This paper examines the role of leadership in organizational success and failure, focusing on the full-range leadership model developed by Bass and Avolio. The paper distinguishes between transactional leadership, which manages roles and rewards, and transformational leadership, which inspires vision and personal development. Through analysis of both private and government sectors, the paper demonstrates how combining these approaches creates effective organizational cultures. The paper argues that transformational leaders must build trust, foster innovation, and maintain ethical standards, while transactional elements ensure accountability and goal alignment. The conclusion emphasizes that strong leadership cultures are essential for organizational sustainability and performance.
When examining organizational performance, it becomes clear that failed leadership often underlies organizational failures. Some organizations have struggled due to management's inability to adapt to consumer demands, as seen in cases where leaders established goals and vision but failed to plan properly, set a clear path, hire the right people, or collaborate with other leaders and staff to achieve those goals. Conversely, successful organizations like American Express, McDonald's, and Netflix have demonstrated the ability to remain dynamic both externally and internally, allowing them to survive and thrive. This difference hinges on a critical insight: leadership determines the goals, but how leadership conveys and sells the message to the organization will determine whether the goals are met.
While management or owners may set goals and rules, it is leadership that sets the direction, aligns personnel, fosters motivation, and establishes the ethical climate that determines whether the message effectively reaches followers. Leadership has been described as "a process of social influence in which a person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task" (Chemers, 1997, p. 5).
Leadership and management within an organization are not necessarily the same function, nor must they be performed by the same individuals. This distinction is captured in the full-range leadership model developed by Bernard Bass and Bruce Avolio. In this framework, transactional leaders (who function as managers) set employee roles, define job requirements, and provide positive and negative feedback based on performance. In contrast, transformational leaders earn the trust of their peers, seek the development of others, demonstrate a willingness to sacrifice, and serve as "moral agents" for change or a higher good (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013, p. 480).
The full-range model, which integrates both transactional and transformational leadership, provides an effective framework for organizational success. Transactional leadership can operate at all levels of an organization—from stakeholders and senior management to line managers. Transactional leaders establish roles, set goals, and reward or punish based on results. Transformational leaders also operate across all levels, from executives through lower-level managers to followers who take the lead. Transformational leadership fosters employee motivation to inspire the accomplishment of goals, encourages personal growth, and prompts individuals to question organizational assumptions and explore new ways of working (Avolio & Bass, 2002).
When an organization utilizes the full-range model effectively, both transactional and transformational leadership work together to foster prosperity. Effective leaders establish not only specific goals but also a compelling vision that employees and managers can strive toward. They motivationally inspire both individuals and groups to expend extra effort, recognize those who foster customer service, provide leadership roles that assist in personnel development, and drive innovation throughout the organization.
In government, the full-range leadership approach offers distinct advantages. Using both transactional and transformational leadership can foster a compliant environment while also empowering government servants to be driven, work more efficiently, and inspire intelligent innovation. Transactional leadership in government is naturally driven by constitutional functions such as setting budgets, passing laws, and maintaining law and order. Failures to meet expectations or goals are determined either at the ballot box or through legal proceedings when laws are broken.
However, while the overall structure of government can be managed by transactional leadership principles, the agencies that comprise government should be led primarily by transformational leadership to foster an environment of customer service, team effort, innovation, and measurable results. An effective transformational leader will inspire motivation and a visionary focus on customer service that transcends economic rewards and drives public servants to perform with extra effort. Without transformational leadership, most government agencies function by following rules, doing the bare minimum, and resisting change (DeBerry, 2010).
Public servants can be inspired by a vision of making a difference—not only to the people they serve but also to their agency and the general public. Unlike the private sector, political leaders often cannot choose most of their teams. Therefore, transformational leaders in government must inspire team members through shared beliefs and collective sacrifice. For those team members who do not align with the leader's direction, transactional leadership may be necessary to establish goals, rewards, and punishments to ensure organizational alignment.
When a transformational leader successfully creates an environment of trust and shared sacrifice while selling the organization's vision to both teams and individuals, those leaders can become moral agents of a cause higher than themselves, driving customer service, innovation, and performance. Transformational leaders should strive to influence both at the individual level and at the team level. At the individual level, leadership should support personal development, job satisfaction, and performance (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013).
In the private sector, performance reviews often involve feedback from both managers and subordinates—a practice commonly known as 360-degree reviews. Implementing such reviews in government agencies would create a collaborative work environment where freedom of feedback promotes team performance and reinforces organizational goals while fostering individual development. Another method to unite people and teams is conducting customer satisfaction tests and feedback sessions between agencies that work together and external customers. These assessments stimulate team conversation, driving change and innovation while transforming organizational performance through teamwork.
Finally, transformational leaders must strive to be ethical. This begins with hiring the right leaders. All levels of leadership and management should undergo extensive interviewing, thorough reference checking from current and past positions, and background investigations. In government, where it is nearly impossible to terminate an employee, many agency managers will provide overly positive descriptions of individuals they wish to remove from their agency. When dealing with public trust and sensitive information, background checks are essential. Some government agency employees in sensitive positions may have criminal backgrounds that go undetected without proper investigation. Government agency employees should be recognized publicly for their service and ethical conduct. Finally, each agency should establish a code of ethics tailored to its mission while mirroring overall government policy.
The role of leadership encompasses a global focus on the organization as a whole, including its customers, employees, and public responsibilities. Without the proper influence of leadership, goals will not be accomplished, innovation will not occur, and the organization will drift without clear direction or purpose. The full-range leadership model serves to first establish transactional leadership to clarify purpose and goals, then advance to transformational leadership to create vision, develop selfless leaders, and inspire effort that transcends the organization—whether in the private sector or a government agency. As more people provide leadership to the organizations dominating today's world, the greater the need to develop organizational cultures that cultivate such leadership. As noted by Kotter (2001), "Institutionalizing a leadership-centered culture is the ultimate act of leadership."
You’re 98% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.