Bass Responds to the Critique...

Benard M. Bass in his article The Ethics of Transformational Leadership attempts to provide a rebuttal of the critics of his Transformational Leadership model that he outlined in a publication in the 1980’s called Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. He suggests that there is a key difference between Transformational Leaders (TF) and Pseudotransformational Leaders (PT). He writes that leaders are transformational when they “increase awareness of what is right, good, important, and beautiful, when they help to elevate followers' needs for achievement and self-actualization, when they foster in followers higher moral maturity, and when they move followers to go beyond their self-interests for the good of their group, organization, or society.” He counters this with Pseudotransformational leaders who “may also motivate and transform their followers but in doing so they arouse support for special interests at the expense of others rather than what's good for the collectivity. They will foster psychodynamic identification, projection, fantasy, and rationalization as substitutes for achievement and actualization. They will encourage "we-they" competitiveness and the pursuit of the leaders' own self- interests instead of the common good. They are more likely to foment envy, greed, hate, and conflict rather than altruism, harmony, and cooperation.”

He then writes that the attributes that set TF leadership apart from all others are the “Four I’s.” He writes that if a person’s leadership is truly transformational, then their “idealized influence is characterized by high moral and ethical standards. Their inspirational motivation provides followers with challenges and meaning for engaging in shared goals and undertakings. Their intellectual stimulation helps followers to question assumptions and to generate more creative solutions to problems. Their individual consideration treats each follower as an individual and provides coaching, mentoring and growth opportunities.”

Bass then goes about the rebuttal of four key arguments that critics have with the ethics of his TF model of leadership: The ethics of impression management; the ethics of checks and balances; the ethics of organizational development; and the ethics of influencing followers values and self-interests.

Impression Management. Bass admits that in our contemporary society there “a certain level of impression management has become the norm in our society of advertising, publicity agents, public relations consultants and spin doctors seeking visibility and celebrity status,” however, “the truly transformational leader who is seeking the greatest good for the greatest number and is concerned about doing what is right and honest is likely to avoid stretching the truth or going beyond the evidence for he/she wants to set an example to followers about the value of valid and accurate communication in maintaining the mutual trust of the leader and his or her followers.” He suggests that a truly TF leader cannot engage in negative (where the truth is stretched or lies occur) impression management because “trust is the single most important variable moderating the effects of transformational leadership on the performance, attitudes, and satisfaction of the followers.”

Checks and Balances. Bass suggests that there is checks and balances that are in place, simply because you cannot have TF leadership without also having Transactional Leadership (TA). He writes, “when the transformational leader sees himself/herself in a win-lose negotiation he tries to convert it into a win-win joint problem-solving situation. If this is not possible, then he or she can display the transactional skills necessary as an effective negotiator.” This provides the checks and balances that leadership and follower-ship require.

Organizational Development (OD). Bass asserts that OD and TF are compatible because they both seek to recognize problems, envision winning solutions, communicate information about the issue, persuade others about the issue and the possible solutions and create the cultural organizational infrastructure to deal with the issues at hand. However, Bass states that “the transformational leader strives to achieve a true consensus in aligning individual and organization interests.” As a result, what is avoided is a culture where “everyone is a leader but no followers in the interests of true participative democracy.” OD and TF desire to avoid a “leaderless group,” where “members compete with each other for leadership. The structure that emerges is one or more leaders, followers and isolates.”

Followers Values and Self-Interests. Basically, this is what Bass is saying. Leaders, Followers and Organizational Culture have values that influence everything that happens. Critics suggest that followers must change their values to adopt the values of the leader or the organizational culture as set forth by the leader. Regardless, of whether followers, the leader or the culture shifts it’s values to attain congruence. “In any event, values of individuals must change if congruence is to be attained.” The key issue is how are values aligned to attain congruence? A transformational leader as they live into the “Four I’s” are consistenly focused on the needs of the follower and achieving the growth of the individual and the organization.

Bass concludes that “that rather than being unethical, true transformational leaders identify the core values and unifying purposes of the organization and its members, liberate their human potential, and foster plural leadership and effective, satisfied followers.”[i]

[i] The Ethics of Transformational Leadership, Bernard M. Bass; KLSP: Transformational Leadership, Working Papers (Academy of Leadership Press, 1997)