Suchergebnisse

"Most research into leadership has presented leaders as heroic, charismatic and transformational 'visionaries'. The leader, whether in business, politics or any other field, is the most important factor in determining whether organizations succeed or fail. Indeed, despite the fundamental mistakes which have, arguably, directly led to global economic recession, it is often still taken for granted that transformational leadership is a good thing, and that leaders should have much more power than followers to decide what needs to be done."--Publisher's website

This paper explores how gender and organizational level interact to influence ratings of leadership and work satisfaction, and argues that transformational leadership permits women to simultaneously carry out leadership and gender roles. Findings of a study of the management team of a large US social services agency confirmed predicted similarities in male and female managers' transformational leadership and work satisfaction. Top managers of both sexes saw themselves as more transformational leaders, while their raters perceived them as less transformational than average for the sample. Those who were younger and at lower managerial levels were more likely to underrate themselves as leaders, while their raters viewed them as higher than average in transformational leadership. The results are discussed in terms of how organizational status, experiences and feedback processes influence individuals' leadership perceptions and the potential obstacles to women's accurate assessment of their leadership abilities.

Transformational leaders are typically seen as visionaries and catalysts of organizational change. Although organizational change is important, the transformational leadership model is vitally important and relevant to the public sector in ways that are not accounted for in this model. This article builds on and extends existing literature by identifying the key normative elements of a public sector transformational leadership model. Specifically, it focuses on why transformational leadership in the public sector should explicitly address democratic norms and the role of citizens and citizenship in both formulating and realizing shared goals.

This study aims to analyze the nexus between transformational leadership and corporate entrepreneurship through an integration of dispersed scholarly work on transformational leadership, absorptive capacity, and corporate entrepreneurship under one framework. A survey method was employed for the collection of data from small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) of Pakistan. The data were analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM) technique to empirically test the hypotheses. The results demonstrate that transformational leadership positively affects corporate entrepreneurship and its dimensions—namely, innovation, new business venturing, self-renewal, proactivity, and risk-taking—both directly and through absorptive capacity. The potential of transformational leadership to influence corporate entrepreneurship via absorptive capacity added additional interesting substitutes. Future studies may produce novel insights by examining different leadership styles, settings, or utilizing qualitative technique. Firms should invest to initiate transformational leadership training programs for their managers. Additionally, if these firms are aiming to promote corporate entrepreneurship, they should focus on hiring managers that have attributes of transformational leadership. Furthermore, they should also invest in absorptive capacity to utilize outside knowledge for the enhancement of entrepreneurial activities. This study exploits research work on the relationship between transformational leadership and corporate entrepreneurship in a novel way; it investigates the dimensions of entrepreneurship individually, as well as unidimensionally, and includes the mediating role of absorptive capacity and tests several other hypotheses that previously have been ignored. This study, compared to the existing research, contributes to the impact of transformational leadership on corporate entrepreneurship and absorptive capacity, especially in Pakistan's business settings.

Much research has been conducted to demonstrate the roles of emotional intelligence, political skill, and transformational leadership in the organisational context. However, there is a lack of research that investigates the relationships between the three, particularly in the construction project environment, thus this research attempts to fill this gap. It was hypothesised that emotional intelligence serves as the foundation of these relationships, whilst political skill is the mediator and transformational leadership is the output. Questionnaire survey was used to collect data from three large construction organisations in Australia where 273 valid responses were received. Data were analysed using structural equation modelling method to test the theoretical model. The finding of this research advances theoretical understanding by showing the relationships between emotional intelligence, political skill, and transformational leadership. Practically, it helps construction organisations strategise in recruiting and developing their project personnel.

Transformational leadership has become one of the dominant paradigms of leadership studies since its fist articulation by James MacGregor Burns in 1978. In recent years, however, this formulation of leadership has come under criticism, to include the critique of its ethical implications. One of the most innovative and provocative of such critiques is on by Michael Keeley in this book, grounded in his close study of the political theory of James Madison. Keeley argues that Madison provides a model of leadership that opposes transformational leadership and that avoids many of its ethical pitfalls. This chapter suggests an alternative interpretation of Madison's theory and works; one that places Madison's though squarely in the historical intellectual current that eventually yielded conceptions of transformational leadership. Moreover, I argue that Madison's continued concern with the proper roles of leaders and followers suggests a remedy for the ethical concerns over transformational leadership that Keeley and others so rightly identify.