Journal (if Occii[iattonal and Orga

Journal (if Occii[iattonal and Organizational Psychology (1997), 70, 19-34 Printed in Great Britain 19

© 1997 The British Psychological Society

Transactional versus transformational leadership:

An analysis of the MLQ

Deanne N. Den Hartog*, Jaap J. Van Muijen and Paul L. Koopman

Department of Work and Organizational Psychology, van der Boechorststraat I.

1081 BT Amsterdam. The Netherlands

A questionnaire used often to measure transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership is che Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire developed by Bass (Bass & Avolio, 1989). This study aims to test the factor structure of the MLQ as developed by Bass & Avolio. The MLQ-8Y was analysed using data collected in Dutch organizations. Seven hundred employees from eight organizations rated their leader's behaviour with the MLQ. First, an indication of the internal consistency of the scales developed by Bass is reported. The results of subsequent factor analyses show that the three types of leadership can be found in the data; however, the scales found here are slightly different from Bass' scales. Especially, the transactional and laissez-faire scales have been altered on theoretical and empirical grounds. The adapted version of the MLQ covers the domain with fewer items.

Leadership has been an important topic in the social sciences for many decades. Recently there has been a renewed interest in leadership. Meindl (1990) notes that this recent resur-gence of interest in studying the topic of leadership appears to be accompanied by an acceptance of the distinction between transactional and transformational leadership, with an emphasis on the latter. Quinn (1988) compares transactional and transformational leadership with other differentiations in leadership such as relations oriented-task ori-ented leadership (Fiedler, 1967), consideration-initiating structure (Korman, 1966), and directive-participative or autocratic-democratic leadership (Heller & Yukl, 1969). Bass (1990/;) claims that the transactional-transformational model is a new paradigm, neither replacing nor explained by other models such as the relations oriented-task oriented lead-ership model. Some authors describe concepts similar to transformational leadership as charismatic, inspirational or visionary leadership (Bryman, 1992). Although the termi-nology used by these authors is different, more similarities than differences seem to exist between these views of the phenomenon of leadership. Bass inspired and is still one of the major contributors to this approach that Bryman (1992) calls 'the New leadership'. 'The New leadership' approach revived leadership as a topic of theory and research, after many lost interest and faith in this concept (see, for instance. Miner, 1975). 'The New leader-ship' integrates ideas from trait, style and contingency approaches of leadership and also incorporates and builds on work of sociologists such as Weber (1947) and political scien-tists such as Burns (1978).

•Requests for reprints.

20 Deanne N, Den Hartog, JaapJ, Van Muijen and Paul L, Koopman

Transactional leadership

A better understanding of transformational leadership can follow from contrasting it with transactional leadership. Burns (1978) argues that transactional leadership entails an exchange between leader and follower. Followers receive certain valued outcomes (e.g. wages, prestige) when they act according to their leader's wishes. Taking Burns as his starting point Bass (1985) notes that leadership in research has generally been conceptu-alized as a transactional or cost-benefit exchange process. Transactional leadership theo-ries are all founded on the idea that leader-follower relations are based on a series of exchanges or implicit bargains between leaders and followers. The general notion is that, when the job and the environment of the follower fail to provide the necessary moti-vation, direction and satisfaction, the leader, through his or her behaviour, will be effec-tive by compensating for the deficiencies. The leader clarifies the performance criteria, in other words whar is expected from subordinates, and what they receive in return (House, Woycke & Fodor, 1988). Several transactional theories have been tested extensively. Some have received considerable empirical support. Examples are path-goal theory (House,

1971; House & Mitchell, 1974; Indvink, 1986) and vertical dyad theory (Graen & Cashman, 1975; Graen & Scandura, 1987).

Transformational leadership

While the transactional leader motivates subordinates to perform as expected, the trans-formational leader typically inspires followers to do more than originally expected. Transformational leadership theories predict followers' emotional attachment to the leader and emotional and motivational arousal of followers as a consequence of the leader's behaviour (House et al.., 1988). Hater & Bass (1988) state: 'The dynamics of transforma-tional leadership involve strong personal identification with the leader, joining in a shared vision of the future, or going beyond the self-interest exchange of rewards for compliance' (p. 695). Transformational leaders broaden and elevate the interests of followers, generate awareness and acceptance among the followers of the purposes and mission of the group and motivate followers to go beyond their self-interests for the good of the group (Yammarino & Bass, 1990; see also Burns, 1978). Yammarino & Bass (1990) also note 'the transformational leader articulates a realistic vision of the future that can be shared, stim-ulates subordinates intellectually, and pays attention to the differences among the subor-dinates' (p. 151). Tichy & Devanna (1990) highlight the transforming effect these leaders can have on organizations as well as on individuals. By defining the need for change, cre-ating new visions, mobilizing commitment to these visions, leaders can ultimately trans-form the organization. According to Bass (1985) this transformation of followers can be achieved by raising the awareness of the importance and value of designed outcomes, get-ting followers to transcend their own self-interests and altering or expanding followers' needs.

Relations between transformational and transactional leadership

As Hater & Bass (1988) point out, contrasting transactional and transformational leader-ship does not imply that the models are unrelated. Burns (1978) thought of the two types of leadership _as being at opposite ends of a continuum. Bass (1985) however views them

Results (Thai) 1:

สมุดรายวัน (ถ้า Occii [iattonal และจิตวิทยาองค์กร (1997), 70, 19-34 พิมพ์ในสหราชอาณาจักร 19© 1997 อังกฤษจิตวิทยาสังคมทรานแซคชันเมื่อเทียบกับภาวะผู้นำ:การวิเคราะห์การ MLQDeanne N. Den Hartog * Jaap J. Van Muijen และ Paul L. Koopmanแผนกงานและจิตวิทยาองค์กร แวนแดร์ Boechorststraat ฉัน1081 บาทอัมสเตอร์ดัม เนเธอร์แลนด์แบบสอบถามที่ใช้ความถี่ในการวัดภาวะ ทรานแซคชัน และนำ laissez-faire เป็น che Multifactor นำแบบสอบถามที่พัฒนา โดยเบส (เบส & Avolio, 1989) การศึกษานี้มีวัตถุประสงค์เพื่อทดสอบปัจจัยโครงสร้างของ MLQ ในขณะที่พัฒนา โดยเบส & Avolio MLQ-8Y ถูก analysed โดยใช้ข้อมูลที่เก็บรวบรวมในองค์กรดัตช์ พนักงานองค์กรแปดเจ็ดร้อยคะแนนพฤติกรรมผู้นำของพวกเขา ด้วยการ MLQ ครั้งแรก การบ่งชี้ความสอดคล้องภายในของเครื่องชั่งที่พัฒนา โดยเบสมีรายงาน ผลการวิเคราะห์ปัจจัยภายหลังแสดงว่า สามารถพบผู้นำสามชนิดข้อมูล อย่างไรก็ตาม เครื่องชั่งน้ำหนักที่พบที่นี่จะแตกต่างเล็กน้อยจากระดับของเบส โดยเฉพาะ ทรานแซคชัน และ laissez-faire เครื่องชั่งน้ำหนักมีการเปลี่ยนแปลงในทฤษฎี และผลจากการ รุ่นดัดแปลงของ MLQ ครอบคลุมโดเมนที่ มีสินค้าน้อยลงLeadership has been an important topic in the social sciences for many decades. Recently there has been a renewed interest in leadership. Meindl (1990) notes that this recent resur-gence of interest in studying the topic of leadership appears to be accompanied by an acceptance of the distinction between transactional and transformational leadership, with an emphasis on the latter. Quinn (1988) compares transactional and transformational leadership with other differentiations in leadership such as relations oriented-task ori-ented leadership (Fiedler, 1967), consideration-initiating structure (Korman, 1966), and directive-participative or autocratic-democratic leadership (Heller & Yukl, 1969). Bass (1990/;) claims that the transactional-transformational model is a new paradigm, neither replacing nor explained by other models such as the relations oriented-task oriented lead-ership model. Some authors describe concepts similar to transformational leadership as charismatic, inspirational or visionary leadership (Bryman, 1992). Although the termi-nology used by these authors is different, more similarities than differences seem to exist between these views of the phenomenon of leadership. Bass inspired and is still one of the major contributors to this approach that Bryman (1992) calls 'the New leadership'. 'The New leadership' approach revived leadership as a topic of theory and research, after many lost interest and faith in this concept (see, for instance. Miner, 1975). 'The New leader-ship' integrates ideas from trait, style and contingency approaches of leadership and also incorporates and builds on work of sociologists such as Weber (1947) and political scien-tists such as Burns (1978).•Requests for reprints.20 Deanne N, Den Hartog, JaapJ, Van Muijen and Paul L, KoopmanTransactional leadershipA better understanding of transformational leadership can follow from contrasting it with transactional leadership. Burns (1978) argues that transactional leadership entails an exchange between leader and follower. Followers receive certain valued outcomes (e.g. wages, prestige) when they act according to their leader's wishes. Taking Burns as his starting point Bass (1985) notes that leadership in research has generally been conceptu-alized as a transactional or cost-benefit exchange process. Transactional leadership theo-ries are all founded on the idea that leader-follower relations are based on a series of exchanges or implicit bargains between leaders and followers. The general notion is that, when the job and the environment of the follower fail to provide the necessary moti-vation, direction and satisfaction, the leader, through his or her behaviour, will be effec-tive by compensating for the deficiencies. The leader clarifies the performance criteria, in other words whar is expected from subordinates, and what they receive in return (House, Woycke & Fodor, 1988). Several transactional theories have been tested extensively. Some have received considerable empirical support. Examples are path-goal theory (House,1971; House & Mitchell, 1974; Indvink, 1986) and vertical dyad theory (Graen & Cashman, 1975; Graen & Scandura, 1987).Transformational leadershipWhile the transactional leader motivates subordinates to perform as expected, the trans-formational leader typically inspires followers to do more than originally expected. Transformational leadership theories predict followers' emotional attachment to the leader and emotional and motivational arousal of followers as a consequence of the leader's behaviour (House et al.., 1988). Hater & Bass (1988) state: 'The dynamics of transforma-tional leadership involve strong personal identification with the leader, joining in a shared vision of the future, or going beyond the self-interest exchange of rewards for compliance' (p. 695). Transformational leaders broaden and elevate the interests of followers, generate awareness and acceptance among the followers of the purposes and mission of the group and motivate followers to go beyond their self-interests for the good of the group (Yammarino & Bass, 1990; see also Burns, 1978). Yammarino & Bass (1990) also note 'the transformational leader articulates a realistic vision of the future that can be shared, stim-ulates subordinates intellectually, and pays attention to the differences among the subor-dinates' (p. 151). Tichy & Devanna (1990) highlight the transforming effect these leaders can have on organizations as well as on individuals. By defining the need for change, cre-ating new visions, mobilizing commitment to these visions, leaders can ultimately trans-form the organization. According to Bass (1985) this transformation of followers can be achieved by raising the awareness of the importance and value of designed outcomes, get-ting followers to transcend their own self-interests and altering or expanding followers' needs.Relations between transformational and transactional leadershipAs Hater & Bass (1988) point out, contrasting transactional and transformational leader-ship does not imply that the models are unrelated. Burns (1978) thought of the two types of leadership _as being at opposite ends of a continuum. Bass (1985) however views them

Results (Thai) 3:

วารสาร ( ถ้า occii [ iattonal และองค์การ จิตวิทยา ( 1997 ) , 70 , 19-34 พิมพ์ใหญ่ 19 อังกฤษ

สงวนลิขสิทธิ์ 1997 อังกฤษทางจิตวิทยาสังคม

การแลกเปลี่ยนและภาวะผู้นำการเปลี่ยนแปลง :

การวิเคราะห์ mlq

ดีนเอ็นเจแวนเดนตาม * , ยาป muijen และพอลล. คุ๊ปมันส์

แผนกงาน และจิตวิทยาองค์การ แวน เดอ boechorststraat ผม

เยี่ยมสำหรับอัมสเตอร์ดัม เนเธอร์แลนด์

เครื่องมือที่ใช้วัดการเปลี่ยนแปลงบ่อย , และเป็น เช multifactor ภาวะผู้นำภาวะผู้นำ Laissez Faire แบบสอบถามเบส ( เบส& Avolio , 1989 ) การศึกษานี้มีวัตถุประสงค์เพื่อทดสอบปัจจัยโครงสร้างของ mlq ที่พัฒนาโดยเบส& Avolio . การ mlq-8y วิเคราะห์รวบรวมข้อมูลการใช้ในองค์กรชาวดัตช์เจ็ดร้อยคน จาก 8 องค์กรในพฤติกรรมของผู้นำกับ mlq . แรก , ข้อบ่งชี้ของความสอดคล้องภายในของเครื่องชั่งที่พัฒนาโดยเบสคือรายงาน ผลของปัจจัยต่อการวิเคราะห์แสดงให้เห็นว่าสามประเภทของภาวะผู้นำที่สามารถพบได้ในข้อมูล แต่เกล็ดที่พบที่นี่จะแตกต่างจากเครื่องชั่ง แบส โดยเฉพาะอย่างยิ่งและการขาดความสามัคคีและเกล็ด ) มีการเปลี่ยนแปลงในเชิงทฤษฎีและเชิงประจักษ์ภูมี การปรับรุ่นของ mlq ครอบคลุมโดเมนด้วยรายการที่น้อยลง ผู้นํา

ได้เป็นหัวข้อสำคัญในทางสังคมศาสตร์มานานหลายทศวรรษ เมื่อเร็วๆนี้ได้มีการต่ออายุความสนใจในการเป็นผู้นำ