The Trouble with Transformational Leadership: Toward a Federalist Ethic for Organizations

Abstract

Abstract:Popular media, communitarian writings, and recent management literature suggest that communities and organizations are rent by factional mischief: by individuals and groups who pursue their own selfish interests without regard for the common good. An emerging solution to this problem is “transformational” leadership, which seeks to refocus individuals’ attention on higher visions and collective goals. The dangers of such a solution were identified by James Madison at the Constitutional Convention of 1787; and mechanisms to thwart it were designed into the framers’ system of government. This article examines Madison’s objections and the implications of his political theory for the leadership of modern organizations.

Caring Leadership: A Heideggerian Perspective

“…By contrast, transformational leadership and care which 'leaps-ahead' reach beyond the immediate and involve a more complex temporal trajectory (Keeley, 2004). Similarly, both transactional leadership and 'leaping-in' belong to the territory of the known -or at least the we have placed at the heart of our analysis of care.…”

Transformational leadership: is it time for a recall?

“…The danger of such unidirectional influence is that, it "makes the followers more susceptible to deception" (Mullins, 2007: 383). Moreover, transformational leaders aim to "get people's thoughts off distributional questions and refocus them on common goals or communal interests" (Keeley, 2004: 167, emphasis in original). This implies that the leaders are putting themselves above followers' needs, which is "antidemocratic" (Northouse, 2013: 203).…”

Authentic Leadership and Leadership Ethics: Proposing A New Perspective

“…However, opposed to such a distinction between transactional and transformational leaders on the basis of ethical considerations, Keeley (1995) has argued for the possibility of unethical transformational leaders and ethical transactional leaders. He argued, "Unless leaders are able to transform everyone and create absolute unanimity of interests, transformational leadership produces simply a majority will that represents the interests of the strongest faction" (p. 77).…”