Diferencias entre la relacion de la integridad y los estilos de liderazgo de acuerdo con el modelo de Bernard Bass.
| Autor | Arredondo Trapero, Florina Guadalupe |
| Cargo | Report |
Differences between the relationship of integrity and leadership styles according to the model of Bernard Bass
Diferenças entre a relação de integridade e estilos de integridade conforme o modelo de Bernard Bass
INTRODUCTION
In the literature of leadership it has been established that transformational and transactional leaders have their own dimension of integrity. It is important to distinguish one from another considering their level of integrity. Integrity is demonstrated by leaders in the decision making and actions they undertake. Regarding transactional leadership, it has been said that it has less integrity than transformational leadership. This is thought because the orientation of the relationship with collaborators is based on exchanges, as well as interpersonal conformity. In as much as he/she is interested in relating to others and encouraging them to be better collaborators, then he/she will be more of a transformational leadership and with more integrity. A transformational leadership operates in post conventional levels; it is interested in others, not just as elements of work but also as people. It assumes the responsibility that it has been given by its collaborators and displays its leadership with the intention of helping others by creating the environment that makes them better collaborators.
The objective of this article is to study the differences between the leadership style perceived by collaborators (MLQ, Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire) and the lack of integrity perceived in their immediate boss (PLIS, Perceived Leader Integrity Scale).
The hypothesis is that transformational leaders have more integrity than transactional ones, and that transactional leaders have more integrity than Laissez Faire style. To prove this hypothesis, Pearson correlation studies were conducted. Also T-tests are part of the study to evaluate the significant differences between the relationships of lack of integrity (PLIS) and leadership (MLQ) variables. According to Craig y Gustafson (1998) a leader who is related inversely with lack of integrity, is a leader with integrity. Taking this as reference one can conclude that transformational leadership is related in a higher degree with integrity than transactional leadership is with integrity. And transactional leadership is related in a higher degree with integrity than Laissez Faire style. Although Parry and Proctor-Thompson (2002) already had demonstrated the relationship between transformational, transactional and Laissez Faire leadership style and integrity, they did not establish any findings about which of the styles are more or less related to integrity. Thanks to the findings obtained in this study it is possible to conclude which style of leadership is perceived as less related to lack of integrity within the model proposed by Bernard Bass (Bass, 1985). In addition, it is demonstrated that there is a relation between integrity and leadership found in Latin-America business context.
-
BACKGROUND
1.1. Integrity
Integrity is understood as a virtue that must be distinguished from moral actions. In other words, one can have integrity but can act immorally (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2007). Regarding the concept of integrity, it has been established that it is perceived as the pattern that aligns words with facts. Also, integrity has been understood as the commitment to the values one assumes and the compliance with the promises made. And finally it has been related to the level to which the collaborator thinks about his/her leader congruency (Worden, 2003). However, different authors argue that integrity must be based on morally justified principles. In other words, one has not integrity as a virtue by taking any value as a reference. Values must share an important characteristic: they must be ethical (Aranzadi, 2000).
Going back to Aristoteles' Nicomachean Ethics, integrity can be present when the particular goals of human beings are linked and oriented towards a personal project of realization. According to Aristóteles (2004) a flourished man is the one who lives well and acts well. In this sense, integrity is also present in those acts that the human being performs. For Aristoteles there must be an agreement with those virtuous acts, not just for the acts themselves, but these must be done with full consciousness and complete resolution (Aristóteles, 2004). In other words, if one of these two elements is missing, then the act is not considered with integrity. Lack of integrity in humans has also been attributed to a fragmentation of conscience due to an ignorance of the difference between role integrity that is living according to specific responsibilities. Verstraeten (2003) contention about integral integrity is where the elements of life are concentrated and articulated in a single element. Role integrity precludes man and woman to having double morals, one at home and one in the workplace, for instance, and thus generating an inadmissible duplicity.
When one combines both definitions one arrives at the following: integrity means acting in accordance with what one thinks says and does, and these acts have their bases in a sense of respect to one's human dignity and the human dignity of others. This is the way to enable the integration of the human being with himself/herself, with others and with the environment.
1.2. Transformational Leadership Model
Literature concerning leadership argues for a different leadership that is able to respond to the transition towards more modern organizational models. The paradigm transition in strategic transformation models in organizations, from a traditional strategic model to a modern one requires a new style of leadership and thus a new leader, different to those from the past (Vargas and Guillén, 2005). These new models of organizational leadership require a new type of leader who is centered in the human aspect. The types of leadership that are emerging are built around the central premise of situating the human aspects in the foreground. Leadership centered in people is substituting the traditional leadership centered in control processes or operational and asset control (Puga and Martínez, 2008). This new type of leadership, which is more appropriate to modern organizations, is no longer centered on elements of hierarchy or rigid control. The functions of this new leadership are more evenly distributed, which is why group compromise is sought as well as the possibility for workers to enact and develop their own sources of empowerment (Vargas and Guillén, 2005). This new type of organization demands a leadership that allows the taking of responsibilities in a joint manner. The concept is taken up along with the idea that leadership (intelligent, acquired through merit and not just charisma, and more humane and interested in well being) must allow subordinates to participate in the decision making process. Participation is important in order to effectively deal with change and with the acceptance of joint responsibilities (Vargas and Guillén, 2005). It is a type of leadership that is centered on the collaborator instead of around the leader, a type of leadership model that respect the collaborator. That is the central element in the quality of the work environment (Mercado, 2007). A leadership that inspires and not just operates; a leadership centered in more integral ways of interacting with collaborators, professional who inspire others appealing to the higher moral standard instead of operating on a practical level (Molina, 2000). One of the models that respond to the new forms of leadership is the Transformational Leadership Model developed by Bernard Bass (Bass, 1985). This model will be explained theoretically and later it will be applied in the empirical study.
The transformational leadership model includes three different styles of leadership, each one with its own corresponding types: Laissez Faire leadership, transactional leadership (with three different types: management by exception passive/active, and contingent reward), and transformational leadership (with four types: individual consideration, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, and idealized influence).
Based on the model of Transformational Leadership proposed by Bernard Bass (Bass, 1985), the transformational leadership as well as the transactional leadership is present in the profile of most leaders. The way in which one can classify the styles of leadership is based on identifying the style that the leader acts upon the most. Those leaders that identify themselves as transformational follow the transformational style most of the time, and not the transactional style. On the other hand, the leaders that identify themselves as transactional act most of the time in a transactional style, instead of in a transformational style. These styles are not mutually exclusive, and both can be present to a certain degree in the leader.
With the purpose of understanding the way in which integrity relates with leadership, the authors will propose some ideas about the integrity of each model supported on the model of transformational leadership by Bernard Bass.
1.3. The integrity of Laissez Faire
A Laissez Faire leader does not put enough effort into encouraging the development of his/her or the organization's collaborators. This type of leader is satisfied with attending his/her own personal needs and shows no interest in the activities of his/her collaborators. It is a style with low integrity because he/she abandons his/her collaborators. It does not assume the responsibility that he/she as a leader must, and is neither responsible for the team that is on his/her care (Ayerbe, 2006).
1.4. The integrity in the Transactional Leadership
In transactional leadership, there's a relationship of leadership that limits the possibility of a human connection between both actors. There is no differential influence...
Para continuar leyendo
Solicita tu pruebaCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
