Transactional leadership
Transactional leadership often referred to as managerial leadership concerns with the role of supervision, organization as well as group performance. In this system, the focus is on results while employing the established structure of the organization and evaluates results based on the organization’s system of reward and penalties. The leaders using the transactional method usually have formal power and position of responsibility in the organization, they are accountable for keeping routine through the management of individual as well as group performance (Ibarra, 2015).
How Transactional leadership Works
Under transactional leadership, rewards and punishment are contingents based on the follower’s performance. The leaders using this approach believes that the only existing relationship between managers and employees is exchange, that is, in every action the must be an equal opposite reaction. In this case, when employees perform well, they are rewarded, and when the performance is poor, they are punished (Cameron & Green, 2017). In this leadership style, the assumption is that subordinates are motivated by rewards and punishment, employees must follow the order, and subordinate must be supervised closely to work since they are self-motivated (Cameron & Green, 2017). The leaders provide the subordinates with constructive feedback to help them improve their performance. The exchange approach occurs in four dimensions:
Cotangent Reward: The leaders using the transactional approach link goal attainment to rewards, identify objectives, offers the needed resources, formulate mutually agreed goals, and offer different types of rewards upon successful completion. The managers set SMART goals for the employees.
Active Management by Exception: The managers actively supervise the work of their employees, evaluate for any form of diversion from the set standards and rules, and employ corrective measures to eliminate mistakes.
Passive Management by Exception: The leaders in this scenario only intervene when they realized that the performance did not meet the expected objective. In this case, they may employ punishment as a response to performance bellow the standard.
Laissez-faire: The managers create an environment whereby the employees have numerous times to make decisions. The leaders here, abdicate duties and refrain from any form of decision making, often leaving the group with no proper direction.
Impact of Transactional Leadership on Tribal Stage of The Organization
In a scenario where we consider the second stage of tribal leadership known as “My Life Suck,” the individuals in this group are usually well-mannered. Unfortunately, the subordinates under this level lack connection and are affected by the idea that they can only excel when valued (Rosenbach, Taylor & Youndt, 2012). These individuals’ goal accomplishment can only help them retain their work. According to Marshall (2018), about 25% of individuals in this category are found even among the successful firms. Transactional leadership can be used in this tribal stage through the use of rewards as a means of motivation. This style of leadership will motivate these individuals feeling unvalued and the punishment will ensure that these subordinates do not underperform.
Necessary Changes
It is important to implement some changes in the second stage of tribal leadership to fit transactional leadership. The initial change required is to make every individual contented and minimize the idea of victimization among the workers. At this level, workers feel victimized and think that the organization does not consider them important (Rosenbach et al., 2012). It is important to collect data through questionnaires aimed at identifying issues affecting these employees. It will be essential in improving the working environment before the implementation of transactional leadership. It is equally vital to establish a culture of creativity that is always missing at this stage (Marshall, 2018). The changes are critical for propelling performance under the new leadership.
Action Plan for Change Implementation
Establishing an action plan marks the third stage in implementing change in an organization. At this level, the institution is required to establish measurable attributes to affirm the success of the change implementation (Rosenbach et al., 2012). It can be evaluated through an analysis of employee’s attitudes which can be acquired by analyzing the organization’s performance over a duration. It is equally important for the management to establish the resources required to implement the change (Cameron & Green, 2017). The main resources to consider in this case can be time as well as finances. Finally, the organization should align the action plan with the goals of the institution.