A Functional Understanding of Transformational and Transactional Leadership: Lessons from a Sitting President

Kristina Drumheller
West Texas A&M University

Greg G. Armfield
New Mexico State University

Classroom instruction on leadership generally includes transformational and transactional leadership. Politics is a good place for finding both transformational (Yes we can!) and transactional (No new taxes!) rhetoric (Northouse, 2007). “In contrast to transactional leadership, transformational leadership is the process whereby a person engages with others and creates a connection that raises the level of motivation and morality in both the leader and the follower” (Northouse, 2007, p. 176). Also rooted in charismatic leadership (Weber, 1947), transformational leadership has significant beginnings with Burns (1978) and notably extended by Bass (1985). Although typically thought of as an organizational leadership theory, transformational leadership has found its way into political research as well (e.g., House, Spangler, & Woycke, 1991; Wendt & Fairhurst, 1994).

It is not uncommon for contemporary candidates running for president of the United States of America to try to appear as charismatic, yet historically, “the American presidency was not designed to be the center of leadership in the new republic” (Burns, 1978, p. 385). The president as chief executive was supposed to be above political conflict, but clearly this is unrealistic at best as it went by the wayside the moment the first president took office (Burns, 1978). Additionally, presidents typically seek bipartisan unity the moment they take office, and they are expected to do so charismatically (Wendt & Fairhurst, 1994).

Four transformational leadership factors that rely heavily on the perception of followers have been identified (Avolio, 2005; Bass, 1985). The first factor is idealized influence, which is the ability to gain followers’ trust because they usually do the right thing. The second factor is inspirational motivation, whereby followers are inspired to commit to the leader’s vision of a better future. The focus is generally on the team rather than the individual. The third factor is intellectual stimulation, which is provided by a leader’s focus on creativity and innovation from followers. The fourth factor is one of the most important: individualized consideration. Transformational leadership is about the relationship between the leader and the followers, where the leader appears supportive and is able to listen while also delegating so followers take their own initiatives.

Political leaders have often been categorized using the transactional/transformational leadership dichotomy. “In exchanging promises for votes, the transactional leader works within the framework of the self-interests of his or her constituency, whereas the transformational leader moves to change the framework” (Bass, 1990). Where President Lincoln shifted paradigms to preserve the Union, his predecessor, Buchanan, would prefer stay the course despite the ramifications (Bass, 1990). Carter and Hoover were competent but were not inspiring leaders, while Kennedy and FDR were less intellectual but far more inspirational. Furthermore, presidents could have transformation qualities, but not really be transformational, but rather, pseudotransformational (Bass & Steidlemeier, 1998). Viewing transformational and transactional leadership through a recent presidential campaign and resulting presidency can provide relevancy and uniqueness to the class lesson.

Learning Objectives

Students will be able to:

  • Discern the key differences in transactional and transformational leadership.
  • Identify claims of transformational leadership and transactional leadership in campaign speeches; and the fruition of each through acts while in office.
  • Critically evaluate presidential rhetoric from a visionary and practical perspective.

Part I: Lessons on Leadership

Prepare a lesson on transformational leadership and transactional leadership, identifying key characteristics of each leadership style. Discuss the leadership styles of previous presidents using previous research studies (e.g., Bass, 1990; House et al., 1991; Wendt & Fairhurst, 1994). American Rhetoric has a database of past presidential speeches to provide background for a lesson of this nature (www.americanrhetoric.com). There are also movie clips that could be used in place of the actual speech. Make sure the students are comfortable with the four factors of transformational leadership before moving on to the next part of the lesson.

Part II: From Campaigning to the White House

This can be an in-class assignment or used as a paper or project in an honors course, theory course, or any course requiring a lesson on leadership. Because Barack Obama’s campaign is the most recent to lead to a sitting president, this assignment uses his campaign and presidency. This lesson can easily be adapted as presidencies change over time, or to even use a past presidency if preferred.

Have the students watch Obama’s acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention during the 2008 campaign (available at www.americanrhetoric.com). You can also give the students access to the transcript, which might facilitate the identification of transformational moments in the speech. Create a handout of transformational factors or have the students make their own. Have the students write down key phrases from the speech that meet the respective definitions of each of the four factors. Students could also just be required to keep count of each time each factor is identifiable in the speech. If using speeches from other past presidents, keep in mind that some will be perceived as more transformational than others, with some speeches containing more transactional than transformational elements. Depending on the class, this assignment could also incorporate the use of Benoit’s (2007) Functional Theory by asking students to identify the transformational leadership factors in terms of acclaims while also identifying attacks and defenses.

Next, have the students go to a website such as http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/ to view the actions of the sitting president. Note, this is not to be politically charged, but rather to get a relatively accurate sense of the difficulty of being visionary when challenged by partisan goals. Have the students identify acts that show the president to be a transformational leader, and which suggest a transactional leader. They can conclude by arguing which leadership type predominantly characterizes the president.

Debrief

Remind students that this exercise is not about whether they like or dislike the president or whether they agree or disagree with the president’s policies. Discuss the president’s attempts at being transformational and the realities of often being transactional by necessity. Engage the discussion about the potential for pseudotransformational leadership; and whether a president can every truly be transformational. Have the students then consider the implications of what they have studied for the workplace, group settings, or other applied context appropriate for the class.

Campaigning and the eventual executive power do present unique challenges for a job requiring a visionary who can create stability. Incumbent presidents, for example, would have a more difficult time arguing for a vision if they have not managed change during their previous term (Wendt & Fairhurst, 1994). The same can be said for those who proclaim to be transformational in a previous work setting, but yet produced limited results. Being able to critically evaluate leadership styles can help students better understand and evaluate their own work, group, and world experiences.

References

Avolio, B. J. (2005). Leadership development in balance: Made/born. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.

Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership. New York: Free Press.

Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1998). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership. Retrieved from: http://cls.binghamton.edu/BassSteid.html [No longer active]. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00016-8

Benoit, W. L. (2007). Communication in political campaigns. New York: Peter Lang.

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

House, R. J., Spangler, W. D., & Woycke, J. (1991). Personality and charisma in the U.S. presidency: A psychological theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 364-396. doi:10.2307/2393201

Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Weber, M. (Henderson, A.M, & Parsons, T. (trans). (1947). The theory of social and economic organization. New York: Oxford University Press.

Wendt, R. F., & Fairhurst, G. T. (1994). Looking for the vision thing: The rhetoric of leadership in the 1992 presidential election. Communication Quarterly, 42, 180-195.