Analysis of Transformational Leadership

Overview of the Differences between Leadership and Management

Leadership and management are closely related, but a critical analysis reveals their fundamental differences. Leading and managing are not complementary but fundamentally similar concepts used to define diverse classification levels linked to organizational presentation or efficiency (Azad et al., 2017, p. 1). Some significant variances between leadership and management are as follows: Leadership tends to focus on people and articulates a vision, whereas management focuses on things and promotes the execution of plans. This means that the primary focus of leadership is controlling the number of followers to achieve a specific aim. In contrast, leadership’s central focus is on a person’s ability to inspire, encourage, and permit others to give their views, which can result in organizational success.

Leadership is also about creating an environment of trust and development, whereas management is mainly concerned with the significant roles of management, including planning, leading, organizing, and controlling. Leadership creates change, whereas management accomplishes that change. In this connection, the change leadership approach primarily focuses on the strategy, vision, and driving forces that drive inclusive transformations. This contrasts with change management, which mainly focuses on the activities carried out to implement a change while managing resistance and minimizing disruptions (Azad et al., 2017, p. 2).

While leadership uses influence, management uses authority. This means a leader is a role model his followers should emulate. In this case, he must lead by example by engaging in only the acceptable morally upright activities. For instance, a leader who reports to work early can motivate his followers and even organization employees to come to work early. On the other hand, management is different since a manager uses the authority granted to them by the title to make the subordinates carry out their duties and responsibilities. In this manner, a manager ensures that the rules and regulations laid down in an organization’s policies are followed. In case the subordinates fail to conduct their duties as speculated in their job description, the manager can take action using the powers bestowed to them in their title (Azad et al., 2017, p. 2).

Organizational leadership and management are two concepts applicable in an educational organization. For instance, Connolly, James & Fertig (2019) assert that in an educational organization setting, educational management entails delegation, accepting, and conducting the obligation for the effective operation of a system whereby others take part in a learning institution. On the other hand, in the same educational setting, educational leadership entails persuading others in the educational setup to accomplish goals, hence necessitating actions (Connolly, James & Fertig, 2019, p. 514-515).

To sum it all up, leaders and managers have unique characteristics that differentiate them. For instance, a leader motivates people to come up with new objectives, does the right thing, is emotional, and is concerned with ends and the future direction. On the other hand, a manager administers resources to achieve goals, does something right, is rational, and is concerned with the means of doing things.

Analysis of Stephen Ball’s Thoughts on Educational Leadership

The major argument of Ball is on teacher performativity. It gives complete details on the challenges the teachers face today due to new reforms brought about by performativity. The new rules and regulations that non-teachers have set up need to be teacher-oriented and thus are very harsh to teachers. As a result, as Ball notes, teaching has now become a business, whereby the major focus has shifted from the development of the learner to that of fear of losing their job, progress, and standardization due to the ever-increasing demands to be met. If any reforms are to be made, then the school leaders and managers are not given a chance to implement their views but rather other non-teaching organizations and politicians. According to Ball (2003), performativity is a new mode of state regulation that facilitates governance in a manner that is liberal and advanced. Individual practitioners must establish themselves as a rejoinder to evaluations, goals, and indicators.

Various stakeholders, including the government, are vehicles for structural and technical change of organizations and mechanisms for reforming teachers. The main idea is to change what it means to be a teacher. In general, the machinery of reform results in new types of teacher subjects. The leadership style in the education sector and specifically in a school setup has changed, whereby the new manager in the current educational reforms entails instilling an attitude and culture whereby workers, and in this case teachers, feel accountable and committed to the school organization. This is in line with May (1994), who refers to these new managers as technicians of transformation, and their major role is to produce capable and passive bodies.

The role of teaching and the partiality of the teacher are both intensely transformed within the new reforms aimed at improving quality and excellence. The issues of performativity have largely impacted educational leadership negatively since the modern-day teacher has been turned into a robot supposed to adhere to strict education reforms that the government has set up. This form of leadership demotivates the teachers since they are viewed as robots. The sole purpose of the teacher is to make students pass exams. In this regard, the system is results-oriented. The teacher is no longer attached to the student, which is very risky as it kills creativity and motivation, key factors required in the teaching profession. This form of leadership creates a harsh environment for teachers whereby turnover rates are predicted to rise in the coming years.

Based on the arguments highlighted by Ball, this culture of performance needs to be administered by teachers since they are the major backbone of the education sector. There is a need to thoroughly readdress business-orientated views and relentless reforms of schools and the education sector. Teachers should be given a chance to participate in educational reforms and a conducive workplace environment to practice their profession.

Key Debates and Discourses in Educational Leadership

How the discussed ideas are helping with my thinking

The article by Oplatka and Arhar (2016) presents ideas that are helping with my thinking in that they broaden my understanding of leadership for social justice, specifically the Western-based models’ limitations in traditional societies. Notably, the contrast between the main elements of social justice leadership and the cultural features of traditional communities (Oplatka & Arar, 2016) makes me think that the existing frameworks may not be applicable in all settings. Consecutively, this challenges me to adopt a more culturally sensitive approach, because I have realized that there needs to be leadership models in place that match the unique structures and values of diverse societies.

Other Reflections

I enjoyed reading the article, although I found some aspects challenging. On the one hand, one aspect discussed in the article that formed part of my reflections includes the leadership for social justice (Oplatka & Arar, 2016). Before reading the article, I thought Western models were ideal for a wide range of leadership settings. However, reading this article prompted me to reevaluate my preconceptions and consider aspects like culture and how it affects leadership in modern society. Therefore, the existing leadership frameworks are less universally applicable than initially thought. Although understanding the complexities of Western models was challenging, the author’s call for a more inclusive discourse (Oplatka & Arar, 2016) resonated with me because of the emphasis on the importance of culturally sensitive approaches, which I highly value.

The Key Idea

The key idea of the article is to question the applicability of Western-based leadership models for social justice in traditional societal systems (Oplatka & Arar, 2016). Building on this idea, the article identifies the chief rudiments of leadership for social justice and then differentiates them with traditional societies’e cultural and structural characteristics (Oplatka & Arar, 2016). The authors argue that scholars experience challenges and contradictions when applying Western models in traditional contexts. As a result, the article suggests an alternative conceptualization that is more sensitive to the culture and structure of such societies (Oplatka & Arar, 2016).

Areas of Contention

Although the authors do not mention any areas of contention, they acknowledge that the dichotomy of modernism,, including traditionalism,, is a theoretical and empirical device that may fail to capture the complexity and diversity of different societies well (Oplatka & Arar, 2016). Therefore, there might be debates or differing opinions among scholars regarding the applicability of such dichotomies.

The Usefulness of the Article to Me

This article is useful to me for several reasons. First, the article challenges my understanding of leadership for social justice by introducing a different perspective on the applicability of Western-based models in traditional societies (Oplatka & Arar, 2016). This approach encourages me to reconsider the universality of leadership frameworks and, therefore, find new ways of approaching leadership, especially incorporating cultural sensitivity in my leadership approaches. Because the article calls for further empirical and theoretical studies in traditional settings (Oplatka & Arar, 2016), I will explore alternative viewpoints to broaden my knowledge of diverse cultural approaches to social justice leadership.

Analysis of Transformational Leadership

Introduction

Transformational leadership is a significant practice that can steer changes within institutions toward accomplishing the set long-term goals and objectives. With the increasingly immense changes in educational settings, transformational leaders are known to outline clear organizational goals. Employees can fully exploit their potential to accomplish these goals with their guidance. To accommodate the learning needs of all culturally diverse learners, relevant transformational leaders are adopting policies that will enable students to compete effectively in a global market. Adoption and implementation of new teaching approaches in specific learning institutions require leaders ready to implement them to bring about the desired and expected changes within individual educational contexts. Transformational leaders are change-driven; therefore, they can implement timely changes within educational changes. In its exploration of the role of leadership, this essay will look into the dominance of transformational leadership in educational contexts.

Differences between Management and Leadership

Before analyzing a leader’s role, more so a transformational leader, differentiating between leadership and management is essential. Leadership and management are terms that have been used interchangeably in specific scenarios. However, they are believed to be completely distinct. The significant differences between management and leadership are noted in the roles of leaders and managers within organizations. Among the many responsibilities of management and leadership are working with people and persuading others to attain objectives. Leadership competencies are employed to focus on a possible change by setting orientation, bringing people together, and encouraging and urging them. Management skills are used to organize, construct, and coordinate organizational structures to accomplish tasks and objectives (Wajdi, 2017). Jahan (2023) argues that leaders question the status quo and promote new roles, and managers keep the workplace running efficiently. As a result, leaders focus on long-term objectives to steer organizations towards certain opinions, while managers focus on short-term goals for day-to-day activities.

Organizations are arranged differently, from how departments operate to other organizational members’ various roles and duties. Surbhi (2018) believes that in their roles, managers may ensure that different people within organizations perform their given tasks as effectively as possible to facilitate the seamless running of organizational activities. On the other hand, leadership is more focused on introducing new roles or pushing employees to take up new work challenges. It challenges employees to work towards achieving specific objectives despite the harrowing experiences that may come along the way. Kotter (2017) believes management focuses more on dealing with organizations’ intricacies, while leadership involves adapting to organizational changes. Therefore, administration may be engaged in propelling an organization to the next level more than management would since administration aims to deal with modifications for the growth of an organization while management is more about finding solutions to departmental problems than it would for the whole organization.

Transformational Leadership

Overview of Transformational Leadership

Transformational leadership characteristics include individualized concern, effective communication, relational appreciation, and inspirational appeal. Transformational leaders use idealistic leadership, intellectual encouragement, zeal and drive, and individualised attention to achieve better outcomes. By establishing shared goals, leaders can increase production, enthusiasm, and employee fulfillment by developing trust in their followers. Transformational leadership is often viewed as transforming social institutions and people by transforming adherents into future leaders and ushering in substantial and beneficial improvement (Ghasabeh et al., 2015). Transformational leadership is designed to offer an identifiable and convincing organizational goal and objective by encouraging employees to dedicate themselves to new ideas. Visionary and goal-oriented, transformational leaders aim to transform organizations and their workforces. Leaders do so by providing well-outlined goals and objectives, which assist in providing a purpose towards which employees ought to work.

The benefit of transformational leadership lies in its ability to motivate followers to surpass their initial objectives and often surpass their preconceived notions of what is achievable. Since transformational leadership aims to inspire followers to prioritize the team’s and the organization’s requirements over their interests, it is also advantageous. Transformational leaders enhance adherents’ optimism, self-drive, and output in several ways. They include encouraging followers to take greater responsibility for their work through encouraging intrinsic motivation among followers (Day et al., 2016). Transformational leaders are inspirational, and they encourage followers to connect their sense of self-worth and uniqueness to the organization’s goals and collective belonging. Taking into account their needs, supporting them in constructively utilizing their abilities, and contributing to favorable organizational results. Transformational leaders are known to work closely with their followers, whereby they recognize their abilities and shortcomings, hence allowing them to assign followers tasks that maximize their productivity (Steinmann et al., 2018).

Transformational leadership is a crucial approach that ensures that learning institutions achieve their objectives through collaborative efforts between leaders, followers, and stakeholders. Cite ( describes ) Transformational leadership as a leadership style in which the leaders evolve, stimulate and nurture confidence and trust in the people they supervise while also praising and appreciating their creative concepts. Trust between leaders and followers is essential in ensuring cohesion at the workplace, consequently encouraging confidence in the employees’ abilities. Transformational leadership makes Transparent interaction possible by allowing for pleasant two-way feedback-giving between managers and staff. Furthermore, Norwani et al. (2016) believe that trust between transformational leader and their adherents encourages communication between the two parties since the adherents provide timely feedback to their leaders since they feel at ease. Trust between transformational leaders and their adherents builds on the interpersonal relationships between the involved parties, where adherents can comfortably interact with their leaders through productive consultations at workplaces.

Transformational Leadership in Educational Settings

Educational settings are guided by educational policies formulated by several education bodies within respective nations. Neoliberalism educational ideologies have become prevalent aiming at producing students with skills that are competitive in global markets. Transformational leadership plays a crucial role in neoliberal educational institutions by fostering new working cultures. In addition, transformational leaders within neoliberal contexts aid in creating a balance between neoliberal ideologies and promoting social justice among learners by lessening discrimination and injustice against marginalized parts of the community. It strives for equitable treatment and equal opportunities for everyone, distributing authority fairly among many cultural groups (Santamaría, 2014). However, Sleeter (2014) believes that the political enterprise of advancing social equality that educational diversity is, mainly considered as encompassing a diverse public and connecting local to international battles for fairness and equality, provides a rich structure for thinking about participation as well as an intriguing counter-narrative to neoliberal education. Multicultural learning transforms educational institutions as every learner obtains the understanding, mindset, and skills necessary to live successfully in a country and a varied world of race and ethnicity (Au, 2016). Multiculturalism continues to dominate the majority of institutions around the globe, presenting the need for transformational leaders within individual schools to ensure there is inclusivity and equality

Transformational leadership in general educational settings aids in improving the learning outcomes among learners. Day et al. (2016) state that schools can become more successful over time because principals, as transformational leaders, can diagnose and comprehend the institution’s needs and apply operationally divulged educational principles through various arrangements. The organizational environment and architecture of the school, the meaning that people attach to their work, and their willingness and ability to take risks are all influenced by patterns of transformational leadership. Teachers who employ a transformational leadership style persuade, inspire, and encourage learners to achieve exceptional outcomes by influencing their values and drive and by having them model behavior consistent with the organization’s purpose, goal, and principles.

Transformational educational leaders also ensure that individual context-sensitive approaches are gradually ingrained in the school’s accomplishments, work, and tradition, encouraging a new culture of learning and teaching activities within an institution (Anderson, 2017). Establishing and maintaining an encouraging educational environment and determining the course of action are essential tasks for school leaders. However, to do this, transformational educational leaders must establish teamwork between all the different elements of an individual educational context to support and enhance staff and learners’ enthusiasm, engagement, and well-being (Wiyono, 2018). In addition, to foster advancement and encourage and maintain success for educational institutions and classrooms that serve a range of fortunate and impoverished populations, transformational leaders ensure that there is optimism, cooperation, and positive mindsets among learners and teachers, therefore creating an enabling environment for all involved parties to work in peace.

Transformational leaders are known to be charismatic and, within educational contexts, encourage positive emotions such as hope, optimism, and happiness among their adherents. Transformational leadership is associated with high emotional intelligence, where its leaders are believed to empathize and sympathize with their adherents during challenging situations. Overwhelming school populations result in high workloads among teachers and the increasingly emerging changes in educational policies that often influence school cultures. Conversely, dealing with high workloads may result in manifestations of negative emotions such as anger and distress, thus affecting the job performance of the majority of teachers’ hence high turnovers. Nevertheless, transformational leaders can change their followers’ reactions through affective appeal and contagion, affecting how well they perform their duties.

As an educational leader, I believe that transformational leadership is crucial in the successful growth of educational contexts. According to Steinmann et al. (2018), building dedication and understanding among all parties involved in academic institutions to put into practice themselves and use knowledge, interaction, and technical advancements in the teaching and learning process is the foundation of transformational leadership. At a time when the education sectors across various nations in the world needed to implement new pedagogies in learning and the new neoliberal ideologies, transformational leadership is crucial in helping teachers, learners, and other involved parties, including parents and the communities at large in handling the change processes through motivation and inspiration. Change is difficult to navigate, but under the guardianship of transformational leaders as role models, teachers and learners would otherwise be able to navigate and cope with the changes better as they strive to grow and improve themselves by building self-confidence. Transformational leaders encourage collaboration and teamwork and are great communicators; hence, they instill a culture of togetherness within educational contexts. Their ability to foster self-drive and innovation among their followers’ transformational leaders would be crucial in providing teachers with the required resources and encouraging them to utilize the provided resources in curriculum implementation processes through intellectual stimulation.

Criticism of Transformational Leadership

Although transformational leadership is highly attributed to the success of institutions, it does not go without criticism. According to O’Reilly and Chatman (2020), transformational leaders motivate and inspire their followers by appealing to their deepest sentiments, and sometimes, these approaches may not be made with the best intentions because some leaders may end up manipulating their followers. Transformational leadership is characterized by trust between leaders and adherents, resulting in followers having deep appreciation and confidence in their followers to the extent that they may not become aware that their leaders are emotionally manipulating them. Transformational leadership gives leaders endless opportunities to engage in self-promotion, which may be considered behavior.

Transformational leadership is overly reliant on the leaders implementing changes within organizations, often presenting the notion that the employees may only implement organisational changes effectively with the assistance of the leaders (Ghasabeh et al., 2015). Therefore, the leadership style undermines the roles and responsibilities of transformational leaders in work environments where changes are not highly needed. Transformational leadership is built around the context of change, where organizations and employees are expected to develop new cultures to succeed. This ideology disregards employees’ organization in less practice of transformational leadership.

Conclusion

In conclusion, transformational leadership plays a significant role in accomplishing institutional goals when practiced with utmost efficiency, especially because transformational leaders are regarded as visionaries with the aim of achieving long-term objectives. Leadership and management are seen as different aspects of leaders’ and managers’ organizational roles and responsibilities. Managers’ roles involve the day-to-day running of organization duties at senior leadership positions, more concerned about the short-term goals that affect the employees’ diligent and flawless performance of tasks. On the other hand, leadership is more concerned with roles dealing with implementing changes within the organization meant to achieve long-term goals and objectives. In their roles, leaders are more concerned about how well employees are suited to execute organizational changes. Transformational leadership encourages new organizational and employee cultures; hence they foster transformations. Transformational leadership emotionally appeals to the adherents, encouraging productivity among employees in educational contexts. Furthermore, transformational leadership has been successfully implemented in educational contexts because it encourages innovation, teamwork, and motivation; nonetheless, it is criticized for its overreliance on leaders and the narcissistic approaches leaders use to appeal to followers’ emotions.

Reference List

Anderson, M., 2017. Transformational leadership in education: A review of existing literature. International Social Science Review, 93(1), pp.1-13.

Au, W., 2016. Meritocracy 2.0: High-stakes, standardized testing as a racial project of neoliberal multiculturalism. Educational Policy, 30(1), pp.39-62.

Azad, N., Anderson, H.G., Brooks, A., Garza, O., O’Neil, C., Stutz, M.M. and Sobotka, J.L., 2017. Leadership and management are the same—American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 81(6).

Ball, S.J., 2003. The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of education policy, 18(2), pp.215-228.

Bush, T. and Glover, D., 2014. School leadership models: What do we know? School Leadership & Management, 34(5), pp.553-571.

Connolly, M., James, C. and Fertig, M., 2019. The difference between educational management and educational leadership and the importance of educational responsibility. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 47(4), pp.504-519.

Day, C., Gu, Q. and Sammons, P., 2016. The impact of leadership on student outcomes: How successful school leaders use transformational and instructional strategies to make a difference. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), pp.221-258.

Fairman, J.C. and Mackenzie, S.V., 2015. How teacher leaders influence others and understand their leadership. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 18(1), pp.61-87.

Ghasabeh, M.S., Soosay, C. and Reaiche, C., 2015. The emerging role of transformational leadership. The Journal of Developing Areas, 49(6), pp.459-467.

Hallinger, P., 2018. Bringing context out of the shadows of leadership. Educational management administration & leadership, 46(1), pp.5-24.

Jahan, I., 2023. Differences between Leadership and Management. Available at SSRN 4622411.

Kotter, J.P., 2017. What do leaders do? In Leadership perspectives (pp. 7-15). Routledge.

Lai, E. and Cheung, D., 2015. Enacting teacher leadership: The role of teachers in bringing about change. Educational management administration & leadership, 43(5), pp.673-692.

May, T., 1994. Transformative power: a study in a human service organization. The Sociological Review, 42(4), pp.618-638.

Morley, L., Marginson, S. and Blackmore, J., 2014. Education and neoliberal globalization. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 35(3), pp.457-468.

O’Reilly, C.A. and Chatman, J.A., 2020. Transformational leader or narcissist? How grandiose narcissists can create and destroy organizations and institutions? California Management Review, 62(3), pp.5-27.

Oplatka, I. and Arar, K.H., 2016. Leadership for social justice and the characteristics of traditional societies: ponderings on the application of western-grounded models. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 19(3), pp.352-369.https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2015.1028464

Santamaría, L.J., 2014. Critical change for the greater good: Multicultural perceptions in educational leadership toward social justice and equity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(3), pp.347-391.

Slater, G.B., 2015. Education as recovery: Neoliberalism, school reform, and crisis politics. Journal of education policy, 30(1), pp.1-20.

Sleeter, C.E., 2014. Multiculturalism and education for citizenship in a context of neoliberalism. Intercultural Education, 25(2), pp.85-94.

Steinmann, B., Klug, H.J. and Maier, G.W., 2018. The path is the goal: How transformational leaders enhance followers’ job attitudes and proactive behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, p.2338

Surbhi, S., 2018. Difference Between Leadership and Management.

Wajdi, B.N., 2017. The differences between management and leadership. Sinergi: Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Manajemen, 7(1).

Wenner, J.A. and Campbell, T., 2017. The theoretical and empirical basis of teacher leadership: A literature review. Review of educational research, 87(1), pp.134-171.

Wiyono, B.B., 2018. The effect of self-evaluation on the principals’ transformational leadership, teachers’ work motivation, teamwork effectiveness, and school improvement. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 21(6), pp.705-725.