does not rely on self-motivating productivity from employees or on rewards as a motivator.

Transactional Leadership Vs. Transformational Leadership

Transactional leadership is perhaps most similar to transformational leadership, and the two managerial styles are often compared. Where transactional leadership focuses on more structured environments and the self-motivation of others, transformational leadership places more emphasis on motivating and inspiring team members to do their job.

Simply put, transformational leaders focus on influencing others, while transactional leaders focus on directing others.

Applying Transactional Leadership in The Workplace

When looking at leadership styles, most experts will rank theories on a spectrum of leadership vs. management. Leadership is more about inspiring individuals and management is more about maintaining order. Transactional leadership falls closer to the management style of leadership. While certain approaches, such as transformational leadership, have more of a "selling" style used to motivate, transactional leadership is all about "selling."

What's so interesting about transactional leadership is that this type of leadership typically only works in environments where a certain hierarchy is already set up. In short, most people are not inherently transactional leaders, they form to this leadership style after an organization has set up the original structure.

Transactional leadership can be a slippery slope, and if not handled carefully, it can quickly border autocratic leadership styles or seem too authoritarian. The key is maintaining the system of rewards and punishments to help create a balance. There should be a focus on the flow of operations and on the hierarchical chain in the office, not necessarily on the thoughts or ideas of one individual.

Staying focused, following the rules and regulations put forth, using small goals and performance reviews, and sticking to the format set out before you is a great way to take this leadership style and apply it to your work environment.
Want to learn the secret recipe for creating an impactful life? Join one of the world's most trusted leadership experts, Robin Sharma in his upcoming FREE Masterclass What kind of leader will you choose to be?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Is Transactional Leadership And Why It Matters - Mindvalley Blog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When it comes to determining which leadership style is the best leadership style, there is no end to the different theories and suggestions on how to lead others. The truth of the matter is, no matter how fervently certain individuals believe in their preferred style of leadership, there is no one right way to lead others.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Have you ever been in a group where someone took control of the situation by conveying a clear vision of the group's goals, a marked passion for the work, and an ability to make the rest of the group feel recharged and energized? This person just might be what is called a transformational leader.

Transformational leadership is a leadership style that can inspire positive changes in those who follow.

Transformational leaders are generally energetic, enthusiastic, and passionate. Not only are these leaders concerned and involved in the process; they are also focused on helping every member of the group succeed as well.

Quick Background

The concept of transformational leadership was initially introduced by leadership expert and presidential biographer James MacGregor Burns. According to Burns, transformational leadership can be seen when "leaders and followers make each other to advance to a higher level of moral and motivation."

Through the strength of their vision and personality, transformational leaders are able to inspire followers to change expectations, perceptions, and motivations to work towards common goals.

Later, researcher Bernard M. Bass expanded upon Burns's original ideas to develop what is today referred to as Bass's Transformational Leadership Theory. According to Bass, transformational leadership can be defined based on the impact that it has on followers.

Transformational leaders, Bass suggested, garner trust, respect, and admiration from their followers.

Components

Bass also suggested that there were four different components of transformational leadership.

Intellectual Stimulation - Transformational leaders not only challenge the status quo; they also encourage creativity among followers. The leader encourages followers to explore new ways of doing things and new opportunities to learn.

1. Individualized Consideration - Transformational leadership also involves offering support and encouragement to individual followers. In order to foster supportive relationships, transformational leaders keep lines of communication open so that followers feel free to share ideas and so that leaders can offer direct recognition of the unique contributions of each follower.

2. Inspirational Motivation - Transformational leaders have a clear vision that they are able to articulate to followers. These leaders are also able to help followers experience the same passion and motivation to fulfill these goals.

3. Idealized Influence - The transformational leader serve as a role model for followers. Because followers trust and respect the leader, they emulate this individual and internalize his or her ideals.

So what are some typical signs of a transformational leader? Groups led by this type of leader tend to be both successful and loyal. They give a lot to the team and care deeply about the groups ability to accomplish its goals. Turnover tends to be quite low as transformational leaders are able to inspire a great deal of committment in their followers.

Effects

In their classic text, Transformational Leadership, authors Bass and Riggio explained:

"Transformational leaders...are those who stimulate and inspire followers to both achieve extraordinary outcomes and, in the process, develop their own leadership capacity. Transformational leaders help followers grow and develop into leaders by responding to individual followers' needs by empowering them and by aligning the objectives and goals of the individual followers, the leader, the group, and the larger organization."

Researchers have found that this style of leadership can have a positive effect on the group.

"Research evidence clearly shows that groups led by transformational leaders have higher levels of performance and satisfaction than groups led by other types of leaders," explained psychologist and leadership expert Ronald E.

Riggio in an article for Psychology Today.

The reason, he suggests, is that transformational leaders believe that their followers can do their best, leading members of the group to feel inspired and empowered.

What can you do to become a more transformational leader? Leadership experts suggest that having a strong, positive vision of the future plays a critical role. Not only is it important to believe in this vision yourself; you've also got to inspire others to buy in to your vision as well. Being genuine, passionate, supportive, and trustworthy are all key characteristics that will help motivate followers to support your goals for the group.

Link to Well-Being

According to the results of one study, this style of leadership can also have a positive influence on employee well-being.

The study published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine involved surveying workers at several different German information and communication technology companies. Researchers asked participants to answers questions about their employer's leadership style. A score for transformational leadership was then determined based on qualities such as providing intellectual stimulation, giving positive feedback for good performance, leading by example, and helping employees feel like they were making a contribution toward the goals of the group.

The researchers discovered that employees who identified a higher level of transformational leadership in their employers also had higher reported levels of well-being. The effect stayed significant even after researchers controlled for factors that are linked to well-being such as job strain, education, and age.

"The results of this study suggest that a transformational leadership style, which both conveys a sense of trust and meaningfulness and individually challenges and develops employees, also has a positive effect on employee well-being," the authors summarized.

Real-World Applications

So what impact could such results have for managers and workers?

The study's authors suggest that the results are important and can help companies develop leadership training programs that can be used to teach transformational leadership skills. Acquiring communication skills such as resolving conflicts in the workplace and recognizing the needs of employees are an important part of transformational leadership.

"Such training programs can be seen as another essential component of workplace health promotion and prevention efforts and therefore should receive wide support," explained the study's authors.
A Word From Verywell
The transformational style of leadership can be highly effective when used appropriately, but it might not necessarily be the best choice for every situation. In some cases, groups may require a more managerial or autocratic style that involves closer control and greater direction, particularly in situations where group member are unskilled and need a lot of oversight.

One way to improve your own leadership skills is to assess your own current leadership style and think about ways in which your strengths can benefit the group you are leading. By evaluating your own skills, you will be better able to play to your strengths and work on improving your areas of weakness.
Bass, B. M. & Riggio, R. E. Transformational Leadership. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc; 2008.
Jacobs C; Pfaff H; Lehner B, et al. The Influence of Transformational Leadership on Employee Well-Being: Results From a Survey of Companies in the Information and Communication Technology Sector in Germany. J Occup Environ Med. 2013;55(7):772-8. ​

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Do Transformational Leaders Inspire and Motivate Followers?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Have you ever been in a group where someone took control of the situation by conveying a clear vision of the group's goals, a marked passion for the work, and an ability to make the rest of the group feel recharged and energized? This person just might be what is called a transformational leader.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
TransactionalTransformational Leadership andBy: Krista Alvarado Angelo State University What is Transactional Leadership?Everything You Need to Know About Transactional Leadership - Mindvalley Blog. (2018, February 24). Retrieved from https://blog.mindvalley.com/transactional-leadership/What is Transactional Leadership?Everything You Need to Know About Transactional Leadership - Mindvalley Blog. (2018, February 24).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 1995, psychologist and science journalist Daniel Goleman published a book introducing most of the world to the nascent concept of emotional intelligence. The idea--that an ability to understand and manage emotions greatly increases our chances of success--quickly took off, and it went on to greatly influence the way people think about emotions and human behavior.

But what does emotional intelligence look like, as manifested in everyday life?

For the past two years, I've explored that question in researching my forthcoming book, In doing so, I've identified a number of actions that illustrate how emotional intelligence appears in the real world.

1. You think about feelings.

Emotional intelligence begins with what is called self- and social awareness, the ability to recognize emotions (and their impact) in both yourself and others.

That awareness begins with reflection. You ask questions like:

What are my emotional strengths? What are my weaknesses?

How does my current mood affect my thoughts and decision making?

What's going on under the surface that influences what others say or do?

Pondering questions like these yield valuable insights that can be used to your advantage.

The pause is as simple as taking a moment to stop and think before you speak or act. (Easy in theory, difficult in practice.) This can help save you from embarrassing moments or from making commitments too quickly.

In other words, pausing helps you refrain from making a permanent decision based on a temporary emotion.

3. You strive to control your thoughts.

You don't have much control over the emotion you experience in a given moment. But you can control your reaction to those emotions--by focusing on your thoughts. (As it's been said: You can't prevent a bird from landing on your head, but you can keep it from building a nest.)

By striving to control your thoughts, you resist becoming a slave to your emotions, allowing yourself to live in a way that's in harmony with your goals and values.

4. You benefit from criticism.

Nobody enjoys negative feedback. But you know that criticism is a chance to learn, even if it's not delivered in the best way. And even when it's unfounded, it gives you a window into how others think.

When you receive negative feedback, you keep your emotions in check and ask yourself: How can this make me better?

5. You show authenticity.

Authenticity doesn't mean sharing everything about yourself, to everyone, all of the time. It does mean saying what you mean, meaning what you say, and sticking to your values and principles above all else.

You know not everyone will appreciate your sharing your thoughts and feelings. But the ones who matter will.

6. You demonstrate empathy.

The ability to show empathy, which includes understanding others' thoughts and feelings, helps you connect with others. Instead of judging or labeling others, you work hard to see things through their eyes.

Empathy doesn't necessarily mean agreeing with another person's point of view. Rather, it's about striving to understand--which allows you to build deeper, more connected relationships.

7. You praise others.

All humans crave acknowledgement and appreciation. When you commend others, you satisfy that craving and build trust in the process.

This all begins when you focus on the good in others. Then, by sharing specifically what you appreciate, you inspire them to be the best version of themselves.

8. You give helpful feedback.

Negative feedback has great potential to hurt the feelings of others. Realizing this, you reframe criticism as constructive feedback, so the recipient sees it as helpful instead of harmful.

9. You apologize.

It takes strength and courage to be able to say you're sorry. But doing so demonstrates humility, a quality that will naturally draw others to you.

Emotional intelligence helps you realize that apologizing doesn't always mean you're wrong. It does mean valuing your relationship more than your ego.

10. You forgive and forget.

Hanging on to resentment is like leaving a knife inside a wound. While the offending party moves on with their life, you never give yourself the chance to heal.

When you forgive and forget, you prevent others from holding your emotions hostage--allowing you to move forward.

11. You keep your commitments.

It's common nowadays for people to break an agreement or commitment when they feel like it. Of course, bailing on an evening of Netflix with a friend will cause less harm than breaking a promise to your child or missing a major business deadline.

But when you make a habit of keeping your word--in things big and small--you develop a strong reputation for reliability and trustworthiness.

12. You help others.

One of the greatest ways to positively impact the emotions of others is to help them.

Most people don't really care where you graduated from, or even about your previous accomplishments. But what about the hours you're willing to take out of your schedule to listen or help out? Your readiness to get down in the trenches and work alongside them?

Actions like these build trust and inspire others to follow your lead when it counts.

13. You protect yourself from emotional sabotage.

You realize that emotional intelligence also has a dark side--such as when individuals attempt to manipulate others' emotions to promote a personal agenda or for some other selfish cause.

And that's why you continue to sharpen your own emotional intelligence--to protect yourself when they do.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 1995, psychologist and science journalist Daniel Goleman published a book introducing most of the world to the nascent concept of emotional intelligence. The idea--that an ability to understand and manage emotions greatly increases our chances of success--quickly took off, and it went on to greatly influence the way people think about emotions and human behavior.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tips to be a good leader in student affairs.pdf