Question

Leadership how Does Bass view leadership differently from “traditional” leadership theorists like McGregor (1960) and Feidler (1972)?

Answer 1

Bass Transformational Leadership Theory

As the word transformation suggests, Bass Transformational Leadership Theory is one of a set of various Transformational Leadership Theories. Burns originally said that leaders can transform the life of followers by altering their perceptions, expectations, values, and so. Qualities within the leader she or he is behind the changes. The leader communicates, and does whatever it takes to get the audience see a vision and make them to do things.

The Bass Transformational Leadership Theory was interested in the extent to which a leader influences followers. Followers go after a leader because of trust, honesty, and other qualities and the stronger these are, the greater loyalty they have for the leader. The leader transforms the followers because of her or his having these qualities. Not only is the leader a role model but she or he exhorts the following to challenging the existing order, the revolutionary being a stark example of this. While the leader may have democratic motives in mind, he can assume a Transaction Leadership style at the same time, directing the followers to do things. Bass saw these aspects of transformational leadership:

1. Individual consideration, where there is an emphasis on what a group member needs. The leader acts as a role model, mentor, facilitator, or teacher to bring a follower into the group and be motivated to do tasks.
2. Intellectual stimulation is provided by a leader in terms of challenge to the prevailing order, task, and individual. S/he seeks ideas from the group and encourages them to contribute, learn, and be independent. The leader often becomes a teacher.
3. Inspiration by a leader means giving meaning to the follows of a task. This usually involves providing a vision or goal. The group is given a reason or purpose to do a task or even be in the organization. The leader will resort to charismatic approaches in exhorting the group to go forward.
4. Idealized influenced refers to the leader becoming a full-fledged role model, acting out and displaying ideal traits of honesty, trust, enthusiasm, pride, and so forth.

This theory was much different from what traditional theorists have to say about the leadership. Let us check the traditional theories as well.

McGregor X and Y theory

In 1960, Douglas McGregor developed a leadership theory about organization and management in which he represented two opposing perceptions about people. He referred to these two perceptions as Theory X and Theory Y. Douglas McGregor then arrived at the conclusion that the style of leadership depends on the manager’s perception of people.

Theory X

In Theory X, Douglas McGregor summarizes the traditional view of management in a number of characteristic assumptions in which autocratic leadership style, close supervision and the hierarchical principle are the key elements.

Theory X starts from the assumption that people are naturally lazy, want to avoid work as much as possible, do not wish to take responsibility. The authoritarian leadership style is therefore the most appropriate leadership style in Theory X. According to this theory, pure work motivation consists of financial incentives. Therefore, the system of rewards and punishments works best for them. According to this theory, people definitely do not wish to bear any responsibility for their work.

Theory Y

Unlike in Theory X, Douglas McGregor starts from the assumption in Theory Y that people have different needs. Theory Y assumes that people are inherently happy to work, they want to exert themselves and they are motivated to pursue objectives. There is no need for the system that involves rewards and punishments. People are prepared to take responsibility for everything they do. People want to use their creativity and they like to take a creative problem solving approach.

Feidler contingency model of leadership

The LPC-score appears to be the central measure for research on leadership effectiveness in the context of the contingency model. At first, researchers thought about a direct relationship between the LPC-score and group performance but no consistent evidence had been found. Fiedler, re-analyzing some old studies and conducting some new ones, proposed a contingent approach towards the LPG-score. Both high and low LPC leaders could be effective, but the situation in which the group operated determined whether this would be really the case. The contingency model has appeared to be a popular approach towards leadership effectiveness, through the years.

The differences in old and new leadership theories are that people not only don’t want to be managed, in most cases, they simply won’t be managed. Today’s employees want to be led. They want to participate and engage in every aspect of their job. Creating a two-way relationship is critical, especially considering that many knowledge workers today know more about what they are doing than their boss does. And that’s what Bass focused on and the traditional leadership theorists like McGregor (1960) and Feidler (1972) did not.