Journal of Management History

Nothing new under the sun: transformational

leadership from a historical perspective

John H. Humphreys
Eastern New Mexico University, Portales, New Mexico, USA
Walter O. Einstein
University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, Dartmouth, Massachusetts, USA

Keywords Burns (1978, p. 19) summarized his concept

Transformational leadership, Introduction of transactional leadership:
Management, History
In recent years, management theorists have Such leadership occurs when one person
Abstract given considerable, and well deserved, takes the initiative in making contact with
Transformational leadership others for the purpose of an exchange of
attention to the testing of a ``new''
theory is a relatively recent valued things. The exchange could be
management paradigm of transformational
entrant into the realm of economic or political or psychological in
management thought. In fact, the leadership (Bass and Avolio, 1994). In fact, nature: a swap of goods or of one good for
majority of this literature has been during the five-year period from 1990 to 1995 money; a trading of votes between candidate
published in the past 15 years. alone, over 100 theses and dissertations and citizen or between legislators; hospitality
That being said, the ideas that are
central to transformational
investigated the concept and behaviors of to another person in exchange for willingness
leadership are not necessarily transforming leadership (Avolio et al., 1995). to listen to one's troubles. Each party to the
new. Many of these constructs Bass (1990) suggests that by applying the bargain is conscious of the power resources
can be found in the writings of behavioral characteristics of and attitudes of the other. Each person
earlier management theorists. The recognizes the other as a person. Their
literature indicates that
transformational leadership, leaders can
purposes are related, at least to the extent
transformational leadership can guide their followers toward performance
that the purposes stand within the bargaining
positively impact on organizational beyond expectations. process and can be advanced by maintaining
outcomes and employee The historian James MacGregor Burns
satisfaction. Without an that process. But beyond this the relationship
understanding of its historical (1978), in his book Leadership, was the first to does not go. The bargainers have no enduring
roots, however, transformational coin the terms transactional and purpose that holds them together; hence they
leadership risks becoming nothing transformational leadership. His interest was may go their separate ways. A Leadership act
more than the latest ``buzzword'' took place, but it was not one which binds the
primarily political leadership but the terms
for enhancing organizational
quickly caught on in organizational leader and followers together in a mutual and
performance. To fully understand
and appreciate the paradigm, one management circles. continuing pursuit of higher purpose.
must trace the development of the
Transactional leader behavior is the style of
transformational factors from a
historical perspective. leadership that is most often exhibited in
Transactional leadership industry today (Yammarino and Bass, 1990).
The authors would like to The key to the transactional style of Moreover, active transactional leader
thank Dr Bill Brunsen and behavior (contingent reward) has been
leadership is the exchange between the
Dr Dale Davis for their positively correlated to follower attitudes
observations in the superior and subordinate. They influence
and performance (Avolio et al., 1988; Bass and
development of this each other in a way that both parties receive
manuscript. A special Avolio, 1990; Dubinsky et al., 1995; Waldman
something of value. In other words, the
thanks goes to the et al., 1990). The majority of the published
superiors give subordinates something that
anonymous reviewer whose literature indicates that this is not the case
comments clearly enhanced they want (for example, a salary increase) in
with more passive and avoidant leader
their work. exchange for something that the superiors
behaviors (Avolio et al., 1988; Bass, 1985;
desire (e.g. greater productivity, conformity
Howell and Avolio, 1993; Kessler, 1993; Kirby
to standards, etc.). The parties are mutually
et al., 1992; Podsakoff et al., 1982).
dependent on one another and the
contributions of each side are understood
and rewarded (Burns, 1978). In this
transaction, leader influence is based on the
Transformational leadership
premise that it is in the best interest of the Transformational leader behavior also
Management Decision subordinates to follow. originates in the personal values and beliefs
41/1 [2003] 85-95
# MCB UP Limited The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
[ISSN 0025-1747]
[DOI 10.1108/00251740310452934] http://www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister http://www.emeraldinsight.com/0025-1747.htm

[ 85 ]
John H. Humphreys and of the leader but does not constitute an great feats. This is characterized by the
Walter O. Einstein exchange of commodities between superior communication of high expectations, using
Nothing new under the sun: and subordinate (Bass, 1985). symbols to focus efforts, and expressing
transformational leadership
from a historical perspective Transformational leaders operate out of important purposes in simple ways.
Management Decision deeply held personal value systems that Intellectual stimulation of followers is
41/1 [2003] 85-95 include things like justice and integrity. Bass' (1985) third factor associated with
Burns (1978) refers to these as end values. transformational leadership. This is
End values are those values that cannot be characterized by promoting intelligence,
negotiated or exchanged between rationality, logical thinking, and careful
individuals. By expressing these personal problem solving. An intellectually
standards, transformational leaders unite stimulating leader is intent on showing
their followers but, more importantly, they subordinates new ways of looking at old
can change their followers' goals and beliefs. problems (Avolio et al., 1988). They tend to
Burns (1978, p. 20) explains the concept of emphasize teaching their followers to search
transforming leadership as follows: for sensible solutions.
Such leadership occurs when one or more Bass' (1985) fourth dimension of the
persons engage with others in such a way that transformational leader is individual
leaders and followers raise one another to consideration. These leaders tend to pay close
higher levels of motivation and morality. attention to the inter-individual differences
Their purposes, which might have started out among their followers. They often act as
as separate but related, as in the case of mentors to their subordinates. Coaching and
transactional leadership, become fused. advising followers with individual personal
Power bases are linked not as counterweights attention characterize this factor.
but as mutual support for common purpose. There is a preponderance of literature
Various names are used for such leadership, indicating that transformational leadership
some of them derisory: elevating, mobilizing, can lead to substantial organizational rewards
inspiring, exalting, uplifting, preaching, (Bass, 1990; Deluga, 1988; Tichy and Ulrich,
exhorting, evangelizing. The relationship can 1984; Yammarino and Bass, 1990; Yammarino
be moralistic, of course. But transforming et al., 1993). Transformational leadership has
leadership ultimately becomes moral in that been positively correlated to leader
it raises the level of human conduct and effectiveness ratings, leader and follower
ethical aspiration of both leader and led, and satisfaction, follower efforts, support for
thus it has a transforming effect on both. innovation, and overall organizational
Thus, transformational leadership results in performance (Avolio et al., 1988; Bass et al.,
achievement of higher levels of performance 1987; Gaspar, 1992; Hater and Bass, 1988;
among followers than previously thought Howell and Avolio, 1993; Humphreys, in press;
possible (Bass, 1990). Transformational Kessler, 1993; Lowe et al., 1996; Nischan, 1997;
leaders achieve this in one or more ways. Patterson et al., 1995; Seltzer and Bass, 1990;
Bass (1985) proposed four behaviors he Waldman et al., 1987; Wofford et al., 1998;
believed were associated with Yammarino et al., 1993). In addition, findings
transformational leadership: have been reported that suggest that
1 charisma (idealized influence); transformational leader behavior is
2 inspiration; associated with employee commitment to the
3 intellectual stimulation; and organization, trust in the leader, and positive
4 individual consideration. organizational citizenship behaviors (Bycio
et al., 1995; Podsakoff et al., 1990).
Attaining charisma in the eyes of followers is Further, research suggests that
a critical step in becoming a transformational transformational leader behavior delivers an
leader (Bass, 1990). Charismatic leaders exert augmentation effect, that is, performance,
an enormous amount of influence (Conger effort, and satisfaction that rises above that
and Kanungo, 1988; Howell and Frost, 1989). derived by contingent reward leader behavior
Followers consistently place an inordinate (Avolio et al., 1988; Geyer and Steyrer, 1998;
amount of confidence and trust in Hater and Bass, 1988; Howell and Avolio, 1993;
charismatic leaders (Howell and Avolio, Waldman et al., 1990; Yammarino and Bass,
1992). This charismatic dimension of 1990; Yammarino et al., 1993).
transformational leadership is characterized
by providing vision and a sense of mission,
instilling pride in and among the group, and
gaining respect and trust.
Transformational leadership: the
Inspiration, often referred to as
evolution through historical
inspirational motivation, is usually a
management thought
companion of charisma. Transformational Bernard Bass' (1985) model of
leaders inspire their followers to accomplish transformational leadership is a relatively
[ 86 ]
John H. Humphreys and recent entrant into the leadership and soldiers at this point as ``a disorganized mass
Walter O. Einstein management literature. This being said, the of individually helpless atoms''. Under
Nothing new under the sun: ideas that are central to his transformational Xenophon's leadership, however, the
transformational leadership
from a historical perspective leadership model are not necessarily new. community of the 10,000 was spared the
Management Decision Many of these constructs can be found in the horrors of complete disintegration and their
41/1 [2003] 85-95 writings of earlier writers and management salvation realized. How did Xenophon
theorists. To fully understand the accomplish this? He describes his approach
development of Bass' (1985) model, and to in the Anabasis. He first recognized that he
comprehend how transforming leadership must turn around the minds of his followers
impacts on management thought, it is helpful by providing much needed encouragement.
to trace the historical evolution of the factors He did this by way of a series of speeches.
associated with transformational leadership. Quintilian (1954) declared that the ``goddess
of persuasion sat upon his lips'' (Institutio
The philosophical beginnings Oratoria 10.1.82). Xenophon spoke of moving
On examination of the earliest writings, it is from a passive, confused, perplexed state of
apparent that our fixation with the notion of mind to one of activity, clarity, and
leadership has been with us for thousands of understanding (Howland, 2000). He inspired
years. Actual written principles regarding his followers, by employing powerful terms
leadership and the leader/follower and symbols, to become a motivated, unified
relationship were beginning to emerge as force with high morale, a common goal, and a
much as 5,000 years ago (Bass, 1981). Further, sense of purpose that transcended their
the philosophical understanding of the individual self-interests. Xenophon stood
factors associated with transformational apart from his predecessors in that he was
leadership was beginning to appear as well. able to look beyond the customs and
In many of the Chinese classical works, conventions of the day that had limited their
leaders such as Confucius and Asoka vision. In essence, Xenophon was able to
encouraged those in power to become moral employ leadership behaviors that ranged
forces for the good of followers and their from the necessary to the noble (Howland,
development. Many of these same thoughts 2000). Could it be that this behavioral range
are repeated in the writings of Aristotle. In exemplifies the transactional-
ancient Greece, the heroic deeds of Ajax, as transformational leader behavior continuum
told by Homer, embodied inspirational that Bass and Avolio (1994) refer to as the full
leadership. Further, Plato spoke at length to range of leader behavior? Possibly. There is
the issue of effective leadership and little doubt, however, that these ancient
charisma. Plato asserted that if leaders philosophers had built the foundation for the
desired to be charismatic, they must learn to evolution of transformational leadership.
express important ideas by using symbols
and metaphors in their managerial efforts Early management thought
(Takala, 1998). These philosophers were Strands of the transformational leadership
promoting charismatic leaders as moral factors can also be found in the writings of
agents that inspire followers by evoking many of the early management pioneers.
symbolic images and expressing important Frederick Taylor, known for his system of
ideas in simple, rational ways. Could it be scientific management, is considered by
they attended the birth of transformational many to be the antithesis of a
leadership as a construct? transformational leader. Drucker (1976),
Probably no other figure from the ancient however, demonstrates that glimpses of the
world illustrates these concepts to a greater transformational leadership factors were
degree than Xenophon, who describes his beginning to emerge. From Taylor's own
philosophical self-discovery, by way of a testimony:
military campaign, in the Anabasis. It becomes the duty of those on the
Xenophon, an intellectual heir of Socrates, is management side to deliberately study the
best remembered for his successful retreat of character, the nature, and the performance of
the 10,000 from Persia. In the third book of each workman, with a view to finding out his
this journey, the 10,000 soldiers found limitations, on the one hand, but even more
themselves in dire straits, largely important, his possibilities for development
on the other hand; and then, as deliberately
precipitated by previous leaders who
and systematically as possible, to train and
exhibited various levels of treachery and
help teach the workman, giving him,
extreme autocratic behavior. The men were wherever it is possible, those opportunities
far away from home, surrounded by enemies, for advancement which will finally enable
almost without supplies, and very him to do the highest and most interesting
demoralized. Their very survival was in and most profitable class of work . . .
question. Howland (2000, p. 881) describes the development is not a single act; it goes on

[ 87 ]
John H. Humphreys and from year to year and is the subject of widely held views of their day that workers
Walter O. Einstein continual study on the part of management. were impersonal hands that were the adjunct
Nothing new under the sun: of the machine. Early thinking put the
transformational leadership It does not require a great leap to envision
from a historical perspective manager as an individual who followed
the transformational factor of individual
Management Decision reason while workers follow their
consideration in Taylor's words. Further,
41/1 [2003] 85-95 sentiments. Follett argued that intellectual
many wrongly considered scientific
reasoning could stimulate workers because a
management as an efficiency movement.
mixture of reason, feelings, and character
Taylor, however, believed that the difference
governed both managers and workers
between true scientific management and the
(Graham, 1996). From her own writings
efficiency craze of his time period was in a
(Follett, 1918) comes a clear illustration of
``mental revolution''. That is, the growth of
how transformational leadership works with
both leader and follower that is created from
a group of ``transformed'' followers. She
mutual respect over time. He envisioned that
called it ``the collective idea:''
leaders and followers, working together
Let us imagine that you, I, A, B and C are in
toward common goals with mutual conference. Now what from our observation
responsibility, could perform beyond the of groups will take place? Will you say
expectations of both parties (Wren, 1994). something, and then I add a little something,
Leaders shifting from a ``responsible for'' to a and then A, and B, and C, until we have
``responsible to'' relationship with followers together build up, brick wise, an idea,
to achieve extraordinary performance is constructed some plan of action? Never. A has
certainly consistent with transforming one idea, B another, C's idea is something
leadership (Einstein and Humphreys, in different from either, and so on, but we
press). cannot add all these ideas to find the group
idea. They will not add any more than apples
Gilbreth (1914), in her book Psychology of
and chairs will add. But we gradually find
Management, continued Taylor's scientific that our problems can be solved, not indeed
management position. She saw scientific by mechanical aggregations, but by the subtle
management in terms of the welfare of the process of the intermingling of all the
individual worker. Wren (1994, p. 149) different ideas of the group. A says
describes her belief that the ``object of something. Thereupon a thought arises in B's
scientific management was to develop each mind. Is it B's idea or A's? Neither. It is a
person to the fullest potential by mingling of the two. We find that A's idea,
strengthening personal traits, special after having been presented to B and returned
abilities, and skills''. The result was to A, has become slightly, or largely, different
from what it was originally. In like manner it
emphasis on the employee as an individual.
is affected by C and so on. But in the same
Although leaders were certainly interested in way B's idea has been affected by all the
the use of correct methods and ideal others, and not only does A's idea feel the
equipment, follower productivity also modifying influence of each of the others, but
depended on a leader's ability to guide A's ideas are affected by B's relation to all the
attitude, opportunity, and provide a positive others, and A's plus B's are affected by all the
physical environment (Wren, 1994). Again, others individually and collectively, and so
the transformational factors of individual on and on until the common idea springs into
consideration and intellectual stimulation being. We find in the end that it is not a
appear to be emerging. question of my idea being supplemented by
yours, but that there has been evolved a
Although the ``scientific management'' era
composite idea (Follett, 1918, ch. 2).
provided a philosophy of managing physical
and human resources in a technical world, Follett described a leader's position power as
workers were often seen as mere extensions being generally viewed as ``power-over'' with
of the machines and tools that they used. one side trying to gain power over the other
Growing out of a building interest in social side. She offered another approach, which
behavior and systems, a philosophy began to she referred to as ``power-with''. She
emerge that focused more on the human side described this as a ``jointly developed power,
of the person-machine relationship. Mary a coactive, not coercive power'' (Graham,
Parker Follett provided new thinking that 1996, p. 103). Rather than assuming classical
would help make the transition from the management's strong hierarchical view of
scientific management era to the behavioral position power in organizations, Follett
science era (Graham, 1996). asserts power should be cooperatively shared
for the purpose of resolving conflict. She
The social person era viewed legitimate power as that which is
Follett's background in social service helped produced from the circular behavior between
her develop ideas on the importance of the two groups. Later leaders, such as Gandhi,
group and the relationships of its members. would demonstrate this notion of the mutual
Follett's work was a departure from the relationship inherent within the leader/
[ 88 ]
John H. Humphreys and follower relationship (Nair, 1996). This rings understand the situation, must see it as a
Walter O. Einstein clearly as transformational leadership's view whole, must see the interrelation of all the
Nothing new under the sun: of influence. Follett, on power and influence: parts . . . He must see the evolving situation,
transformational leadership the developing situation. His wisdom, his
from a historical perspective If your business is so organized that you can
influence a co-manager while he is judgment, is used, not on a situation that is
Management Decision stationary, but on one that is changing all the
41/1 [2003] 85-95 influencing you, so organized that a workman
has an opportunity of influencing you as you time (Follett, 1933, p. 51).
have of influencing him; if there is an
She did not underestimate the personal
interactive influence going on all the time
qualities of a leader but to her these were not
between you, power-with may be built up
(Graham, 1996, p. 107). the main points that determined a leader.
While much has been written over the years
One way to reduce the power-over situation about leaders, Follett also saw followers as
is through integration, as described in her having an important role. She said that the
idea on constructive conflict. Another way is role of the follower is to keep the leader in
to obey the law of the situation. When both control of the situation. This is not much
sides follow the law of the situation, no one different than the thoughts of modern
side has power over the other. A third way transformational leadership writings
she offers is to make business more of a (Graham, 1996).
functional unity. In a functional unity, each As mentioned above, Mary Parker Follett
person has his function, which should served as a bridge between the scientific
correspond to his abilities. Each person management era and the behavioral science
should then have the authority and era. She was a member of the Taylor Society
responsibility which goes with that function. and agreed that production had to be
Follett thought that people confused power optimized but she did not accept that strict
and authority. To her power was a self- division of labor best achieved this. While
developing capacity within a person. A many over the years may have forgotten
manager could not give a worker power, but Follett herself, her ideas can be seen
instead, could create the opportunities for the throughout the succeeding decades. Many
worker to develop their own power. schools of management thought have
Authority, on the other hand, can be developed over the years, each having
conferred upon a person but not until the certain popularity for a certain period of
capacity to accept it has been developed. time. It may possibly be that Mary Parker
Follett also suggested that authority should Follett's remarkable body of writing was not
not be given without also giving some only ahead of her time, but that it was
corresponding stake in the business. She transformational leadership that she was
gave an example of a certain store where the writing about.
employees had a form of profit sharing. One Similar to Follett, Chester Barnard saw
December the employees agreed to keep the that organizational goals would be furthered
store closed the day after Christmas. They if people were to work collectively and
took into account the number of people likely systematically. Barnard saw people as
to come out on this day versus the costs of external to the organization. By that, he
running the store. In another situation, the meant that people have a choice to enter the
employees decided to stay open after a organization based on their own free will and
certain holiday. In both cases, they had the how the organization meets their purposes,
power to decide (Graham, 1996). desires, impulses of the moment, as well as
While Follett never used the term the various alternatives seen as available. In
``transformational leadership'', she did share other words, the individual's motives play an
her views that paralleled current important role when it comes to free will.
transformational leadership thinking. Follett Barnard explains the behavior of the
divided leadership into three areas: individuals in organizations as resulting
leadership of position, leadership of from the ``modification of the action of the
personality, and leadership of function. To individual through control of or influence
her, leadership of function was the most upon one of these categories'' of choice
important: (Barnard, 1938, p. 17).
The leader then is one who can organize the Barnard's definition of a formal
experience of the group . . . and thus get the organization was ``a system of consciously
full power of the group. The leader makes the
coordinated activities of two or more
team. This is preeminently the leadership
quality ± the ability to organize all the forces persons'' (Barnard, 1938, p. 73). He viewed
there are in an enterprise and make them organizations as social systems that
serve a common purpose. Men with this constantly interacted with their
ability create a group power rather than environment. Barnard drew on a biological
express a personal power, . . . the leader must analogy to explain his views:
[ 89 ]
John H. Humphreys and . . . the activities contributed by the Whether authority is of personal or
Walter O. Einstein individual, following biological analogy, are institutional origin it is created and
Nothing new under the sun: in my thinking like the protoplasm and the maintained by public opinion, which in its
transformational leadership energies constantly working into and out turn is conditioned by sentiment, affection,
from a historical perspective
from the cell. When a new enterprise is reverence or fatalism. Even when authority
Management Decision undertaken it begins with a small group who rests on mere physical coercion it is accepted
41/1 [2003] 85-95
are the founders or incorporators, or by an by those ruled, although the acceptance may
individual who gathers about him an initial be due to fear of force (Barnard, 1938, p. 164).
small group. It then expands as an
organization by the development of additional Chester Barnard said a person can and will
cells or groups interlocked, by the constant accept a communication order when four
circulation of individuals more strictly, their conditions simultaneously exist. These are:
activities between groups. The principal 1 the communication is understood;
interlocking activity is communication. In 2 it is consistent with the purpose of the
this way we achieve the complex formal organization at the time of his decision;
organizations, . . ., familiar to us all (Wolf, 3 it is consistent with his personal interest
1974, p. 64). as a whole; and
Regarding his approach to analyzing a topic, 4 the mental and physical ability to comply
Barnard would use a polarity approach. He are present (Barnard, 1938, p. 165).
would begin with extreme positions and then Barnard anticipated the question, ``How can
attempt to arrive at a balanced point of view. an organization function if the concept of
Barnard's view of authority has caused authority lies with the individual?'' He says it
considerable debate. Many writers have is possible because orders personally comply
viewed authority as management's right to with the four conditions mentioned above;
lead, with this right being given as a people have a ``zone of indifference'' within
formality within the organization's power which they will accept orders without
structure. This is commonly called position questioning their authority, and there is
power. This kind of authority is seen as pressure from the informal organization
coming from higher levels within the within the formal organization.
organization. He explains the zone of indifference by
Barnard, on the other hand, saw authority describing categories of acceptability of
as resting on the consent of the subordinates. orders. On one side, there are those orders
Modern writers call this personal power and that are clearly unacceptable; there are those
it is the basis of an effective transformational that are more or less neutral, and those that
leader's role. Barnard defines this difference are accepted without question. The area of
as follows: one's unquestionable acceptance is a
Authority is the character of a person's zone of indifference. The zone of
communication order in a formal indifference then is that area where the
organization by virtue of which it is accepted person is indifferent towards the order with
by a contributor to or ''member`` of the
respect to the authority involved. The size of
organization as governing the action he
the zone of indifference depends upon the
contributes; that is, as governing or
determining what he does or is not to do so far degree to which the advantages for the
as the organization is concerned. If a directive individual to be connected with the
communication is accepted by one to whom it organization outweigh the disadvantages.
is addressed, its authority for him is According to Barnard (1938), there are two
confirmed or established. It is admitted as the kinds of authority of leadership ± authority of
basis of action. Disobedience of such a position and authority of leadership.
communication is a denial of its authority for Authority of position comes strictly from a
him. Therefore, under this definition the person's position regardless of their ability.
decision as to whether an order has authority Authority of leadership comes from the
or not lies with the persons to whom it is respect and confidence that others have for
addressed, and does not reside in ``persons of
the person's superior ability. Combining
authority'' or those who issue these orders
(Barnard, 1938, p. 163).
both authority of position and authority of
leadership can cause the zone of indifference
Follett, by comparison, depersonalized to become large.
authority and proposed following the law of Barnard also recognized the effects of the
the situation. Barnard retained the personal informal organization on helping to maintain
aspects but saw authority as coming from the authority. He says that the efficiency of
bottom-up rather than top-down. Barnard organizations depends on the degree to which
realized that his view was contrary to the individuals accept orders. Denying the
view widely held among people but he authority of an order becomes a threat to the
wanted to show that the commonly held interests of other individuals who do not see
belief regarding authority was not universal: the order as unacceptable and still find it
[ 90 ]
John H. Humphreys and advantageous to be connected with the (Wren, 1994). Wren (1994, p. 250) further
Walter O. Einstein organization. This group attitude then affects declares:
Nothing new under the sun: the attitude of the individual to the point that Elton Mayo had set the stage for the social
transformational leadership
from a historical perspective they do not question authority that is written person by seeking a new leadership,
near the zone of indifference. buttressed by social and human skills, that
Management Decision
41/1 [2003] 85-95 Transformational leaders recognize would overcome anomie and social
disorganization.
Barnard's zone of indifference as the zone, or
area of influence, where leader bonding can Howell and Avolio (1993, p. 892) would echo
take place (Einstein, 1995; Einstein et al., this sentiment with their suggestion that
1997). When people have gained sufficient transformational leaders ``inspire followers
trust, confidence, and desire in the leader as to transcend their own self-interests for a
a person (personal power), and are higher collective purpose, mission, or
sufficiently congruent with the vision''.
organization's mission and goals, they are Work in discovering the secrets of effective
able to perform at levels beyond their own management was also taking place in
expectations (Bass, 1985). Recalling Follett's Europe. Henri Fayol is often credited with
notion of the collective idea, it is difficult to the creation of the first theory of
imagine that the previously mentioned management (Wren, 1994). As early as 1900,
researchers and management writers Fayol began to address the separation of
envisioned transformational leadership leadership and technical management. He
without being greatly influenced by the asserted that ``a leader who is a good
writings of Follett and Barnard. administrator but technically mediocre is
As management thought entered the social generally much more useful to the enterprise
person era, the theoretical foundation for than if he were a brilliant technician but a
transformational leadership continued to mediocre administrator'' (Wren, 1994, p. 181).
evolve. Wren (1994) states that both Follett It appears that Fayol accepted the premise
and Barnard concluded that moral leadership that leadership was a key to organizational
would enhance the effectiveness of success. How closely this statement
organizations and the well being of people. resembles that of Jim Reiner, vice-chairman
This thought is captured in the work of of Honeywell, when responding to a question
Sergiovanni (1990, p. 24), who wrote, ``In about transformational leadership from
transformational leadership . . . leaders and Tichy and DeVanna (1986, p. 30):
followers are united in pursuit of higher-level A leader is more than a technician to me. If
goals common to both.'' there's a need to separate the two, then I say
Burns (1978) concluded that leave the definition of the leader to the person
transformational leaders could actually who knows how to deal with the value system
become moral agents for their subordinates. of the organization and paint a picture of
Bass (1985) suggests that transformational where we're going. The manager can take
leaders raise their followers' consciousness what the leader has done for a while, as long
levels and persuade them to pursue the as the value system stays constant and the
vision is valid. But if the value system
interests of the organization over their own
changes or the vision is no longer valid, the
self-interests. Transformational leaders often
manager, the technical managers, will take
accomplish this by talking about their you right into oblivion.
important values, beliefs, dreams, and ideals
(Avolio et al., 1995). These ideas are Although Fayol never heard the label of
consistent with those expressed by Barnard transformational leadership, his personal
(1938, p. 283): experience apparently led him to an
Executive responsibility, then, is that understanding of the idea that transforming
capacity of leaders by which, reflecting leaders possessed the personal power to
attitudes, ideals, hopes, derived largely from greatly influence the organization.
without themselves, they are compelled to A contemporary of Fayol was Max Weber.
bind the wills of men to the accomplishment Although best known for his theory of
of purposes beyond their immediate ends . . ..
bureaucracy, Weber's postulation of
The social person era was likely ushered in charismatic authority provides an important
by the Hawthorne studies. Although the foundation for the charismatic and
experiments were flawed, the end result was transformational leadership models. Weber
the recognition that performance was asserted that charismatic authority derived
enhanced by incentives and the leadership its legitimate power from faith in the
style of the supervisor. This human relations personal character of the leader, not from
leadership style emphasized interpersonal rules or traditions (Conger and Kanungo,
relations, listening, communication, and 1988). His belief was that charismatic
socio-human skills for the manager-leader authority was based upon ``devotion to the
[ 91 ]
John H. Humphreys and specific and exceptional sanctity, heroism, or to demystify charismatic leadership. He
Walter O. Einstein exemplary character of an individual agreed with Follett and Barnard, in that
Nothing new under the sun: person'' (Henderson and Parsons, 1947, p.
transformational leadership charismatic leadership could only exist when
from a historical perspective 328). Weber suggested that the charismatic followers said it did. He did not accept the
Management Decision leader was obeyed ``by virtue of the followers' premise that charismatic leaders were
41/1 [2003] 85-95 personal trust and belief in the leader's endowed with certain characteristics that
powers or revelations'' (Wren, 1994, p. 195). made them charismatic.
He concluded that charismatic leaders Tucker (1968) believed that there were two
possess the ability to inspire exceptional types of charismatic leadership. He labeled
achievement by followers. Bass (1990, p. 21), these as the prophet and the activist. Using
describing the charismatic aspect of his terminology, a prophet is a leader that
transformational leadership, asserts: excels in communicating a vision. An activist
Attaining charisma in the eyes of one's charismatic leader, according to Tucker,
employees is central to succeeding as a exhibited exceptional practical leadership
transformational leader. Charismatic leaders
skills. The ability to communicate a vision
have great power and influence. Employees
want to identify with them, and they have a
and assist followers in solving problems are
high degree of trust and confidence in them. key leader behaviors in Bass' (1985)
Charismatic leaders inspire and excite their transformational leadership model.
employees with the idea they may be able to House (1977) furthered Tucker's work with
accomplish great things . . . a more complete charismatic model. House
stressed the emotional aspects of charismatic
Moreover, Weber made the observation that
leadership (Kessler, 1993). He suggested that
people are more likely to follow a charismatic
charismatic leaders ``inspire their followers
leader during times of distress or turmoil.
to give unquestioned obedience, loyalty,
The transformational leadership literature
commitment, and devotion to the leader and
indicates that transformational leader
to the cause the leader represents'' (House,
behavior is most valuable during periods of
1977, p. 191). This definition, of course, has
turbulence and instability (Bass, 1985, 1990;
led many to observe that charismatic
Dubinsky et al., 1995; Howell and Avolio,
1993; Humphreys and Parise, 2000). leadership can be a two-edged sword. Leaders
with great charisma can lead followers to
The modern era greater heights of performance and morality
The modern era has witnessed a plethora of or exhibit tendencies to manipulate and
leadership research and leader charisma has enslave followers (Conger, 1990; Howell and
certainly received its share of attention. Avolio, 1992; Sankowsky, 1995). Clearly,
Building on Weber's charismatic authority, history has given us many examples of
Shils (1965) suggested that charisma could be charismatic leaders that have used their
exhibited in a work environment. He charisma to lead followers down a path of
believed that Weber's concept of charismatic destruction (Hitler, Jim Jones, etc.).
authority was too idealistic. Shils advanced House insisted that charismatic leaders
the notion that charisma could be found in have distinguishing personality
ordinary people with ordinary jobs in characteristics and behaviors from their
ordinary organizations. One of the hallmarks noncharismatic counterparts. He listed these
of Bass' (1985) transformational leadership as high self-confidence, dominance, a strong
model is the idea that transformational belief in the moral correctness of the vision,
leader behaviors are often present at various and the need to influence other people
levels and in diverse types of organizations (House, 1977). Transformational theorists
(Bass et al., 1987; Deluga, 1988). believe these characteristics to be the
Tucker (1968) first described the dominion of transformational leaders (Bass,
charismatic leader/follower relationship and 1985, 1990; Tichy and DeVanna, 1986).
is often credited with the first formal theory Conger and Kanungo (1988) added to the
of charismatic leadership (Kessler, 1993). He charismatic literature by introducing
examined the behaviors of the leaders of the situational leadership into the charismatic
Russian Revolution and the effects those model. They explain charisma as an
behaviors had on followers. Some have attributional occurrence. Simply, followers
asserted that this was problematic as it was a attribute charisma to those leaders they
Machiavellian time period where the elite perceive as effective. The Conger and
ruled primarily by means of intimidation and Kanungo (1988) model suggests that certain
fear. Even the ultimately pragmatic conditions must be present for a leader to be
Machiavelli, however, realized that radical perceived as transformational:
change was best achieved if one could gain . the leader must see the opportunity and
the esteem of the followers. Tucker attempted develop a vision to address it;
[ 92 ]
John H. Humphreys and . the vision must be communicated to leadership complementing, or augmenting,
Walter O. Einstein followers and those followers must be active transactional leader behavior (Hater
Nothing new under the sun: and Bass, 1988; Howell and Avolio, 1993;
transformational leadership persuaded that change must occur;
from a historical perspective . the leader's personal success, sacrifice, Waldman et al., 1990; Yammarino and Bass,
Management Decision and risk-taking must convince followers 1990; Yammarino et al., 1993).
41/1 [2003] 85-95 to trust his/her abilities and vision; and
. the leader must convince the followers
that the vision is both realistic and Conclusion
attainable (Conger, 1991).
Although a relatively recent conceptual
Thus, instead of a personal characteristic, model, the underpinnings of the
Conger and Kanungo (1988, p. 83) suggest transformational leader behaviors certainly
``what distinguishes charismatic from have a distinguished heritage in earlier
noncharismatic leaders is the charismatic thoughts and models. To some, Bass' (1985)
leader's ability to recognize deficiencies in model of transformational leadership is not
the present system''. only a new paradigm, but also the most
All people with charisma, however, are not complete picture of the ``full range'' of
transformational leaders. Charismatics may leadership (Bass and Avolio, 1994). To others,
have significant emotional appeal to those transformational leader theory is nothing
around them but there is no transformational more than a return to trait theory (Weihrich
component to the relationship (Bass, 1985). and Koontz, 1993). The historical perspective
Although charisma is recognized as an presented suggests that modern
integral transformational factor, charisma transformational leader theory has a rather
alone doesn't explain transforming impressive history. Although Bass' (1985)
leadership (Bass, 1985). These charismatic transformational model is a relatively new
theories, however, did provide the construct, the components, factors, and
framework for the broader transformational behaviors that make up transformational
leadership models (Kessler, 1993). leadership have been observed since the
At roughly the same period, and building dawning of management thought. The writer
on the work of House (1977), Burns (1978) was of Ecclesiastes (1: 9,10) summed up this
developing his transforming leadership predicament by writing:
model. This leadership model was far The thing that hath been, it is that which
broader than the preceding charismatic shall be; and that which is done is that which
models (Yukl, 1989). Burns envisioned shall be done: and there is no new thing under
transformational leadership at one end of a the sun. Is there any thing whereof it may be
said, See, this is new? It hath been already of
continuum and transactional leadership at
old time, which was before us.
the other (Bass, 1985). According to Burns'
(1978) model, transformational leaders have Clearly, the roots of Bass' (1985)
an understanding of their followers' needs transformational leadership model are
and attempt to structure leader/follower inextricably embedded in the evolution of
interaction to appeal to those needs. He management thought.
believed that these leaders appealed to their
followers through a sense of moral obligation References
and values such as liberty, justice, and Avolio, B.J., Bass, B.M. and Jung, D.I. (1995),
equality. Burns suggests that transactional Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire
leaders only appeal to their followers' self- Technical Report, Mind Garden, Redwood
interests. City, CA.
Finally, Bernard Bass (1985) expanded Avolio, B.J., Waldman, D.A. and Einstein, W.O.
Burns' work by incorporating a broader (1988), ``Transformational leadership in a
range of processes and a detailed description management game simulation'', Group and
Organization Studies, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 59-80.
of the behaviors that separate transactional
Barnard, C. (1938), The Functions of the Executive,
and transformational leaders (Kessler, 1993).
Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Further, Bass' (1985) model challenged
Bass, B.M. (1981), Stogdill's Handbook of
Burns' assumption that transformational and
Leadership: A Survey of Theory and Research,
transactional leaders were at opposite poles. Free Press, New York, NY.
Burns (1978) believed a leader to be one or the Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance
other. In Bass' (1985) construct, Beyond Expectations, Free Press, New York,
transformational leadership is not a NY.
substitute for transactional leadership but, Bass, B.M. (1990), ``From transactional to
rather, a complement (Dubinsky et al., 1995). transformational leadership: learning to
Research has supported Bass' share the vision'', Organizational Dynamics,
conceptualization of transformational Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 19-31.

[ 93 ]
John H. Humphreys and Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1990), Manual for the Fins-Mary Parker Follett-02.html (accessed
Walter O. Einstein Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, August 1999).
Nothing new under the sun: Consulting Psychologists Press, Follett, M.P. (1933), ``The essentials of leadership'',
transformational leadership
from a historical perspective Palo Alto, CA. lecture delivered at Department of Business
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1994), Improving Administration, London School of Economics
Management Decision
41/1 [2003] 85-95 Organizational Effectiveness through and Political Science. January, reprinted
Transformational Leadership, Sage, from the book, Freedom and Coordination,
Thousand Oaks, CA. Chapter IV, pp. 47-60. edited by L. Urwick
Bass, B.M., Avolio, B.J. and Goodheim, L. (1987), (1949), The Management Publications Trust,
``Quantitative description of world-class Ltd.
industrial, political, and military leaders'', Gaspar, S. (1992), ``Transformational leadership:
Journal of Management, Vol. 13, pp. 7-19. an integrative review of the literature'',
Bass, B.M., Waldman, D.A., Avolio, B.J. and Bebb, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Western
M. (1987), ``Transformational leadership and Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI.
the falling dominoes effect'', Group and Geyer, A.L.J. and Steyrer, J.M. (1998),
Organization Studies, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 73-87. ``Transformational leadership and objective
Burns, J.M. (1978), Leadership, Harper, performance in banks'', Applied Psychology:
New York, NY. An International Review, Vol. 47, pp. 397-420.
Bycio, P., Hackett, R.D. and Allen, J.S. (1995), Gilbreth, L. (1914), The Psychology of
``Further assessments of Bass' 1985 Management, Sturgis and Walton Co., New
conceptualization of transactional and York, NY.
transformational leadership'', Journal of Graham, P. (1996), Mary Parker Follett Prophet of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 80, pp. 468-78. Management, Harvard Business School Press,
Conger, J.A. (1990), ``The dark side of leadership'', Boston, MA.
Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 19 No. 2, Hater, J.J. and Bass, B.M. (1988), ``Superiors'
pp. 44-55. evaluations and subordinates' perceptions of
Conger, J.A. (1991), ``Inspiring others: the transformational and transactional
language of leadership'', Academy of leadership'', Journal of Applied Psychology,
Management Executive, Vol. 5, pp. 31-45. Vol. 73, pp. 695-702.
Conger, J.A. and Kanungo, R. (1988), Charismatic Henderson, A.M. and Parsons, T. (1947), Max
Leadership: The Elusive Factor in Weber: The Theory of Social and Economic
Organizational Effectiveness, Jossey-Bass Organization, Free Press, New York, NY.
Publishers, San Francisco, CA. House, R.J. (1977), ``A 1976 theory of charismatic
Deluga, R.J. (1988), ``Relationship of leadership'', in Hunt, J.G. and Larson, L.L.
transformational and transactional (Eds), Leadership: The Cutting Edge,
leadership with employee influencing pp. 189-207.
strategies'', Group and Organization Studies, Howell, J.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1992), ``The ethics of
Vol. 13, pp. 456-67. charismatic leadership: submission or
Drucker, P.F. (1976), ``The coming rediscovery of liberation?'', Academy of Management
scientific management'', The Conference Executive, Vol. 6, pp. 43-54.
Board Record, pp. 23-7. Howell, J.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1993),
Dubinsky, A.J., Yammarino, F.J., Jolson, M.A. ``Transformational leadership, transactional
and Spangler, W.D. (1995), ``Transformational leadership, locus of control, and support for
leadership: an initial investigation in sales innovation: key predictors of consolidated-
management'', Journal of Personal Selling business-unit performance'', Journal of
and Sales Management, Vol. 15, pp. 17-29. Applied Psychology, Vol. 78, pp. 891-902.
Einstein, W.O. (1995), ``The challenge of Howell, J.M. and Frost, P.J. (1989), ``A laboratory
leadership: a diagnostic model of study of charismatic leadership'',
transformational leadership'', The Journal of Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, Processes, Vol. 43, pp. 243-69.
Vol. 1, pp. 120-32. Howland, J. (2000), ``Xenophon's philosophic
Einstein, W.O. and Humphreys, J.H. (in press), odyssey: on the Anabasis and Plato's
``Transforming leadership: matching Republic'', The American Political Science
diagnostics to leader behavior'', The Journal Review, Vol. 94 No. 4, pp. 875-89.
of Leadership Studies. Humphreys, J.H. (in press), ``Transformational
Einstein, W.O., Dorris, J.M. and Harcar, T. (1997), leadership and support for e-commerce: the
``Leaders as change agents: matching moderating effects of leader practical
diagnostics to behaviors'', Proceedings of The intelligence'', The Journal of e.Commerce and
Association of Management and The Psychology.
International Association of Management, Humphreys, J.H. and Parise, P.A. (2000), ``Shifting
15th Annual Conference, Montreal, August, culture: an examination of the relationship
Vol. 15, pp. 12-26. between transformational leadership and
Follett, M.P. (1918), The New State, available at: sales productivity during a period of
Sunsite.utk.edu/FINS/Mary_Parker-Follett/ organizational turbulence'', interactive

[ 94 ]
John H. Humphreys and session at the Western Academy of Shils, E. (1965), ``Charisma, order, and status'',
Walter O. Einstein Management, Hawaii, April. American Sociological Review, Vol. 30,
Nothing new under the sun: Kessler, T.G. (1993), ``The relationship between pp. 201-13.
transformational leadership
from a historical perspective transformational, transactional, and laissez- Takala, T. (1998), ``Plato on leadership'', Journal of
faire leadership behaviors and job Business Ethics, Vol. 17 No. 7, pp. 785-98.
Management Decision
41/1 [2003] 85-95 satisfaction in a research environment'', Tichy, N.M. and DeVanna, M.A. (1986), The
unpublished dissertation, Nova University, Transformational Leader, Wiley,
Fort Lauderdale, FL. New York, NY.
Kirby, P.C., Paradise, L.V. and King, M.I. (1992), Tichy, N.M. and Ulrich, D.O. (1984), ``The
``Extraordinary leaders in education: leadership challenge ± a call for the
understanding transformational leadership'', transformational leader'', Sloan Management
Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 85, Review, pp. 59-68.
pp. 303-11. Tucker, R. (1968), ``The theory of charismatic
Lowe, K.B., Kroeck, K.G. and Sivasubramaniam, leadership'', Daedalus, Vol. 97, pp. 731-56.
N. (1996), ``Effectiveness correlates of Waldman, D.A., Bass, B.M. and Einstein, W.O.
transformational and transactional (1987), ``Leadership and outcomes of
leadership: a meta-analytic review of the performance appraisal'', Journal of
MLQ literature'', Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 7, Occupational Psychology, Vol. 60, pp. 177-86.
pp. 385-425. Waldman, D.A., Bass, B.M. and Yammarino, F.J.
Nair, K. (1996), A Higher Standard of Leadership: (1990), ``Adding to contingent reward
Lessons from the Life of Gandhi, behavior: the augmenting effect of
Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, CA. charismatic leadership'', Group and
Nischan, T.P. (1997), ``Transformational leadership Organization Studies, Vol. 15, pp. 381-94.
as a predictor of effectiveness, extra effort, and Wiehrich, H. and Koontz, H. (1993), Management:
satisfaction in the community college A Global Perspective, McGraw-Hill,
classroom environment'', unpublished New York, NY.
doctoral dissertation, Nova Southeastern Wofford, J.C., Goodwin, V.L. and Whittington,
University, Fort Lauderdale, FL. J.L. (1998), ``A field study of a cognitive
Patterson, C., Fuller, J.B., Kester, K. and Stringer, approach to understanding transformational
D.Y. (1995), ``A meta-analytic examination of and transactional leadership'', Leadership
leadership style and selected follower Quarterly, Vol. 9, pp. 55-84.
compliance outcomes'', paper presented at Wolf, W.B. (1974), The Basic Barnard: An
SIOP, Orlando, FL. Introduction of Chester I. Barnard and His
Podsakoff, P.M., Todor, W.D. and Skov, R. (1982), Theories of Organization and Management,
``Effects of leader contingent and ILR Press, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
noncontingent reward and punishment Wren, D.A. (1994), The Evolution of Management
behaviors on subordinate performance and Thought, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
satisfaction'', Academy of Management Yammarino, F.J. and Bass, B.M. (1990),
Journal, Vol. 25, pp. 810-21. ``Transformational leadership and multiple
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Moorman, R.H. levels of analysis'', Human Relations, Vol. 43,
and Fetter, R. (1990), ``Transformational pp. 975-95.
leader behaviors and their effect on followers' Yammarino, F.J., Spangler, W.D. and Bass, B.M.
trust in leader, satisfaction, and (1993), ``Transformational leadership and
organizational citizenship behaviors'', performance: a longitudinal investigation'',
Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 12, pp. 107-42. Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 4, pp. 81-102.
Quintilian (1954), Institutio Oratorio of Yukl, G. (1989), ``Managerial leadership: a review
Quintillian, Vol. 4, trans. H.E. Butler, of theory and research'', Journal of
Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Management, Vol. 15, pp. 251-89.
Sankowsky, D. (1995), ``The charismatic leader as
narcissist: understanding the abuse of Further reading
power'', Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 23 Keller, R.T. (1992), ``Transformational leadership
No. 4, pp. 57-71. and the performance of research and
Seltzer, J. and Bass, B.M. (1990), development project groups'', Journal of
``Transformational leadership: beyond Management, Vol. 18, pp. 489-501.
initiation and consideration'', Journal of Keller, R.T. (1995), ```Transformational' leaders
Management, Vol. 16, pp. 693-703. make a difference'', Research-Technology
Sergiovanni, T. (1990), ``Adding value to Management, Vol. 38, pp. 41-4.
leadership gets extraordinary results'', Yates, D. (1985), The Politics of Management,
Educational Leadership, Vol. 47, pp. 23-7. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

[ 95 ]