Leadership Theories and Change

Running Head: Leadership Theories and Change

A Review of Leadership Theories and Possible Changes to Police Leadership Randy L. Conyers
University of Central Florida

Leadership Theories and Change Abstract

Throughout the history of law enforcement, leaders have used many different styles to lead employees. From the early styles of Autocratic and Laissez-Faire to Participative (democratic), Transactional and Transformational leadership. Leadership within policing has evolved over the years in some organizations to a more participative style and yet there are still leaders who cling to an antiquated domineering style. The purpose of this paper identified trait theories, leadership theories and change strategies that have molded or are molding the policing culture. Change must occur if the culture of police organizations are going to meet the demands of the 21st century and several issues affecting this change were discussed. An in-depth review of the transactional and transformational styles of leadership was seen as being the styles that a leader in the 21st century would want to use to meet the needs of their employees and motivate them toward success and self-actualization. Although no empirical research is completed in this paper, the literature reviewed and previous research indicate that the transformational style of leadership augments the transactional style, but not vise versa. It also emphasizes that leaders need to become more transformational toward employees and allow them to participate in the decision-making process. As more leadership research is continued, the following research question is proposed for future study: To what extent would an exclusive transformational leadership style in police organizations have on rank structure and promotions?

Leadership Theories and Change A Review of Leadership Theories and Possible Changes to Police Leadership

I.

Introduction

Organizations, including law enforcement agencies, require leadership. Dependable and apposite leadership is crucial to the success of any organization (Spinelli, 2006). Leaders aspire for change in people toward a desired goal. Lussier & Achua (2004) insisted that leadership was a procedure that not only influenced employees, but leaders as well, to accomplish the goals of the organization through change. Leadership entwines leaders-employees, influence, organizational objectives, change and people. Leading involves people. Everyone is leading someone somewhere, but the question is where and how. In order to be a good leader one must be a good employee. Many scholars define leadership as one who plans, directs, or guides people toward a mutual goal. Hesser (1999) noted, Leadership has two component parts, personal and organizational. Success, over time, demands knowledge of and commitment to both. Spinelli (2006) describes a successful leader as being accountable and suitable. Leadership has been described as an influence relationship among leaders and employees who intend real changes and outcomes that reflect their shared purposes (Daft, 2005). The qualities for effective leadership and followership are the same (Daft). The basis for good leadership is a respectable personality and unselfish service to employees and the organization (Clark, 1997). The best leaders are those who are deeply interested in others and can bring out the best in them (Daft).

Leadership Theories and Change

Kouzes & Posner (2007) add that exemplary leadership comes from modeling the way, inspiring a

shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act and encouraging hearts. Leadership in the law enforcement culture has changed over the decades, but must continue to change in order to address modern day problems. The purpose for this paper is to examine police leadership from a historical and empirical standpoint and discuss possible theories for change. An in-depth review of the advantages and disadvantages of two leadership theories (transactional and transformational) are explored as well as the possible outcomes of each.

Leadership Traits and Characteristics An important characteristic of leadership is using human talents to grow performance, trust and integrity in employees and the organization (Daft, 2005). Ones personality plays a major role in the way they lead. Personality is a combination of traits (distinguishing personal characteristics) that classifies an individuals behavior. Personality affects conduct as well as insight and attitudes. Knowing personalities helps explain and forecast others behavior and job performance (Lussier & Achua, 2004). The Big Five Model of Personality assesses whether a person is stronger in surgency, agreeableness, adjustment, conscientiousness, or openness to experience. Surgency includes leadership and extraversion traits (Lussier & Achua, 2004). The need for power compares to the Big Five dimension of surgency. People with a high need for power are depicted as wanting to control situations and enjoy competition in which they can win because they do not like to lose. Leadership Theories and Change 5

They lean toward being ambitious and have a lower need for affiliation. They are more concerned with influencing other people than they are with what other people think about them (Lussier & Achua,).

Extraversion is the extent that a person is outgoing, sociable, talkative, and relaxed in meeting and talking with new people. A person with high marks in surgency wants to be in charge and have influence over others (Daft, 2005). Influencing is the ability of the leader to communicate ideas effectively to employees so employees will not only accept these ideas but motivate them to implement needed changes. Agreeableness is the trait of being able to get along with other people. Some behaviors that characterize agreeableness are being good-natured, cooperative, forgiving, and compassionate, understanding and trusting (Daft, 2005). The need for affiliation compares to the Big Five dimension of agreeableness. They are socially motivated and seek close relationships whether in a group setting or with personal friends. They are more concerned with what other people think about them than influencing other people (Lussier & Achua, 2004). Adjustment is commonly referred to as emotional stability. This trait shows the level that people are well-adjusted, calm and secure (Daft, 2005). Conscientiousness includes traits related to achievement (Lussier & Achua, 2004). People with a high need for achievement take responsibility for solving problems, are goal oriented, seek challenges, strive for excellence, desire concrete feedback on their performance and work hard. They perform well in non-routine, challenging, and competitive situations (Lussier & Achua). Conscientiousness also shows how well a person is responsible, dependable, and persistent. Leadership Theories and Change This trait is more concerned with tasks to be completed rather than relationships (Daft, 2005). Openness to experience relates to a person being willing to change, try new things, imaginative, creative and having a broader range of interests (Daft, 2005). Kouzes & Posner (2007) described how credibility is the foundation of leadership: Everyone wants to be fully confident in their leaders, and to be fully confident they have to 6

believe that their leaders are individuals of strong character and solid integrity. To be credible in action, leaders must be clear about their beliefs; they must know what they stand for. Then they must put what they say into practice: they must act on their beliefs and do. A leader can not model the way nor enable others to act if they are not seen as being honest and trustworthy (Kouzes & Posner). Honesty is seen as the utmost important characteristic between leaders and employees. Being proud of where one works, perceived as a team member, valuing the values of the organization, having a sense of belongingness and ownership are benefits of a credible leader. Unmotivated or motivated only for money, low production, criticizing the organization, looking for another job and having a feeling of being unappreciated are characteristics of a leader that has lost credibility (Kouzes & Posner). If a leader is found to be dishonest, they lose respect among the employees which leads to a loss of motivation and over time the employee loses self-respect (Kouzes & Posner).

Past Practices in Police Leadership The English Parliament passed the Metropolitan Police Act in 1829. The passage of this act created the London Metropolitan Police which became the model for American policing. Leadership Theories and Change This model of policing was based upon a highly centralized command and bureaucratically controlled organization which was used by the militarys leadership. This leadership established a hierarchical authoritarian organization that instilled impersonality into the structure (Fyfe, Greene, Walsh, Wilson & McLaren, 1997). The first American city that tried to implement this style of policing was New York in 1851. Strecher (as cited in Fyfe, et al., 1997) notes that New Yorks 7

attempt to use a strong central authority style of leadership was negated due to political, social and economic forces. This particular style of leadership had a crippling effect on the communication process and the amount of risks that patrol officers would be involved (Smith, 2008). Most of the leaders during this time were appointed because of who they were or where they came from. The bureaucratic-efficiency model used in the early twentieth century continued to use the military command but added the component of scientific management. Not much changed with this style of leadership because leaders still had total control through a centralized and an inflexible chain of command structure in order to achieve overall organizational efficiency. Leaders were usually promoted based on longevity and experience and not on the characteristics they offer as leaders. Scientific management was a result of the Industrial Revolution. Leaders would scientifically develop what would be expected of the worker and then teach and train them how to do their jobs. The downfall of this model was the lack of interest in the worker (Fyfe, et al., 1997). All of these models focused on the leadership at the top and nothing on the officers at the bottom. This led to officers being told what, when and how to do tasks instead of empowering them to make decisions for themselves (Steinheider & Wuestewald, 2008).

Leadership Theories and Change Ginger (2003) blamed the failed leadership on being unable to delegate or understand the sense of urgency, an unwillingness to consider alternatives and autocracy. As police leadership evolved over the years it was ultimately classified as being Autocratic, Laissez-Faire or Democratic. Autocratic leadership is concerned with giving orders to accomplish a task quickly. Autocratic

leadership is when employees are told what to do, how to do it, when to do it and then are watched to make sure it is done. Laissez-Faire leadership allows a group of people to make decisions on

their own, but gives no guidance (Lussier & Achua, 2004). Democratic leadership involves a group of people making decisions with guidance from the leader. Democratic leadership encourages participation in decisions, facilitates discussion so everyone will know what to do and then allows them to do their jobs without close supervision (Professional Organizations, n.d.). Conventional police leadership is primarily protective of their power and skeptical of officer independence (Wuestewald & Steinheider, 2006).

Present Practices in Police Leadership The literature indicates that present leadership practices are mixed throughout various police organizations. The researchers suggest that present police leadership practices are either the same as they always have been or changing. Fyfe, et al. (1997), notes that present police leadership still resembles a military style of leadership. Silverstri (2007) agrees there is minimal verification that police leadership practices are shifting. Most police organizations continue to foster their centralized culture through the use of hierarchy and rank. This in and of itself continues to produce quasi-militaristic officers who are disciplined and follow orders within a bureaucracy. Leadership Theories and Change 9

This type of control reminds officers that they are just subordinates and have a distinct place within the organization. Silvestri (2007) emphasizes that todays police leadership is unwilling to share information within the organization and rarely allows others to participate in decision-making opportunities. The philosophy of the twenty-first century police leader is one of being strong, assertive, competitive, performance based and unreceptive to change. Conversely, Wuestewald & Steinheider (2006) report police leadership is progressively developing from an autocratic, centralized style that was based on wisdom, integrity and courage

to that of one that embraces teamwork, involvement, and shared leadership. The researchers assert that police organizations are allowing more supervision from the bottom up and less direct control. Modern police administration is more about winning the hearts and minds of the police force, claimed Skogan & Hartnett (as cited in Steinheider & Wuestewald, 2008). This philosophy was a by-product of the concept of community policing. According to the International Association of Chiefs of Police [IACP] (1999), the use of a participatory leadership style has taken root because command and control have damaged productivity and morale. As one can see, there are varying opinions on whether police leadership has really changed or remained the same. The literature points to different styles of leadership as being the crux for change.

II.

Leadership Theories and Styles

Leadership style is the combination of traits, skills, and behaviors leaders use as they interact with employees (Lussier & Achua, 2004). In order for one to favor a leadership style, one must understand where the leadership styles originated. Throughout the years, the topic of leadership has been debated. Leadership Theories and Change However, research indicates that certain characteristics or traits are inherent in leaders (Murphy, 2005). According to research, the 1940s proffered leaders as maintaining certain traits. These traits were based on physical and personality characteristics as well as intelligence and interpersonal skills (Steers, Porter, & Bigley, 1996). Marquis & Huston (2000) associated the Great Man Trait Theory with that of the Aristotelian philosophy, which indicated that leaders were 10

born and not made and depending on the need a leader would surface. The limitations of trait theory are that leaders can not be developed through their skills and education (as cited in Murphy, 2005). In contrast with trait theories, the behavioral methodology centered on the recognizable actions that made a person an effective leader (Wright, 1996). Personal Behavior Theories discussed in the University of Michigan and Ohio State University studies identified two more Styles of Leadership: job-centered (task) and employee-centered (people). The job-centered (taskinitiating structure) behavior focuses on the leader taking control in order to get the job done and the employee-centered (people-consideration) behavior focuses on the leader meeting the needs of employees and developing relationships (Lussier & Achua, 2004). The findings in the Michigan study indicated that leaders who were highly employee oriented and allowed participation fostered more productive teams. On the other hand, leaders who were more concerned about accomplishing tasks cultivated lower producing teams. The findings from the Ohio State University study emphasized the consideration and initiating structure as the two underlying structures found in the University of Michigan study.

Leadership Theories and Change

11

The Ohio State University study concluded that both structures were separate components, but if a leader were dedicated in both they could achieve higher results (Murphy, 2005). Research at the University of Iowa expounded on the studies above and identified two basic leadership styles: Autocratic and Democratic. These and other research studies asserted four (4) main leadership styles: concern for task, concern for people, Directive Leadership and Participative Leadership (Wright, 1996).

Fiedler (1967) explored the idea that there was not just one ultimate style of leadership for a given circumstance, but leaders would be more effective by varying their leadership style depending on the situations that faced them. Fiedlers Model based leadership styles on either being task or relationship oriented and the style use depended on whether the situation was one of leader-member relations, task structure or position power (as cited in Murphy, 2005). Hersey and Blanchard theorized that the style of leadership was determined by the employees perceptions. Hersey and Blanchards theory expounded on Fiedlers model by creating four (4) leadership styles: Directing, Coaching, Supporting and Delegating (Murphy, 2005). Building on the same principles of the contingency theories above, House (1971) suggested that the path- goal theory influences and motivates employees views and opportunities. Employee contentment, accomplishment of goals and improved functioning would be derived from the leaders direction, training, guidance and support. Despite the findings of this research, Marquis & Huston (2000) disagreed and noted that situational theory focused on the situation rather than the interpersonal and intrapersonal factors. The following leadership styles are derivatives of the ones discussed above.

Leadership Theories and Change This research paper will examine Autocratic, Laissez-Faire, Participative (democratic), Transactional and Transformational leadership.

12

Autocratic Leadership Merriam-Websters Online Dictionary defines an autocrat as a person (as a monarch) ruling with unlimited authority or one who has undisputed influence or power

(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/autocrat). This style of leadership is considered job-centered as identified by the University of Michigan and Ohio State University studies. The job-centered (task-initiating structure) behavior focuses on the leader taking control in order to get the job done quickly. It relies heavily on employees taking orders from the leader instead of the leader offering much clarification or dialogue (Professional Organizations, n.d.). According to a (University of Central Florida [UCF], (n.d.) study, employees are inspired through threat of correction and reprimand. The autocratic leadership style offers several advantages: swiftness of project completion keeps group members from producing alternatives that influence the minority negatively, guarantees the leader is heard and informs members when their conduct is undesirable. The disadvantages of the autocratic leadership style are: dissociates group members, nondevelopment of employees and convenience of use instead of round tabling quandaries (Professional Organizations, n.d.). One might use this style of leadership when the group is in danger of not accomplishing a task in a timely manner or in a crisis situation (Murphy, 2005).

Leadership Theories and Change Laissez-Faire Leadership The Laissez-Faire leadership style frequently has a negative connotation. This style of leadership depicts an inert leader who is averse to stimulating subordinates or giving focus (Deluga, 1990).

13

The Laissezz-Faire leadership style places an emphasis on the employee centered attribute that was discussed in the University of Michigan and Ohio State University studies (Professional Organizations, n.d.). Leaders who use this style fail their employees because they offer no positive or negative direction nor do they interfere at any time (Webb, 2007). According to Deluga (1990),

Laissezz-Faire leaders renounce their leadership thus giving employees a wide spectrum of decision-making which could lead to amplifying their power and influence. Another assessment of research reported these leaders shun goal-setting, opportunities to succeed, fail to coordinate organizational objectives, ignore responsibilities, and routinely avoid making decisions on important matters (van Eeden, Cilliers, & van Deventer, 2008). Leaders assume the employees will make decisions in a timely manner and handle whatever problems that arise (Professional Organizations, n.d.). There are some advantages and disadvantages of using this style of leadership. It allows team members to develop a working relationship in an informal setting and generates an opportunity to be successful by making their own decisions. On the other hand, a team member can dominate and take control which could lead the team to make incorrect decisions and possibly have the team reprimanded which would lead to negativity within the group; affecting the process and their motivation (Professional Organizations, n.d.). This absence of leadership leads to nothing happening which promotes ineffective leadership (McGuire & Kennerly, 2006). Leadership Theories and Change Participative (Democratic) Leadership A participative leader must have a pioneering, imaginative and adventuresome mindset in order to empower employees to make decisions involving the organization (Smith, 2008). Participative leaders empower their employees in the decision-making process by meeting with them periodically and listening and trusting them (UCF, n.d.). Wolf, Boland & Aukerman (1994b) defined empowerment as the awareness of a persons potential talents, gifts, and power and how a person can contribute to the organizations goals (as cited in Thyer, 2003). Participative leadership requires and encourages participation from everyone and shares decision-making for the 14

betterment of the organization. Employee motivation is derived through obtaining financial and self-image awards. Leaders reward employees through financial gains and positive evaluations which in turn increases motivation and morale (Murphy, 2005). The research contends there are some advantages and disadvantages to using this style of leadership. Skogan (2006) noted that leaders who allowed employees to participate in decisionmaking showed improvement in labor-management relations, encouraged employee commitment, enhanced community service, and diminished employee rejections of police restructuring (as cited in Steinheider & Wuestewald, 2008). Research provides a plethora of findings for implementing participative leadership such as: increased occupational contentment, organizational allegiance, an organizational ownership behavior, apparent support, labor-management collaboration and employee performance (Steinheider & Wuestewald). Smith (2008) suggested that the police rank structure impeded this style of leadership. Furthermore, the police organizational system has embedded a culture of risk aversion by continuing in a hierarchical structure. Leadership Theories and Change The researcher suggested that since the hierarchical system promoted employees to rank that it actually blocked participation at different levels within the organization due to a lack of trust or experience. Other researchers suggest that some have been left out of the decision-making process by allowing employees to participate at a suggestion level or their discretionary decision-making on the street. Labor unions have increased their control within the police organization, but have not been included in the decision-making process. Flynn (2004) and Skogan (2004) contend these labor unions are not being asked to help in the decision-making process because of the hierarchical ethos of the police organization and the selfishness of the labor unions (as cited in Steinheider & Wuestewald, 2008). Ospina & Yaroni (2003) suggested that labor union representatives and police 15

leaders only cooperate with each other when there is a critical situation (as cited in Steinheider & Wuestewald, 2008).

Transactional Leadership Burns (1978) and Bass (1985) portrayed a transactional leader as one whom: (1) recognizes what it is one wants to get from his/her work and tries to see that one gets what his/her wants if performance warrants it; (2) exchanges rewards and promises of reward for effort; and (3) is responsive to ones immediate self-interests if they can be met by getting the work done (as cited in A. Chan & E. Chan, 2005). Bolden, Gosling, Marturano, & Dennison, (2003) presented that employees are inspired through the use of recompense and chastisement (as cited in Taylor, 2009). Taylor (2009) asserts that employees are held accountable regardless of competency or resource availability. Leadership Theories and Change Transactional theories of leadership assert that people will follow leaders who are inspirational. The leader will develop a vision (possibly collaboratively), sell the vision and lead the way (Taylor, 2009). van Eeden et al (2008) defined transactional leadership as a transactional process between the leader and employee. Hartog, Van Muijen & Koopman (1997) added that the leaderemployee relationship not only involves exchanges, but bargaining as well. Deluga (1990) supported this by stating that leaders and/or employees can exercise a significant amount of control and influence over one another during this exchange and bargaining process. Pettigrew (1972) and Mechanic (1962) stated a leaders control over vital information or an employees special skill in solving crucial organizational problems provides each participant leverage from which to negotiate (as cited in Deluga, 1990). The overall success of the organization depends on whether 16

the leader has the power to strengthen the process in which work is completed by staff (Jogulu & Wood, 2007). McGuire & Kennerly (2006) report that transactional leaders are only interested in maintaining the status quo for their organizations. Transactional leaders are known to establish performance specifications and make sure they are accomplished by a given deadline, limit the contentment of employees and create a low amount of employee commitment. Transactional leadership is divided into three distinct processes that influence employees: active management by exception, passive management by exception and contingent reward (van Eeden et al., 2008). In the case of active management by exception, the leader looks for mistakes, indiscretions, exceptions, divergence from standards, complaints, infractions of policy and regulations, and failures and he or she takes corrective action before or when these occur (van Eeden et al., 2008). Leadership Theories and Change A non-listening, reactive leader who does nothing to curb foreseeable errors or problems is considered to be leading by the passive management exception (van Eeden et al., 2008). Leaders identify the outcomes (reward or punishment) that will be bestowed based upon the employees performance (van Eeden et al.). Leaders using contingency rewards engage the path-goal theory that was outlined by House (1971) because it rewards and motivates employees based on performance (Bass, 1997). Contingency rewards used in transactional leadership use contingency rewards for employees when they attain pre-set goals and objectives (Murphy, 2005). Chan & Chan (2005) suggested employees receive rewards for accomplishments, proposals to augment pay and promotion, or praise for superior hard work. Webb (2007) contends that a leader who recognizes the attributes of their employees will assign tasks that will allow the employee to accomplish the mission and obtain their just reward which in turn will motivate them to do more. 17

Webb (2007) indicated there was an optimistic association between contingent rewards and organizational results. Transactional leadership has more shortcomings than merit. Rugieri (2009) contends that a transactional leader is more commanding, has high confidence and is usually more fixated on the job. Trott & Windsor (1999) stress that transactional leadership is best suited for group settings that are under crisis because it offers satisfaction through an urgent resolution. Medley & Larochelle (1995) noted the results with transactional leadership are not very valuable over time (as cited in Trott & Windsor, 1999). Although transactional leaders center on employee needs; they do not offer opportunities for obtaining motivation, job contentment or allegiance (Sahin, 2004).

Leadership Theories and Change Generally the transactional leadership style is used mostly in organizations dominated by command and control procedures (Bass, 1997). Silvestri (2007) reported that employees in a transactional framework obtain their position within the structure through competition and conformity.

18

Furthermore, police leaders continue to work within the transactional style and tend

to be autocratic (Silvestri, 2007).

Transformational Leadership According to Sullivan & Decker (1997), the transformational leader is not concerned with the status quo, rather with effecting revolutionary change in organizations and human service (as cited in Trott & Windsor, 1999). Bass (1996) defined transformational leadership as the ability of a leader to motivate employees to surpass their own individual aspirations for the greater good of

the organization. Burns (1978) depicted the transformational leader as a morally responsible manager who focuses on developing the moral maturity, values, and standards of his or her subordinates and strengthening their devotion to serve the well-being of others, their organization, and society beyond selfinterest (as cited in Olsen & Johnsen, 2006). Lowe, Kroeck, & Sivasubramaniam (1996) described the transformational leader as being pioneering and less likely to support the current situation, seeking opportunities in the face of risk, and attempting to mold and create rather than react to environmental conditions (as cited in van Eeden, et al, 2008). Van Eeden, et al (2008) added that a transformational leader is one who conveys a vision to inspire others, sets long-term goals and emphasizes social and interpersonal skills. The transforming leader looks for potential motives in employees, seeks to satisfy their needs and engages the full person of the follower. Leadership Theories and Change 19

Jogulu & Wood (2007) insinuated transformational leadership involves establishing oneself as a role model by gaining the trust and confidence of employees and to develop their staff by sanctioning and guiding them to excel beyond the organizational day-to-day obligations. A transformational leader could be categorized as a visionary, a futurist or a mechanism for change that assumes a proactive approach to management (Murphy, 2005). Bolden et al (2003) posed change as the key focus for transformational leadership (as cited in Taylor, 2009). Sofarelli & Brown (1998) suggested that a transformational leader must possess high self-esteem, self-regard and self-awareness to effectively transform organizations and employees (as cited in Murphy, 2005). Taylor (2009) described the following fundamental features of transformational leadership: build a shared

vision, see the big picture and deal with convoluted issues, test thinking analytically, encourage involvement and motivation, share information and enable trust through team working, recognize contributions and celebrate accomplishments, create opportunities for incessant learning and support peoples growth, including own; adaptable and able to deal with unexpected issues, role model through behaviors and goal setting, and network effectively (McNichol 2006, Shaw 2007). Transformational leadership is based on four primary dynamics to influence the behaviors and attitudes of others: idealized influence (charisma), inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Ruggieri, 2009, McGuire & Kennerly, 2006). Bass (1985) regarded the charismatic component as idealized influence. Idealized influence implies the employees imitate their leaders behavior and values and are committed to and make sacrifices for the leaders vision (as cited in van Eeden, et al, 2008). Leadership Theories and Change 20

In order for a leader to have idealized influence, an employee must be able to see that the leader is unfailing in word or deed and they actually stand for something they aspire to do and inspire their employees toward the same goal (Murphy & Drodge, 2004). Leaders with these attributes are highly admired, respected, trusted, and have a high level of self-confidence, self-esteem, and selfdetermination. They are usually regarded as role models and demonstrate high standards of ethical and moral conduct (Chan & Chan, 2005). Chan & Chan (2005) described inspirational motivation as the ability of leaders who can stimulate and inspire employees and colleagues by building self-assurance, filling and arousing enthusiasm and determination in the group. In general, this is the method of inspiring their vision and encouraging employees to implement it for the future growth of the organization. This type of leader provides symbols, metaphors, and simplified emotional appeals to increase awareness and

understanding of mutually desired goals (Bass and Avolio, 1997). Murphy & Drodge (2003) pointed out that communicating the vision to everyone and reiterating it often was the key ingredient of inspirational motivation. Bass et al (1987) describes intellectual stimulation as encouraging employees to think of creative ways to solve old problems, examining their own values and beliefs, and when suitable, those of their leader (as cited in Deluga, 1990). As a result, the employees can extend themselves with capabilities of discovering, examining, and resolving problems with a more liberated thought in order to survive rapidly changing organizational environments (Deluga, 1990). Curtin (1995) confirmed this by suggesting that employees welcome new experiences as long as they are not intimidated. Employees want to be included in the decision-making process and know that their views are valued and desired. Leadership Theories and Change 21

Webb (2007) described individual consideration as the need employees have for personal appreciation and the need to acknowledge the unique strengths and skills of each employee in an organization. Chan & Chan (2005) agreed and believed if leaders acted as coaches or mentors, and gave particular attention to individual employees needs for personal growth, advancement, and achievement it would foster mutual trust and effect a positive impact on satisfaction with the leaders, as well as overall productivity. Murphy & Drodge (2003) claimed a vital aspect of individual consideration is assigning jobs to employees that offer opportunities to obtain enthusiasm for what they are doing and providing the necessary tools to accomplish it. The literature reviewed pointed out some benefits and drawbacks in using the transformational leadership style. Taylor (2009) reasoned that transformational leaders place an emphasis on team building, and empowering and developing potential in order to reach long-term

goals. Thyer (2003) reported a transformational leader creates a collaborative learning environment, improves morale, embraces accountability and conflict resolution, proactive towards change management, ignites communication and supports empowerment. These leaders also facilitate employees toward motivation and being involved in the vision they produce. Webb (2007) noted an advantage of transformational leadership is having highly motivated and satisfied employees. Montana & Charnov (1993) stated these employees displayed a decrease in occurrences of absenteeism and an escalation in production while on the job (as cited in Webb, 2007). In turn, Yukl (2003) claimed employees who distinguish their leader as caring for the interests of each individual worker, are likely to exhibit increased allegiance, confidence, and to have a stronger sense of emotional well-being.

Leadership Theories and Change When these issues are present, leaders tend to preserve a higher level of prominence in the

22

organization and the organization has a tendency for greater production (as cited in Webb, 2007). Silvestri (2007) added that transformational leaders have a capability of infusing a higher degree of passion into leadership by engaging employees and making them feel appreciated. Murphy (2005) agreed and pointed out that transformational leaders could achieve this passion by motivating and energizing employees to pursue goals, visions and the empowering culture. If transformational leaders are passionate about appreciating their employees this will provide them with opportunities to grow and develop (Silvestri, 2007). Sheldon & Parker (1997) believe, if a leader effectively empowers employees, it develops an atmosphere of joint trust, increases job contentment, and promotes dedication to the organizational goals which culminates in the delivery of quality service (as cited in Murphy, 2005). Bass (1990) reported that transformational leaders motivated

employees to perform past their expectations (as cited in Adebayo, 2004). Silvestri (2007) insisted that since the police organization culture is rank-oriented it presents significant limitations for those employees wishing to implement alternative, transformative ways of working that require more open and participatory forms of engagement and interaction with colleagues. The ability of the police organization to integrate a transformative style of working then becomes increasingly problematic. Transformative leaders can be seen as being ineffectual and lenient. Another problem seen by many researchers is the culture of police management demands speedy judgments and good decision makers; the transformational approach takes too long and is therefore alleged to be unsuccessful (Silvestri). Sofarelli & Brown (1998) refuted the advantages of the transformational leadership style because it tends to interrupt a balanced and organized method of doing work (as cited in Murphy, 2005). Leadership Theories and Change 23

Wuestewald & Steinheider (2006) and Adebayo (2004) claimed the transformational leader can institute a vision that will move the organization toward the future and an authentic caring environment and procure employee support via idealized influence (charisma), inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration. The use of transformational leadership is gaining momentum because it is directly in contention with the outdated autocratic unilateral style of leadership that has been forced on employees for many years (Murphy, 2005). Bass (1990) argued that the doctrine of transformational leadership related to all organizational levels (as cited in Kane & Tremble, 2000). Curtin (1995) stated the transformational leader: Does not simply strike a fair bargain with people; he/she adds something more by calling them to a higher value, which in turn, increases their self-worth as they learn to value their own contributions to the accomplishment of a mission.

Burns (1978) contended that transformational leaders could lead their employees to a higher level of needs that was outlined in Maslows hierarchy of needs. This was done by increasing the employees level of knowledge in achieving valued conclusions, a vision and the plan to accomplish these traits. It also involved employees exceeding their own concerns for the sake of the team or organization and raising their awareness to enhance themselves and what they want to achieve (as cited in Chan & Chan, 2005). This style of leadership can possibly turn employees into leaders and leaders into change agents (Spinelli, 2006). Transformational leadership qualities are learned from leaders accepting their own mistakes (Murphy). Silvestri (2007) suggested that leaders using the transformational style of leadership not only affected their employees, but it spilled over into the community as well. Leadership Theories and Change This was accomplished by having motivated officers that related better to the community they served. Murphy & Drodge (2003) sum transformational leadership as follows: The key point here is that a police organisations explicit values must reflect the core values of the broader society which the organisation serves, and that police leaders must demonstrate the utmost respect for those values both personally and professionally to be truly transformational. 24

III.

Discussion of Changes to Police Leadership

Change can be complicated and taxing. Some changes can be projected, but some come too quick to be prepared. Management styles and behaviors form a police organizations culture. Culture is seen to be important because it supports or hinders policies, provides value, influences character, establishes consistency and direction, steers and forms conduct, and influences

organization success (Florida Department of Law Enforcement [FDLE], 2010). Thomas (2001) wrote, Our natural reaction to change, even in the best circumstances, is to resist. The overwhelming majority of people naturally and fervently resist change either in their personal lives or in the workplace. We like our comfort zone. There are a number of arguments for resisting change and implementing change. Adlam & Villiers (2003); Franz and Jones (1987) believe that most research equates police leadership with an archaic militaristic style. Franz and Jones (1987) argue that the militaristic style hinders communication between leaders and officers (as cited in Smith, 2009).

Leadership Theories and Change This causes problems with the problem-solving capabilities of police organizations; how they confront a hastily shifting world; and how they support the essential practice of modernization in a setting in which the population and topography of everyday policing is changing rapidly (Smith, 2009). Hisrich & Peters (1992) asserted police leadership does not support ingenuity, flexibility or autonomy due to leadership always enforcing the philosophy of do what you are told, do not make mistakes, and do not take risks (as cited in Smith). Canter (2000) coined the term destructive organizational psychology which means police organizations continue an outdated system that primes certain officers within the organization to become leaders instead of promoting those who have consistently

25

demonstrated the overall qualities of a progressive leader. Police leaders select their future leaders early in their careers and usually do not accept the ones that take time to develop over a longer period of time which promotes the same antiquated police culture (as cited in Smith). Silvestri (2007) emphasized the rank structure has evolved over many decades and has acted as a right of passage for future leaders to carry on the antiquated missions of the organization. Those officers obtaining rank view it as a status symbol. McLaughlin & Murji (1985) contended that if the rank structure was terminated, officers would believe it to be an unproductive step and a loss of power (as cited in Silvestri, 2007). Presently, police organizations are not prepared to embrace an innovative participatory style of management because of its unwillingness to share information with anyone and rank further complicates it (Silvestri). Wuestewald & Steinheider (2006) pointed out that since police leadership is entwined in a traditional hierarchical culture it discourages new styles of shared leadership because these leaders either do not trust officers or have never been introduced to adaptive leadership methods like, allowing interpersonal communication, coaching, and Leadership Theories and Change facilitation or inclusive decision-making. This results in no change to the overall effectiveness of the organization and it remains status quo (as cited in Smith). Another aspect of fearing change is the perceived time it takes to make a decision using one of the participatory leadership styles. Some leaders fear it 26

would be an ineffective method of making decisions and make one believe they were an ineffective and indecisive leader (Silvestri). Davidhizar & Cramer (2000) argued that police organizations do not want to change because their culture and structure have been one in which the leaders are male gendered. These leaders continued to be transactional, domineering, aggressive and powerful (as cited in Thyer, 2003). Murray, Prunckun, & Ras (2007) agreed and indicated that even with changes in masculinities and femininities in police organizations; police leadership is still a gendered site. There is some research that indicates that leaders are simply against change. They lead under the assumptions that if things are working well, why change it (FDLE, 2010). In order for police leaders to establish themselves as being modern, visionary and innovative, they must adapt to the changes that face them. This is accomplished by empowering people within their organizations to make decisions and stimulating collaboration (Wuestewald & Steinheider). Adebayo (2004) wrote:
In order to react effectively to changes in societys demographic composition,

education, and independent ideals, the leadership structure of the police must be seen to be flexible enough to accommodate such changes and also ensure the removal of unnecessary bureaucratic delays in the entire operation of the police. The autocratic style of leadership that consisted mostly of less educated men in the past will not suffice in this timeframe because the workforce has changed (Adebayo, 2004). Leadership Theories and Change 27

Smith (2009) declared that modern day leaders with advanced education have begun embracing the change from the traditional promotional processes to elevating new leaders based upon their education and roles. Education presents more opportunity for change within the police organization by allowing these educated officers to broaden their knowledge, and question and alter assessments in how services are provided. Silvestri (2007) claimed that police leadership possibly changed because women challenged their male counterparts for leadership roles; thusly changing the organizational culture (as cited in Murray et al, 2007). Women have been incorporated in the police culture for over 30 years. Eliminating some of these male gendered biases has resulted in a flatter structure and involved an empowering and participative leadership. The changes in leadership styles have directly benefited the pubic through community and problem-oriented policing. Women leaders are seen to be more transformational, seeking to open up communication and the decision-making process. As more and more women become leaders within the police organization it will shake the foundation of the commanding and controlling style of leadership to one of transformation (Silvestri). Some research indicates that leaders must change because of generational issues. At the present, there are four main generational groups that are active in the workplace: Veterans, Baby Boomers, Generation X and Y. Most of the Veteran generation has either retired from leadership roles or have come back from retirement in a civilian type position. Presently, the Baby Boomers are the generation that is mainly in control. However, the Baby Boomers are beginning to retire and this will force the other two generations into leadership roles and that will require an organizational shift. Leadership Theories and Change 28

If the present economic trend continues all of these generations may continue to work together for some time and they all need to know how to interact. In order to affect positive change, all of these generations will have to respect and learn from each other. Leaders will need to emphasize flexibility, training, and open communication between all generational groups throughout the organization (FDLE, 2010). Steinheider &Wuestewald (2008) proffered that change in police leadership and the organizational structure was connected to the increased adoption of unions. In the past, leaders did not consult union leaders in the decision-making process. Progressive leaders foster improved work conditions, productivity, service delivery and increased organizational commitment when including union leaders in the policy process. Smith (2009) argued that change in police leadership was birthed when police leaders began the use of teams to tackle problems and projects. The adoption of a team or participative concept alludes to some of the characteristics that are consistent in the transformational style of leadership. The remuneration of allowing officers to participate in the team concept while working on projects and problems has made them more flexible and adaptable. Thomas (2001) emphasized three mistakes to avoid if effective change is going to last. The first mistake leaders make before implementing change is not including input from those the change will affect. Leaders fail again by not spending enough time on stimulating and persuading employees that change will be beneficial. Lastly, leaders have to model the way and promote the change. If leaders avoid these mistakes it makes the change process less frustrating and stressful.

Leadership Theories and Change

29

IV.

Conclusion

Accountable and suitable leadership is essential to the success of any organization (Spinelli, 2006). Murphy & Drodge (2003) claimed that a leader should be ethical, grounded in the mission of the organization, and is emotionally engaged with employees. Ginger (2004) pointed out six Golden Rules for the modern police leader to follow: Service to employees and the public, unselfishness, calculated awareness (sensitivity to the wider social, cultural, political and business environments within which the police service operates), support (subordinates and the pubic), professional excellence and endurance with integrity. Bass (1997) suggested that the old standards of job-centered or employee-centered leadership and autocratic or democratic leadership and related exchange theories of leadership overlooked the effects of the leader-employee relations of sharing a vision, representation and sacrifice. Maslows Hierarchy of Needs indicated a person needs to have their physiological needs, safety needs, love and belonging, esteem needs, and self-actualization met. Herzbergs Two-Factor Theory claims in order for a person to feel successful they have to be motivated and this is accomplished by achievement, recognition of this achievement, advancement, responsibility, and the nature of the work itself. There are some factors that hinder being motivated and those are rules and regulations, administration, supervision, working conditions, and interpersonal values (FDLE, 2010). Webb (2007) emphasized that leaders who focused on stimulating employees intellectually, offered rewards, had charisma and individual consideration were more apt to increase motivation and success in their employees. Leadership Theories and Change 30

Transformational and transactional leadership can better allow employees to obtain their needs as outlined by Maslows Hierarchy of Needs and Herzbergs Two-Factor Theory. Although there is a plethora of research on the topic of effective leadership styles there are some researchers that claim a cross between transformational and transactional to be best for the modern police leader. Jogulu & Wood (2007) insisted that using both of these styles of leadership were essential in running a modern-day organization. McGuire & Kennerly (2006) noted effective leaders should have a balance between transformational and transactional leadership that matches that of its employees. Taylor (2009) claimed it was possible to use transformational leadership within a transactional setting such as a police organization. Bass (1997) noted that transformational leadership could be both autocratic and democratic or even participative depending on the issues and authority. He suggested more authoritative transformational leadership would be used during policy implementation rather than work place decisions. Additionally, a review of literature suggests that transformational leadership is complementary to and enhances transactional leadership (Spinelli). Bass (1988) reasoned a transformational and transactional style of leadership is necessary for the continuation and development of intricate organizations (as cited in Spinelli, 2006). Chan & Chan (2005) added that the use of these two styles of leadership could affect employee outcomes positively, but not in isolation of each other. Lipley (2004) pointed out that leaders using both of these styles of leadership are likely to have employees that are more motivated and feel most supported. Silvestri (2007) believed that the ability of the leader to encourage, transform, and improve employees sense of belongingness is a fundamental element for the improvement of a police leader. Leadership Theories and Change She declared that a leader who masters the use of such styles will be a champion of change. 31

McGuire & Kennerly (2006) argued that for an organization to develop a more transformational culture it would need to hire charismatic individuals that are less transactional and who demonstrate a balance of ethics, morals and integrity. It is widely understood that the face of police leadership is changing and in order to be and effective leader one must embrace the changes that are before them. Jogulu & Wood (2007) insisted that effective leadership not only institutes a clear vision for the direction of the organization, but must empower employees to accept the challenges change will bring and cooperate in accomplishing the mission. Cohen, & Eimicke (1995) agreed that effective leadership shapes employees performance toward the mission of the organization (as cited in Adebayo, 2004). Murphy (2004) contended that in order to be an effective leader one must employ behaviors that make their employees feel respected and seek out advancement opportunities for these employees. Fiedler (1967) suggested there is not just one ideal leadership style to use for every issue, because they may have more knowledge and experience in one situation, but may not be as adept in another (as cited in Murphy, 2005). An example of this is when the leader knows when to direct and delegate and when to coach and mentor (Menzies, 2007). An effective leader must be open-minded and able to accept feedback and adjust their style of leadership, if necessary, to accommodate the concerns brought forward. In conclusion, change is necessary if a police organization wishes to keep up with the times. The old styles of leadership must be broken and the organization should encourage and train their leaders to be more transformational. Partnerships, power sharing, confidence and even humbleness are supplanting the influence of rank (IACP, 1999). Leadership Theories and Change 32

This will cause the police organization to become flatter with less levels of management and fewer clear differences between them (Wuestewald & Steinheider, 2006). Menzies (2007) proffered that police leaders who become more collaborative and interdependent in their method to solving conflicts and show concern for employees or build a collective vision will have a major emotional impact on their employees. Taylor (2009) pointed out that leadership theories enable a person to use the correct skills in any given situation through a process of understanding, critical consideration and assessment. A panel of Chiefs of Police from several agencies in Orange County, Florida, was asked what style of leadership was best used and the overall consensus was a mixture because one should not rely on just one style because each situation is different (FDLE, 2010).

Proposed Research Question Based upon the review of the theories and empirical literature on leadership styles, the following question is proposed:

To what extent would an exclusive transformational leadership style in police organizations have on rank structure and promotions?

Leadership Theories and Change

33

References Autocrat. (2010). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/autocrat Adlam, R., & Villiers, P. (2003). Police leadership in the twenty first century: Philosophy, doctrine and development. Hook, Hampshire: Waterside Press. Adebayo, D. (2005). Perceived workplace fairness, transformational leadership and motivation in the Nigeria police: implications for change. International Journal of Police Science & Management, 7(2), 110-122. Retrieved March 19, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Bass, B. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press. Bass, B. (1988). Charismatic leadership: The elusive factor in organizational effectiveness. In Evolving perspectives on charismatic leadership, ed. Conger, J., & Kanungo, N. and Associates, 40-77, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Bass, B., Waldman, D., Avolio, B., & Bebb, M. (1987). Transformational leadership and the falling dominoes effect. Group & Organization Studies, 12, 73-87. Bass, B. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18, 19-36. Bass, B. (1996). A new paradigm of leadership: An inquiry into transformational leadership. Alexandria, VA: US Army Institute for Behavioral & Social Sciences.

Leadership Theories and Change

34

Bass, B. (1997). Does the transactional-transformational leadership paradigm transcend organizational and. American Psychologist, 52(2), 130. Retrieved March 13, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Bass, B., & Avolio, B. (1997). Full range of leadership development: Manual for the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Redwood City, CA: Mind Gardens. Bolden, R., Gosling, J., Marturano, A., & Dennison, P. (2003). A Review of Leadership Theory And Competency Frameworks. Centre for Leadership Studies, University of Exeter. Retrieved March 12, 2010, from http://centres.exeter.ac.uk/cls/research/abtract.php?id=29. Burns, J. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Canter, D. (2000). Destructive organizational psychology. In D. Canter, & L.J. Alison (Eds.), Psychology and law: Bridging the gap (pp. 1-21). Dartmouth: Ashgate Publishing. Chan, A., & Chan, E. (2005). Impact of Perceived Leadership Styles on Work Outcomes: Case of Building Professionals. Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, 131(4), 413-422. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2005)131:4(413). Clark, D. (1997, May 11). Concepts of Leadership. Retrieved April 3, 2006 from http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/leadcon.html Clark, D. (1997, May 11). Concepts of Leadership. Retrieved April 11, 2006 from the World Wide Web: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/leadtem.html Cohen, S., & Eimicke, W. (1995). The new effective public manager: Achieving success in a changing environment. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Leadership Theories and Change 35

Curtin, L. (1995, October). The "Gold Collar" Leader?. Nursing Management, pp. 7-8. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Daft, R. (2005). The Leadership Experience. Toronto: Southwestern. Davidhizar, R., & Cramer, C. (2000). Gender differences in leadership in the health Professions. Health Care Manager, 18(3), 18-24. Deluga, R. (1990). The Effects of Transformational, Transactional, and Laissez Faire Leadership Characteristics on Subordinate Influencing Behavior. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 11(2), 191-203. Retrieved March 5, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Fiedler, F. (1967). A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Franz, V., & Jones, D. (1987). Perceptions of organizational performance in suburban Police departments: A critique of the military model. Journal of Police Science And Administration, 15(3), 153-161. Flynn, J. (2004). The merits of community policing in the twenty-first century: The view From the street. In L Fridell (Ed), Community policing: The past, present, and future (pp. 141-149). Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum. Florida Department of Law Enforcement [FDLE], (2010). Florida Leadership Academy Class 14, Managing change, 5,18 & 19. Fyfe, J. J., Greene, J. R., Walsh, W. F., Wilson, O. W., & McLaren, R. C. (1997). Police Administration, Fifth Edition. Boston, MA: McGraw Hill Companies, Inc.

Leadership Theories and Change

36

Ginger, J. (2004). Police Leadership in the Twenty-First Century: Philosophy, Doctrine and Developments (Book). International Journal of Police Science & Management, 6(2), 112-114. Retrieved January 22, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Hartog, D., Van Muijen, J., & Koopman, P. (1997). Transactional versus transformational leadership: An analysis of the MLQ. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 70(1), 19-34. Retrieved January 25, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Hesser, L. (1999, May). Police Leadership in the 21st Century Achieving & Sustaining Executive Success. Retrieved January 25, 2010, from mhtml://E:\UCF\Police Leadership in the 21st Century.mht Hisrich, R., & Peters, M. (1992). Entrepreneurship: Starting, developing and managing a new enterprise. Hollywood, IL: Irwin. House, R. (1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Leadership Review. 16, 321-339. International Association of Chiefs of Police (1999, May). Police Leadership in the 21st Century Achieving & Sustaining Executive Success. Retrieved January 25, 2010, from mhtml://E:\UCF\Police Leadership in the 21st Century.mht Jogulu, U., & Wood, G. (2007). Power struggle [staff empowerment]. Engineering Management, 17(3), 36-37. doi:10.1049/em:20070306. Kane, T., & Tremble, T. (2000). Transformational Leadership Effects at Different Levels of the Army. Military Psychology, 12(2), 137-160. Retrieved March 19, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Leadership Theories and Change 37

Kouzes, J. & Posner, B. (2007). The leadership challenge (4th ed.). California: Jossey-Bass. Lipley, N. (2004). Mix of leadership styles is best. Nursing Management - UK, 10(9), 4. Retrieved March 27, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Lussier, R., & Achua, C. (2004). Leadership Theory, Application, Skill Development. Minnesota: Southwestern. McGuire, E., & Kennerly, S. (2006). Nurse Managers as Transformational and Transactional Leaders. Nursing Economic$, 24(4), 179-185. Retrieved March 7, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. McLaughlin, E., & Murji, K. (1995). The end of public policing? Police reform and the new managerialism, in: Noaks, L., Levi, M., & Maguire, M. (eds), Contemporary Issues in Criminology. Cardiff: University of Wales Press. Marquis, B. & Huston, C. (2000). Leadership Roles and Management Functions in Nursing (3rded.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins. McNichol, E. (2007). Understanding yourself as a leader in: McNichol E, Hamer, S. (Eds), Leadership and Management: A 3-Dimensional Approach. Cheltenbam: Nelson Thornes. Mechanic, D. (1962). Sources of power in lower participants n complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 7, 349-364. Medley, F. & Larochelle, D. (1995). Transformational leadership and job satisfaction. Nursing Management, 26(9), 64JJ-LL.

Leadership Theories and Change

38

Menzies, C. (2007). What do we know about leadership and policing? Retrieved March
o o

27, 2010 from http://www.sipr.ac.uk/downloads/Menzies.pps Montana, P., & Charnov, B. (1993). Management. Barrons Educational Series, Inc. Murphy, L. (2005). Transformational leadership: a cascading chain reaction. Journal of Nursing Management, 13(2), 128-136. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2934.2005.00458.x. Murphy, S. (2008). The role of emotions and transformational leadership on police culture: an autoethnographic account. International Journal of Police Science & Management, 10(2), 165-178. doi:10.1350/ijps.2008.10.2.72. Murphy, S., & Drodge, E. (2004). The four I's of police leadership: A case study heuristic. International Journal of Police Science & Management, 6(1), 1-15. Retrieved March 16, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Murray, T., Prunckun, H., & Ras, J. (2007). Reviews. Police Practice & Research, 8(5), 487-493. doi:10.1080/15614260701764363. Olsen, O., Eid, J., & Johnsen, B. (2006). Moral Behavior and Transformational Leadership in Norwegian Naval Cadets. Military Psychology, 1837-56. doi:10.1207/s15327876mp1803s_4. Ospina, S. & Yaroni, A. (2003). Understanding cooperation behavior in labor Management cooperation: A theory-building exercise. Public Administration Review, 63(4), 455-471. Pettigrew, A. (1972). Information control as power resource. Sociology, 6, 187-204.

Leadership Theories and Change

39

Professional Organizations: Leadership. List and explain the styles of leadership used by effective leaders. D.O. CAPS. Retrieved January 22, 2010, from http://www.temple.edu/cte/research/DOCAPS/DOCAPS_09.pdf. Ruggieri, S. (2009). Leadership in Virtual Teams: A Comparison of Transformational and Transactional Leaders. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 37(8), 1017-1021. Retrieved January 25, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Sahin, S. (2004). The Relationship between Transformational and Transactional Leadership Styles of School Principals and School Culture (The case of Izmir, Turkey). Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 4(2), 387-395. Retrieved January 25, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Shaw, S. (2007). Nursing Leadership. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Sheldon, L., & Parker, P. (1997). The power to lead. Nursing Management, 4 (1), 8-9. Silvestri, M. (2007). Doing Police Leadership: Enter the New Smart Macho. Policing & Society, 17(1), 38-58. doi:10.1080/10439460601124130. Skogan, W. (2004). Community policing: Common impediments to success. In L. Fridell (Ed.), Community policing: The past, present, and future (pp.159-167). Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum. Skogan, W. (2006, October 12-13). Why reforms fail. Paper for the University of Berkeley/Australian National University Conference on Police Reform from the BottomUp, Berkeley, CA.

Leadership Theories and Change

40

Skogan, W. & Hartnett, S. (1997). Community policing, Chicago style. New York: Oxford University Press. Smith, R. (2008). Entrepreneurship, police leadership, and the investigation of crime in changing times. Journal of Investigative Psychology & Offender Profiling, 5(3), 209-225. doi:10.1002/jip.86. Sofarelli, D. & Brown, D. (1998). The need for nursing leadership in uncertain times. Journal of Nursing Management, 6, 201-207. Spinelli, R. (2006). The Applicability of Bass's Model of Transformational, Transactional, and Laissez-Faire Leadership in the Hospital Administrative Environment. Hospital Topics, 84(2), 11-18. Retrieved January 22, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Steers, R., Porter, L., & Bigley, G. (1996). Motivation and leadership at work. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Steinheider, B., & Wuestewald, T. (2008). From the bottom-up: sharing leadership in a police agency. Police Practice & Research, 9(2), 145-163. doi:10.1080/15614260802081303. Strecher, V. Current Perspectives on Policing, pp. 324-355 in Larry T. Hoover (ed.), Police Management: Issues and Perspectives (Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum, 1992). Sullivan, E. & Decker, P. (1997). Effective leadership and management in nursing (4th ed). Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Leadership Theories and Change

41

Taylor, R. (2009). Leadership theories and the development of nurses in primary health care. Primary Health Care, 19(9), 40-46. Retrieved March 12, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Thomas, G. (2001). Being an effective agent of change. Retrieved March 23, 2010, from weLead, http://www.leadingtoday.org/Onmag/sepoct01/change102001.html. Thyer, G. (2003). Dare to be different: transformational leadership may hold the key to reducing the nursing shortage. Journal of Nursing Management, 11(2), 73-79. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2834.2002.00370.x. Trott, M., & Windsor, K. (1999). Leadership Effectiveness: How Do You Measure Up? Nursing Economic$, 17(3), 127-130. Retrieved January 25, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. University of Central Florida, (n.d.). Advantages and Disadvantages of the Leadership Styles. Retrieved January 25, 2010, from mhtml:file://E:\UCF\Advantages and Disadvantages of the Leadership Styles.mht. van Eeden, R., Cilliers, F., & van Deventer, V. (2008). Leadership styles and associated personality traits: Support for the conceptualisation of transactional and transformational leadership. South African Journal of Psychology, 38(2), 253-267. Retrieved March 7, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database. Webb, K. (2007). Motivating Peak Performance: Leadership Behaviors That Stimulate Employee Motivation and Performance. Christian Higher Education, 6(1), 53-71. doi:10.1080/15363750600932890.

Leadership Theories and Change

42

Wolf, G., Boland, S. & Aukerman, M. (1994b). A transformational model for the practice of professional nursing: part 2, implementation of the model. JONA 24(5), 38-46. Wright, P. (1996). Leadership and the new science. San Francisco: Berret-Koehler Publishers, Inc. Wuestewald, T. & Steinheider, B. (2006, April). The Changing Face of Police leadership. The Police Chief, 73(4), 26-33. Retrieved February 19, 2010, from Criminal Justice Periodicals. (Document ID: 1191292731). Yukl, G. (2003). Leadership in organizations (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

centres.exeter.ac.uk/cls/documents/mgmt_standards.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_leadership

http://www.leadership-central.com/behavioral-theories.html#axzz1rYqjPBce http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=behavioral%20theories%20of%20leadership&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CEEQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F %2Fwww.leadership-central.com%2Fbehavioral-theories.html&ei=Ag2DT868NYPYrQetlLD0BQ&usg=AFQjCNH5ssEp36CtKmLcW4SLR1IEQA2IOQ

Contingent Leadership www.practical-management.com Leadership Basics - Meaning, Characteristics, Theories, Qualities and Useful Articles managementstudyguide.com

1.
9:29 AM http://www.leadership-central.com/behavioral-theories.html#axzz1rYqjPBce www.leadership-central.com 2.

(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/autocrat).

http://managementstudyguide.com/trait-theory-of-leadership.htm

Read more: http://www.leadership-central.com/behavioral-theories.html#ixzz1rYquAi6p

http://www.leadership-central.com/behavioral-theories.html#axzz1rYqjPBce