This article takes transformational leadership, the most frequently researched leadership theory of the last 20 years (Northouse, 2016) and explores this style from a leader, leader-follower relationship and systemic perspectives.
The purpose of the paper is to examine transformational leadership and how, when combined with coaching, facilitates higher levels of performance and wellbeing (Grant, Green & Rynsaardt, 2010).
Transformational leadership focuses on the needs of self-esteem, self-actualisation and achievement in followers (Gill, 2011). A leadership model where leaders seek to motivate followers to achieve organisation goals through transcending self-interest for the greater good (Yukl, 1999).
Transformational leadership theory is described using the four dimensions of idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualised consideration (Bass, 1985). These four dimensions sit alongside the two transactional leadership dimensions of contingent reward and management by exceptions to intrinsically motivate followers to higher levels of performance (Judge & Piccolo, 2004).
According to Bass, Avolio & Goodheim (1987), a transformational style is likely to be ineffective without transactional leadership. The MLQ is a core component that combines self-assessment with stakeholder feedback to identify transformational and transactional behaviours. MLQ is found to be a significant predictor of performance (Lowe, Kroeck & Sivasubramaniam,1996).
When implementing a transformational leadership program, executive coaching is a dominant way an organisation develops leaders (Grant, Passmore, Cavanagh & Parker, 2010). Coaching in organisations focuses on improving work-related skills and performance in a way that is beneficial to the coachee and organisation (Standards Australia, 2011).
This article apply's transformational leadership in developing leaders using executive coaching interventions. Moving on to apply in the leader-follower relationship by focusing on the role of safety and trust to improve performance and wellbeing. In the final section, taking a systemic perspective of transformational leadership and exploring the coaching implications by identifying learnings from complex systems leadership theory.
Applying Transformational Leadership to Develop Leaders
Let's start by briefly describing the four dimensions of transformational leadership.
Idealised Influence has an attributional component based on a follower’s perceptions of a leader as trustworthy, and also a behavioural aspect in considering a leader’s ethical and moral conduct (Tracey & Hinkin,1998).
Inspirational Motivation is the extent to which a leader communicates a vision which is inspiring to followers (Judge & Piccolo, 2004).
Intellectual Stimulation describes how leaders encourage followers to challenge assumptions and reframe problems to innovate (Avolio & Bass, 2002).
Finally, Individual Consideration recognises each follower based on their need for achievement, and coaches and mentors to higher levels of potential (Bass, 1999).
A benefit of transformational leadership is leaders can be developed using these four dimensions (Bass, 1999); and when combined with coaching can improve leadership performance. To demonstrate the effectiveness of this leadership model combined with coaching, a randomised control study among forty-four high-school teachers demonstrated that cognitive-behavioural solution-focused coaching that included transformational leadership increased goal attainment, wellbeing and self-reported leadership performance (Grant, Green & Rynsaardt, 2010).
Implicit Assumptions
To illustrate the application of coaching as part of a leadership development program, Bass (1999) suggests start by exploring a leader’s implicit assumptions of leadership. For example, an implicit assumption a leader might hold is that leadership is all about delivering results. This belief might show up as a leader having a bias towards action rather than taking time to explore different options or perspectives, which could make them shortcut enacting intellectual stimulation. With this assumption, coaching might take a developmental approach to help the leader better understand what is motivating their bias to action. Developmental coaching helps leaders develop more complex self-awareness, emotional self-regulation and cognitive understanding (Standards Australia, 2011). A developmental approach could help a leader explore the impact of this bias for action on themselves, followers and the systemic implications.
Self Concept
A transformational leadership model situates the leader as central to the leadership process (Yukl, 1999). The model assumes a leader can align the values of the organisation with each individual’s needs and motivate them to work towards organisational objectives rather than being driven by self-interest (Kuhnert, 1994). This transcending of personal interest involves self-actualisation to pursue a cause that is bigger than oneself (Maslow, 1954). A developmental process could include exploring a leader’s self-concept and identify and help them identify any beliefs or assumptions that undermine the motivation to lead others for the greater good (Bass, 1999).
Perspective Taking
Coaching could involve helping the leader strengthen their cognitive capacity to consider and integrate multiple perspectives into a more comprehensive view that enables adaptive action (Cavanagh, 2013). To illustrate, this process could include reviewing the challenges a leader is facing in their role and, for example, exploring any ethical dilemmas from a values, stakeholder and systemic perspective to come to a deeper understanding. An eclectic approach could also include strength-based coaching which enhances transformational leadership. For example, helping the leader recognise how they successfully navigated an ethical challenge in the past. This approach helping to strengthen the Idealised Influence component of transformation leadership.
Empathy
Transformational leadership theory underscores the vital role of emotional intelligence to enact the four dimensions. A study by Mandell & Pherwani (2003) stated that emotional intelligence is a predict a manager's transformational leadership. These findings reflect idealised influence and the ability to convey emotions (Antonakis, Cianciolo & Sternberg, 2004). A study by Kim & Kim (2017) found inspirational motivation and intellectual stimulation correlated highly with emotional intelligence. Furthermore, transformational leadership was founded on trust, empathy and a leader’s self-awareness, which are sub-components of emotional intelligence (Bass, 1985, Goleman, 1995). Coaching could include exercises to strengthen a leader's capacity for empathy and to reflect on their impact on others by exploring situations from a leader, team member and observer perspective.
Furthermore, a study by Mandell & Pherwani (2003) indicated that females tend to have higher emotional intelligence. A perspective confirmed in previous studies (Mayer, Caruso & Salovey, 1999). The qualities that females bring to transformational leadership include empathy and social skills, ethical and moral considerations, and being more developmentally orientated (Mandell & Pherwani, 2003, Powell, Posner & Schmidt, 1984, Bass, Avolio & Atwater, 1996). However, it is important to note that emotional intelligence predicts transformational leadership regardless of gender (Mandell & Pherwani, 2003). These learnings could form part of a case conceptualisation and highlight the role of cognitive-behavioural coaching to explore any underlying cognitive and emotional barriers that are negatively impacting how a leader enacts transformational leadership. For example, a technique like Socratic questioning could be used to increase self-awareness (Neenan, 2018).
Dark Side of Transformational Leadership
As well as shining a light on the role coaching can play in developing transformational leadership, there is also a dark side to transformational leadership (Tourish, 2013). For example, when a coach is collecting stakeholder feedback, they may notice signs of an authoritarian culture where followers do not believe they have the power to challenge a leader. An understanding of the different personality disorders is critical to differentiate between an optimal and disordered style. For example, a leader may have an optimal narcissistic personality type that gives them energy and confidence to enact the charismatic component of transformational leadership (Sperry, 2016, Bass, 1985). Whereas, a malignant narcissist may engage in chronic lying and intimidation to achieve their agenda (Caligor, Levy & Yeomans, 2015). This situation presents an ethical challenge in knowing when coaching using transformational leadership theory could be misused by a leader, and whether to exit the relationship or refer to a coach with relevant expertise.
Applying Transformational Leadership to Increase Team Performance
Over the last 20 years, there have been several studies on the effectiveness of transformational leadership. However, there is little on the causal relationship between transformational leadership and follower performance (Antonakis, Cianciolo & Sternberg, 2004), with few details on how a leader influences the cognition or behaviour of subordinates (Yukl, 1999). This section focuses on the role of safety and trust in the leader-follower relationship to improve a follower’s performance and wellbeing.
Psychological Safety
Lowe, Kroeck & Sivasubramanian (1996) described intellectual stimulation as the most underdeveloped component of transformational leadership theory. Intellectual stimulation encourages followers to challenge assumptions and engage in more divergent thinking (Bass, 1985). To facilitate this process, transformational leaders should create the climate for followers to participate in intellectual stimulation fully.
Transformational leaders are instrumental in shaping an organisational climate (Isaksen & Akkermans, 2011). Coaching can play a part by working with a leader to create a climate of psychological safety where followers feel comfortable to ask questions or challenge thinking without fear of retribution (Edmondson, 1999). Coaching can support transformational leadership in creative problem solving by developing greater reflexivity in critical thinking, giving feedback and facilitating divergent perspectives (Carmeli et al., 2013).
Also, without a climate of psychological safety, followers may not offer feedback concerning the emotional distress that stems from excessive workload. The emotional bond that forms between a transformational leader and follower can lead to burning out when the leader is unknowingly exploiting followers and putting them through prolonged stress (Seltzer & Bass, 1990). This example highlights the role of social awareness and empathy in a leader’s development (Goleman, 2006).
Trust
To support the wellbeing of followers, a study by Kelloway, Turner, Barling & Loughlin (2012) demonstrated that a mediating factor between transformational leadership and psychological wellbeing was a follower’s trust in their leader. Coaching can help a leader build trust and also identify any psychological barriers to adopting these behaviours. A study by Gillespie & Mann (2004), identified three factors that predicted individual’s trust towards their leader; these were a consultative approach to decision-making, communicating a vision and identifying shared values. Coaching could support a leader through a psycho-educational approach and setting proximal goals, practice these new behaviours, providing feedback, and reflection in a process of self-regulation (Gregory, Beck & Carr, 2011).
Also, according to Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman & Fetter (1990), trust in a leader mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and organisational citizenship behaviours. OCB is when followers display discretionary effort that is not part of the formal reward system and supports the functioning of the organisation (Organ, 1988). This emergent process is where followers adopt the values of the organisation through the integration of self-and organisational-identities (Kark, Shamir, & Chen, 2003). A study by Hackett, Wang, Chen, Cheng & Farh (2018), highlighted the gender differences with reinforcing OCB with male followers being motivated by career progression and females more motivated by a collaborative work environment.
Applying Transformational Leadership in Complex System
Since Burns (1978) first conceptualised transformational leadership much has changed in organisations. In today's knowledge economy innovation is critical to complete in an increasingly globalised, and technology-enabled environment (Bettis & Hitt, 1995). These changes have seen the development of a new leadership model that better reflects the complexity of organisations (Marion & Uhl-Bien, 2001).
Complex systems leadership theory (CSLT) views leadership as emergent where agents in a system interact in complex and dynamic ways to disseminate information, make change and respond to feedback in an ongoing social process (Jennings & Dooley, 2007). Traditional leadership models have been predicated on a causal relationship between a leader's influence, followers' response and the desired outcomes. In contrast, in today's uncertain environment, social systems are unpredictable and organisational outcomes cannot be attributed directly to a leader’s actions (Marion & Uhl-Bien, 2001).
Transformational leadership assumes a direct relationship by emphasising a leader’s authority in setting a vision, making decisions and focusing on each individual’s relationship with the leader (Malloch, 2014). Taking an eclectic coaching approach to incorporate learnings from CSLT, here are some examples to illustrate:
Idealised Influence has an attributional component based on a follower’s perceptions of a leader as trustworthy, and also a behavioural aspect in considering a leader’s ethical and moral conduct (Tracey & Hinkin,1998). Applying CSLT might include action plans that strengthen the psychological climate of the organisation (Isaksen, 2007).
Inspirational Motivation is the extent to which a leader communicates a vision which is inspiring to followers (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Applying CSLT could involve vicarious learning opportunities for followers to move away from two-way communication with the leader to better emphasis dialogue and people thinking together in relationships (Bandura, 1986, Isaacs,1999).
Intellectual Stimulation describes how leaders encourage followers to challenge assumptions and reframe problems to innovate (Avolio & Bass, 2002). Applying CSLT could focus on a leader’s goals to build multiple scenarios or pathways and use this to nurture innovation (Jennings & Dooley, 2007).
Individualised Consideration recognises each follower based on their need for achievement, and coaches and mentors to higher levels of potential (Bass, 1999). Applying CSLT could involve a psycho-educational approach to challenge ‘top-down’ bureaucratic leader-follower interactions to enable greater leadership within the system and recognise the web of interdependent networks where decision-making is more distributed (Marion & Uhl-Bien, 2001).
Applying Transformational Leadership to Leading Change
Having taken learnings from CSLT to further develop transformational leadership, this next section takes a systemic perspective on organisational change. According to Bass & Riggio (2006), transformational leadership is well placed to facilitate change through idealised influence and articulating a desirable future state; with inspirational motivation adding deeper meaning to the need for change (Shamir, House & Arthur, 1993).
It is through intellectual stimulation that transformational leaders encourage followers to challenge existing assumptions and to be creative in designing a future state (Jung, Chow & Wu, 2003). Finally, through individual consideration a leader could coach people to fulfil their needs and desire for personal growth in facilitating change (Bass, 1999). It is a process of augmenting transformational leadership with transactional leadership that a leader can provide the psychological support to followers, alongside using contingent rewards to seek compliance in the change process (Nadler & Tushman, 1989).
Furthermore, Weick & Quinn (1999), suggest organisational change can be episodic or continuous. An intentional approach to episodic change being more aligned to transformational leadership with a leader's role in establishing a vision and facilitating the meaning-making process. Transformational leadership theory suggests a ‘top-down’ approach to planning and implementing change.
However, according to Ryan, Williams, Charles & Waterhouse (2008), a ‘top-down’ model of change is likely to inhibit the flow of information throughout the organisation. This ‘top-down’ model situates agency in the change process as monological, where an expert facilitates change. Alternatively, a dialogical approach is where change is facilitated by many in the organisation (Jabri, 2012). Idealised influence and inspirational motivation suggest a more monological approach to change. Whereas, intellectual stimulation and individualised consideration suggest a more dialogical approach which encourages different perspectives in the change process. This paper concludes that in the more complex adaptive system, a dialogical approach may be more appropriate to support continuous change.
Conclusions
The resilience of transformational leadership is that it remains an aspirational leadership approach for many organisations, and possibly even more so with the need for organisations to transform continually. The strength of this model is the utility of the four dimensions, combined with an extensive evidence-base and the integration of MLQ in assessing leaders. However, critics could point to its limitations, with a lack of evidence on a causal relationship and underlying assumption that a leaders’ actions directly influence followers and organisational outcomes.
Furthermore, not recognising leadership as emergent, where agents in a system interact in complex and dynamic ways. This paper concludes that even with these limitations transformational leadership remains a valuable theoretical approach. A number of studies have provided evidence of how coaching can augment transformational leadership to enhance performance and wellbeing. It is by taking an eclectic approach that draws on different theoretical perspectives that coaching can help strengthen the application of transformational leadership theory.
Transformational leadership underscores the role of emotional intelligence in leadership effectiveness. Developmental coaching can play a role in strengthening a leader's self-awareness, emotional self-regulation and perspective-taking capacity. Recognising that no two leaders are the same, coaching interventions for transformational leadership are tailored to the specific needs of the leader. For example, by taking a strength-based approach and by exploring a leader’s implicit assumptions of leadership, their self-concept and by working collaboratively on their current leadership challenges in a self-regulatory process.
The challenge in applying transformational leadership is not to fall into a trap of a linear and reductionist understanding of leadership, instead recognise the emergent, non-linear dynamics (Cavanagh, 2013). A lesson for leaders and for those coaching in transformational leadership theory.