The Bilateral Dimensions of Transformational Leadership: (University Leadership Edition)

By Mark Ellis Ph.D.

Used as a university textbook, this groundbreaking research by Dr. Mark Ellis examines the bilateral dimensions of transformational leadership within the context of higher education. Since its inception over 30 years ago, transformational leadership has rapidly become known as an effective leadership model. The positive effects of transformational leadership on organizational constituency have been clearly supported by research. However, the inner dimensions of transformational leadership have undergone extremely limited empirical study. The major components of transformational leadership consist of inspirational motivation, idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. This research further investigates transformational leadership beyond these four characteristics by focusing on two variables identified as bilateral dimensions.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Lulu.com
• Release date: Apr 6, 2011
• ISBN: 9781257412341

Book preview

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

The leadership literature in higher education has changed in a few meaningful ways in the last fifteen years (Kezar, Carducci, & Contreras-McGavin, 2006). First, earlier research focused primarily on the college president, but in the last fifteen years, much of the research has focused on leaders throughout the institution—deans, department chairs, and directors and faculty (2006). Traditionally, institutions of higher learning have been thought to contain leaders who are transactional their leadership approach (Astin & Astin, 2000). However, Kezar, Carducci, and Contreras-McGavin (2006) examined the role of leaders in changing and diversifying educational institutions. The research revealed that leaders that embrace a more transformational view of leadership—seeking to empower others, develop trust, create motivation, and work to transform the values and preferences of the organizational culture were better able to provide leadership for diversity and change.

Tierney (1991) suggests the importance of transformational leadership for moving higher education out of the status quo and for making many of the changes needed so that it can serve a more diverse student body, create greater access, and embrace assessment and technology. Research to date suggests that the earlier belief that transformational leadership was of limited importance and had limited efficacy in higher education is not accurate (Bass, 1997; Mitchell & Tucker, 1992). As such, the literature reveals that a variety of leadership issues and contexts need and benefit from transformational leadership in institutions of higher education (Bass, 1997; Leithwood, 1992; Leithwood & Jantzi, 1990; Mitchell & Tucker, 1992).

Transformational Leadership in Higher Education

Transformational leadership has played a vital role in organizational change due to the rapidly changing trends of higher education (Tierney, 1991; Bass, 1997). Universities and organizations across the globe have been forced to adapt to the radical changes that have transpired within the last two decades (Rowley, Lujan & Dolence, 1997; Williams, 2003). As a result, leaders of educational institutions made necessary adjustments in order to meet those challenges or risk the possibility of becoming obsolete (Rowley et al., 1997). Relatively new universities offering non traditional education yet adhering to traditional academic core values have challenged the status quo of higher education which is steeped in tradition and resistance to change (Eckel, Hill & Green, 1998).

The rapid expansion of internet technology changed everything, including the way people learn (Palloff & Pratt, 2003). In the wake of the technological explosion universities began to harness the power of the internet in order to deliver educational opportunities to individuals unable to attend a university campus. Further, state universities began tinkering with the idea of online learning, weekend college, semesters and quarters comprised of a modular format. Relatively young, but highly successful universities began to spring up all over America. The Graduate School of America, now named Capella University has quickly become one of the most notable leaders in delivering state of the art education for working adults (Bear et al., 2003). As a result of this radical change, many are earning their education through these highly rigorous and demanding degree programs.

As a result of such demands for higher education, colleges and universities that are steeped in tradition are now faced with the intense challenges of organizational change (Bass, 1997). Online education, also known as e-learning is certainly not unique to private, entrepreneurial type institutions of higher learning.

Dolence and Norris (1995) state: education, colleges and universities that are steeped in tradition are now faced with the intense challenges of organizational change (Bass, 1997). Online education, also known as e-learning is certainly not unique to private, entrepreneurial type institutions of higher learning. Dolence and Norris (1995) state:

The Information Age is an epoch where higher education could occupy the pivotal role in society. It is a time when demand for learning is anticipated to skyrocket, but resources available under existing models for educational delivery are expected to remain fairly static. Fresh vision is needed to create new delivery systems for learning, new paradigms for financing, and new models for higher education.

Sashkin and Walberg (1993) also note that the task of the scholar today is to preserve the integrity of the scholarly process while taking full advantages of technologies which extend the collegial domain to any person in any location world-wide (Gaines, 2006). Highly esteemed Ivy League universities such as Harvard University offer a substantial volume of online, modular or e-Learning programs. In fact, Stanford University offers a fully online master’s degree in electrical engineering, something unheard of two decades ago. Further, other high- profile institutions such as University of Notre Dame, U.C. Berkeley, U.C.L.A., U.S.C. and a multitude of State universities and junior colleges are revamping many areas of their organizational infrastructure and learning platforms in order to adapt to the rapid changes in higher education.

Such adaptation is crucial in order to accommodate the demands placed on them as a result of global expansion, sociological trends, economic factors, and the explosion of the information age (Williams, 2003).

With such a high level of demand on institutions of higher learning to adapt to the current changes in structure that are prevalent in our global community, educational leaders must be able to successfully lead these institutions into higher levels of performance and efficiency (Bass, 1990; Gaines, 2006; Massimiliano, 2004). This calls for a different type of leadership than has been seen in the old top-down hierarchal forms of leadership that have successfully kept universities resistant to change (Paul, 2005, personal communication).

Leaders such as chancellors, university presidents, provosts, and academic deans, department chairs, program directors, faculty and online facilitators in order to be successful at bringing about effective change must become change agents who inspire, motivate, and empower organization-wide personnel at every level (Bass, 1997). In order to bring about successful transformation there has to be what Burns (1978) and Bass (1985) identified as transformational leadership.

As suggested by Leithwood (1992) evidence of the effects of transformational leadership is uniformly positive. He cites two findings from his own studies: (a) transformational leadership practices have a sizable influence on institutional collaboration, and (b) significant relationships exist between aspects of transformational leadership and teachers’ own reports of changes in both attitudes toward school improvement and altered instructional behavior.

Transformational Leadership Studies

Since the mid-20th century there has been a tremendous influx of leadership studies and leadership research (Kouzes & Posner, 2002; Robbins, 2004; Wiater, 2004). Out of these studies, what is known as transformational leadership has rapidly become a significant and dominant leadership paradigm. As Hartsfield (2003) notes in the early 80s scholars and leadership practitioners were growing frustrated with the inability of theorists and researchers to go past the concept of task versus people oriented leadership, also known as Theory X and a Theory Y forms of leadership. As a result of this dissatisfaction, there has been a significant amount of research which focuses the characteristics, attributes, and positive impact that exists in the results of the transformational leadership model (Avolio & Bass, 1988; Bass, 1990; Yammarino & Bass, 1990; Bass & Avolio, 1993; Yammarino & Bass, 1993; Yammarino, Spangler & Bass, 1993).

Based on early research that approached leadership studies according to traits, behaviors, style, and contingency theories; James MacGregor Burns (1978) based his premise on these early methods of leadership research. Developing the transactional and transformational leadership models, Burns (1978) and Bass (1985) describe transformational leadership behaviors as significantly different (Burns, 1978). Under the transactional leadership theory, followers are motivated through a system of reward and punishment facilitating the needs wants and desires (Bass, 1985) as well as the physical and psychological needs of a given set of subordinates (Maslow, 1954; Gardner & Clevanger, 1998). The transformational leadership model, also presented as the new leadership paradigm by Brian (1992), gives more attention to the follower as it contains the more charismatic and effective elements of leadership.

Transformational leadership is concerned with emotions, values, ethics, standards, and long-term goals, and includes assessing the follower’s motives, satisfying their needs (Hartsfield, 2003). Moreover, transformational leadership involves an exceptional form of influence that inspires followers to accomplish more than what is usually expected of them, implementing the process that often incorporates charismatic and visionary leadership (Bass, 1985; Conger & Kanungo, 1987; House, 1977; Trice & Beyer, 1986). Further, the transformational leader also influences followers beyond their own self-interest and focuses their interests on the good of the organization with its vision, goals and overall objectives in pursuit of the greater good (Bass, 1997).

Research conducted by Bass and Avolio (1993) indicate that there are four vital components that are prevalent and exist within a transformational leader. Early research (Bass, 1985) identified one of these components was charisma which was later replaced