MGT3LWM Comparing And Contrasting Leadership Theories - Assignment Solution

INTRODUCTION

Leadership which has been immensely researched over the last era has many classifications to define leadership; many definitions of leadership are concentrated on the process, skills, behavior approach, trait approach, situational approach and many others (Bennis, 1982). Leadership can be defined as a process which influences an individual or a group towards goal attainment (Hersey et al., 1979; Hersey & Blanchard, 1996; Blanchard, 2004). There are four central components to the leadership which are: (1) Leadership is a process of a transactional event between the followers and its leader, (2) Leadership transpires in group situations, (3) Influencing the followers, and (4) All effort is towards goal attainment (Northouse, 2007). In the last century, there have been many theories for leadership but all have their own pros and cons, the model of leadership has been growing due to the extensive research on these theories. This essay focuses on comparing and contrasting on Transformational (TF) leadership theory and Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory. Leadership is a process which is based on the interactions between leaders and their followers. TF and LMX are on a central approach that leaders can influence positively by various means, where the TF is focused on the ability of the leader to transform all its followers with an inspiring vision for a positive change, LMX sheds light on the significance of the relationship between the leader and its followers with a positive attitude and behavior. The contrasting and comparing of these two theories is essential because these theories have the ability to decide as to which theory is more impactful and can have prolonged effects on its followers. 

COMPARING AND CONTRASTING TF AND LMX

The foundation of LMX theory is The Vertical Dyad Linkage (LDL) theory which progressed and polished in many occasions earlier studies. Dansereau et al (1975) investigated the promising advantages of the VDL approach where the relationship of a leader and its follower is unique and based on a vertical exchange. LMX Theory is all about the relationship between the leader and the follower which has evolved and grew over time based on many exchanges (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). VDL theory had a limitation of vertical linkages, rather than a relationship with all their followers. For LMX theory previously the focus was set on the in-group (working relationships) or the out-group (limited or no working relationship) but recently the concept is enhanced by the focusing on the quality of exchanges between the leader and follower rather than segmenting in groups (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1991; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Schriesheim et al., 2001). The concept of Transformational leadership was introduced by Burns (1978) for the political leaders but since then there has been some extensive research on this concept and is even labeled as the new leadership paradigm in today’s environment due to the fact that it inspires, energizes, and intellectually stimulates followers during times of uncertainty which is essential to any situation (Bass, 1990; Northouse, 2007). It can be defined as the leadership style which brings a change in the individual and systems, the end goal being to transform followers into leaders. LMX is where a leader should develop high-quality exchanges with all of its followers, focusing on building dyadic relationships throughout which are unique to all members as the leader cannot treat all the followers in the same manner (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Northouse, 2007). The leadership making process is based on (1) the characteristics of the leader, (2) the characteristics of follower, and (3) the maturity of the leadership relationship. There are three phases to the relationship building process between the leader and its followers, the first phase is where leaders and followers are strangers with low-exchanges purely as a working formal relation, the second phase is where leaders and followers have strengthened their relationship by increased social exchanges and are now acquaintance, the third and final phase is where the relationship is matured and there are a high level of trust, loyalty, respect, and obligations (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1991, Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995).