Leadership in Today's World

Dr. Melody D'Ambrosio



The new Millennium and the Information Age have set the stage for a changing world. Wheatley (1998) states that information is a dynamic element that gives way to order, growth and defines what is alive. It is with this fluid movement of information that we see change. "This is the world of whitewater where we have to change to survive; where we have to develop to thrive; and paradoxically, where the very act of change increases the risk that we won't survive" (White, Hodgsen & Crainer, 1996, p.1). It is a world now of mergers, downsizing, reorganization, diversity and more women in the workplace. Since schools reflect the microcosm of society, change affects that system also. New issues have surfaced such as school violence, literacy, increase of special needs students, diversity, collaboration and an increasing demand on schools for family services. This is "whitewater" in the realm of education. Administrators need to address increased demands and problems that previously did not exist. These problems ultimately reach the classroom where the teacher is the leader. "Beyond parents, the teacher is the second most important leader in any society" (Avolio, 1999, p. 17). This paper will discuss leadership for today's changing world and will be applicable in any size setting whether it be a business or educational institution.


Organizations that were once hierarchical in structure are now more web-like in their design. In times of rapid change, organizations must stay focused and respond quickly to their constituency's needs. Hierarchical power structures will not be able to respond quickly enough. The teamwork and collaboration of "lattice organizations" (Wheatley, 1994, p. 117) or "webs of inclusion" (Helgesen, 1995b, p. 10) are now necessary to address the needs of the organization.


In these times of change there must be people who lead with clarity of judgment and who can face adaptive challenges by "getting on the balcony" and having a vision of the whole picture. Heifetz and Laurie (1997) state that these leaders must be able to regulate distress in the workplace, maintain disciplined action and protect the voices of leadership from below. As the world changes, leadership must also change. This is an age of teamwork. No leader leads without followers (Avolio, 199, p.3). There is an exchange of power in today's leadership role between leaders and followers. There is a shared vision for the future in order to build the "vital forces" (Avolio, 199, p.3.).

Theories of Leadership

Einstein said that no problem can be solved from the same consciousness that created it (Wheatley, 1994, p.5.). Effective leadership for today's world needs to be addressed with a new vision. Beginning with Fielder's (1964, 1967) contingency theory of leadership, researchers in the last forty years have generated many theories of leadership. While the tendency has been for new theories to disregard the old theories, it is best to build on the foundation of what is known.

A review of the theories presents an array of models with oversimplified dichotomies, such as autocratic versus democratic, transactional versus transformational, or task-oriented versus relationship-oriented (Klenke, 1999, p. 84). Each theory relies on a limited set of concepts, such as leadership traits, behaviors, or situations, which are usually applicable to only one level of analysis (Klenke, 1999, p. 84). There are many different ways to consider the study of leadership because "traits, leadership style, emergence (of leadership) and leaders' effectiveness represent different foci" (Adams & Yoder, 1985, p. 2).

Stoghill (Adams & Yoder, 1985, p. 4) outlined the criteria for a complete theory of leadership when he said that the theory should explain the emergence of the leader in unstructured groups, explain the processes that maintain the leader's influence over others, explain the relation of the leader's personality, traits and behaviors to group processes and explain the situations or social context I which the leader's personality and behaviors are most effective. Leadership is a dynamic process of mutual influence of leader and followers. Avolio (1999) could not support a passive follower, since it would be inconsistent with the Full Range of Leadership Development. He saw an important part of leadership development being to help people grow to their fullest potential so that one day the followers could become the leaders.

A collaborative leader is emerging. Helgesen (1995a) stated that today's leader needs to be positioned in the middle of a "web of inclusion" ready to deal with all members of the organization. Today's leader must be flexible, open to the needs of the constituents, a willing communicator and be able to voice the concerns of his or her followers. With this new style of leadership comes the description of transformational and transactional leadership. Bass and Avolio (1999) described transformational leadership in terms of Idealized Attributes and Behaviors-complete trust in leader, Inspirational Motivation-leader communicates high standards of performance, Intellectual Stimulation-followers are enable to think creatively, Individualized Consideration-followers' abilities are developed to fullest potential. Avolio (1998) stated that in transformational leadership, leaders develop followers into leaders in a morally uplifting way. These leaders stimulate, challenge and motivate their followers to greater things. Transformational leaders are deeply trusted due to their openness and genuine concern. On the other hand, they (1999) described transactional leadership through Contingent Rewards-leader and follower establishes agreements and Management-by-Exception (Active) and (Passive). The Active role is exemplified through correcting and the Passive role is demonstrated by not taking action until something is going wrong. Avolio (1999) described a transactional leader as someone who rewards or disciplines the follower, depending on the success of the follower's performance. Bass and Avolio (1996) also described laissez-faire leadership, which is inactive and negative in perception with the leader not taking a stand. They believed in a full range view of leadership development and potential. Transactional leadership is demonstrated as a collection of contracts between leader and follower with the leader having certain expectations. The follower may experience rewards or reprimands depending on his or her performance. If the follower fulfills the leader's expectations, then this solidifies the contract. When the leader is honorable, trust will build with repeated transactions. higher levels of trust enable transformational leadership to develop. "Transformational leadership adds or augments transactional leadership in its effects on follower motivation, satisfaction and performance" (Avolio, 1999, p. 55). Kouzes and Posner (1987) compared the transactional leader to the transformational one. Transactional leaders maintain a stable situation by utilizing intrinsic rewards for followers. Transformational leaders empower others to excel by utilizing extrinsic rewards. Both kinds of leadership are effective although transformational leadership empowers the followers (Avolio, 1999).


A review of the literature is necessary to analyze the evolving descriptions of leadership. In many cases, leadership is described in terms of dichotomies. Gender differences in leadership styles has also been researched.

Defining Leadership

The issues that surface in a review of the literature on leadership include a basic description of leadership theories, an enumeration of qualities that a leader must possess, an analysis of the different types of leadership and a discussion of what constitutes effective leadership. Literature indicates that, in general, leadership is viewed as an active process and the act of defining one's voice (Matusek, 1997). There is also an important relationship between the leader and follower. The leader shares the vision through listening and sharing information. Gardner & Laskin (1995) stated that:

Leaders present a dynamic perspective to their followers: not just a headline or snapshot, but a drama that unfolds over time, in which they-leaders and followers-are the principal characters or heroes. Together they have embarked on a journey in pursuit of certain goals, and along the way and into the future, they can expect to encounter certain obstacles or resistances that must be overcome (p. 14)

"Leadership is a reciprocal relationship between those who chose to lead and those who decide to follow. Any discussion of leadership must attend to the dynamics of this relationship" (Kouzes & Posner, 1993, p. 1). One must be an "equilibriumbuster" (Wheatley, 1994, p. 116) and listen to the voices of dissent to decipher truth. Leaders need to be willing to address "adaptive challenges" (Heifetz & Laurie, 1997, p. 124).

Leadership Theories

Different theories are found in a review of leadership literature. Trait theory focused on the personal attributes of the leader. "Leadership, then, is part of one's personality. It is reflected in personality differences between leaders and followers" (Adams & Yoder, 1995, p. 3). In this theory, leadership is the result of "inherent (nature) or learned (nurture) capabilities" (Adams & Yoder, 1995, p. 3). The leadership style approach is very similar to the trait theory approach. According to the leadership style approach, leadership is "the behavior of an individual when he [or she] is directing the activities of a group toward a shared goal (Hemphill & coons, 1957, p.7)" [(Adams & Yoder, 1995, p. 4)]. Lewin, Lippett & white (1939) categorized the leadership style perspective in two types of leaders: autocratic and democratic. They also discussed laissez-faire as an absence of leadership and having no influence on others. Situational leadership viewed leadership as a role with expectations about how people in a given position would interact (Hollander, 1981). Situation theory focuses on the characteristics of the task and situation or social context in which leadership is enacted (Adams & Yoder, 1995). Contingency theory combines leaders' style and situational favorability to predict leaders' effectiveness (Adams & Yoder, 1995). Effectiveness is contingent upon the degree that the two factors match.

Fiedler's contingency model of leadership has been one of the most widely researched models on leadership theory and was one the most prominent of contemporary approaches. It states that leaders with high least Preferred Coworker (LPC) scores do best in situations extremely favorable to them; low scoring leaders do best in situations extremely favorable or extremely unfavorable to them (Bass, 1990, p. 494).

Transactional theory focuses on the dynamic process between leaders and followers and the attainment of mutually established goals. The emphasis of transactional theory is upon leader-follower interaction or transaction within a mutually created situation, rather than a combination of leader, and situational factors (Adams & Yoder, 1995, p. 28). Avolio (1999) stated that:

Transactional leadership occurs when the leader rewards or disciplines the follower, depending on the adequacy of the follower's behavior or performance. Transactional leadership depends on laying out contingencies, agreements, reinforcement and either positive contingent reward or the more negative active or passive forms of Management-by-exception (MBE-A or MBE-P) (p. 49).

Management-by-Exception is a form of corrective transaction in which the leader is active or passive in one's vigilance to monitor mistakes or errors. Bass (1998) stated a similar definition of transactional leadership. Bass (1998) defined transformational leadership as charismatic so that the follower will identify with the leader, as inspiring with challenge and motivation, intellectually stimulating and considerate of the follower's needs.

The definition of leadership adjusts to the changing world. "In the 1990's and beyond, instead of slow moving flows, leaders find themselves hurtling down rapids." Whitewater leadership is the new corporate necessity (White, Hodgsen & Crainer, 1996).

Leadership in the future will not only need to be able to cope with the emotional impact of step-by-step change, but also to help people in the organization rapidly reach a new, more effective way of working. Previous success will be no guarantee of future success. Certainty has given way to uncertainty (White, Hodgsen & Crainer, 1996, p. 5).


Description of Leadership Qualities

Kouzes and Posner (1993) found that the critical attributes for leaders include honesty, the ability to be forward-looking, inspiring and competent. These were the results of their surveys over the last few decades. They believed that being honest, inspiring and competent all refers to "source credibility" if that person is to be believed. Kouzes & Posner (1993) stated that:

A credibility check is rooted in the past. It has to do with reputation. Reputation is human collateral, the security we pledge against the performance of our obligations as leaders, friends, colleagues and constituents. It is what supports the natural human instinct to want to trust. Reputation is to be cherished and cared for. A damaged one lowers people's estimation of a leader's worth and their motivation to follow (p. 25).

Heifetz & Laurie (1997) stated that leaders need to be preparing organizations for adaptive challenges in a changing society. They offered six principles for leading adaptive work: " 'getting on the balcony', identifying the adaptive challenge, regulating distress, maintaining disciplined attention, giving the work back to the people and protecting voices of leadership from below (p. 125." Gardner & Laskin (1995) stated that linguistic intelligence is an important leadership quality. Leaders must be eloquent in voice and many are in writing as well. "They do not merely have a promising story; they can tell it persuasively (p. 34)." Matusak (1997) stated that leaders need to have a passion and purpose, self-awareness and self-confidence. Objective introspection is important for honest self-assessment, which ultimately leads to improved performance. A clear knowledge of ethics and values are needed. A leader needs to be capable of openness, caring, and decision making. By listening to different points of view, the leaders develop a shared vision. All decisions involved risks so wisdom is needed to minimize the risks. The five essential skills for whitewater leadership are difficult learning, maximizing energy, resonant simplicity, multiple focus and mastering inner sense (White, Hodgsen & Crainer, 1996, pp. 6-7).

Practices of Effective Leadership

Today emotional intelligence is crucial for effective leadership (Goleman, 1998, p. 94). Emotional intelligence skills include self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy and social skills. Self-awareness is displayed in a person's ability to assess oneself realistically and with candor. Goleman (1998) suggested that people who can control their fears and emotions will be better able to create an environment of trust and fairness. Highly motivated people are driven to achievement beyond expectations. They are proactive and committed. Empathy is important due to the increasing use of teamwork, globalization and the need to retain talent. Socially skilled people have a wide circle of acquaintances and find common elements in which to converse and interact. There is a network of relationships established. It is important to realize that emotional intelligence can be learned with a sense of commitment and dedication. Goleman (1998) grouped capabilities from leadership "competency models" from 188 companies that were large and global. He grouped the capabilities into three categories: purely technical skills, such as accounting and business planning, cognitive abilities like analytical reasoning and competencies demonstrating emotional intelligence. Senior managers of the companies were interviewed. After analyzing the date, Goleman (1998) found that intellect produced outstanding performance. Big-picture thinking and long-term vision were also important. He found however; that emotional intelligence was twice as important than the other qualities for jobs at all organizational levels.

Moreover, my analysis showed that emotional intelligence played an increasingly important role at the highest levels of the company, where differences in technical skills are of negligible importance. In other words, the higher the rank of a person considered to be a star performer, the more emotional intelligence capabilities showed up as a reason for his or her effectiveness. When I compared star performers with average ones in senior leadership positions, nearly 90% of the difference in their profiles was attributable to emotional intelligence factors than cognitive abilities (Goleman, 1998, p. 94).

Gardner and Laskin (1995) discussed a tie to the community or audience (followers) - a demonstrated relationship to the constituents. The leader needs to be in contact with the community yet balancing the changing views that he or she has personally. In order to be credible, the leader must embody the story. Gardner and Laskin (1994) saw this as one of the guidelines for effective leadership. The other two guidelines for effective leadership include the ability to anticipate and deal with new trends and to encourage recognition of the problems, paradoxes and possibilities of leadership. There are "moments of truth" (Kouzes & Posner, 1987, p. 201) when leaders interact with their followers. These critical incidents reflect what the leader believes in. The most typical "moments of truth" focus on how leaders spend their time, the questions they ask, their reactions to critical incidents and what they reward. Analysis of these actions will produce a window to their central beliefs or core values. The followers or constituents observe, analyze and then interpret the leader from these actions. This is the embodiment of the message (Gardner and Laskin, 1995). if the image a leader projects matches what the leader really does, then the leader will experience a greater level of effectiveness with followers. "A tension will always exist between those who use their knowledge to manipulate and those who use their knowledge to empower" (Gardner and Laskin, p. 306).

Bass and Avolio (1999) described a Full Range of Leadership Development model on a continuum of transactional and transformational leadership where the person attains one's fullest potential over time. It is also a continuous process. Avolio (1999) stated that we must be conscious of the past yet open enough to address the uncertainties of the future.

Different Types of Leaders

The leadership literature over the last thirty years has produced the description of different types of leaders. Transactional leaders and transformational leaders were first described by Bass (Kouzes and Posner, 1987, p. 281).

In terms of practices, his (Bass') transformational leader closely resembles the leader we describe in this book, inspiring others to excel, giving individual consideration to others, and stimulating people to think in new ways. The transactional leader, on the other hand, tends to maintain a steady-state situation and generally gets performance from others by offerring rewards. (The transactional leader closely resembles the traditional definition of a manager.) (Kouzes & Posner, 1987, p. 281).

Transformational Leaders

Transformational leaders do more with colleagues and followers than set up simple exchanges or agreements. They behave in ways to achieve superior results by employing one or more of the four components of transformational leadership such as Charismatic Leadership (or Idealized Influence), inspirational Motivation, Intellectual Stimulation and Individualized consideration (Bass, 1998, pp. 506). Transformational leadership is a process by which leaders act to improve their followers' understanding of a situation. They strive to raise their awareness of what is good for the whole group by taking proactive measures. Followers are motivated to perform tasks beyond their own expectations. In the first component of Charismatic Leadership, leaders are role models for their followers (Bass, 1998, p. 5). Inspirational Motivation is displayed when transformational leaders behave in ways that motivate and inspire those around them by providing meaning and challenge to their followers work (Bass, 1998, p. 5). Intellectual Stimulation is displayed when transformational leaders stimulate their followers' efforts to be innovative and creative by questioning assumptions, reframing problems and approaching old situations in new ways (Bass, 1998, p. 5). Individualized Consideration is practiced when new learning opportunities are created along with a supportive climate (Bass, 1998, p. 6).

Transactional Leaders

Transactional leadership occurs when the leader rewards or disciplines the follower depending on the adequacy of the follower's performance and depends on contingent reinforcement, either positive contingent Reward (CR) or the more negative active or passive forms of Management-by-Exception (MBE-A or MBE-P) (Bass, 1998, p. 6). With Contingent Reward, the leader assigns or gets agreement on what needs to be done and promises rewards or actually rewards others in exchange for satisfactorily carrying out the assignment (Bass, 1998, p. 6). In Active Management-by-exception, the leader arranges to actively monitor deviances from standards, mistakes and errors in the follower's assignments and to take corrective action as necessary (Bass, 1998, p. 7). In Passive Management-by-Exception, the leader waits passively for deviances, mistakes and errors to occur and then takes corrective action (Bass, 1998, p. 7). Transactional leaders seek compliance from the followers. The outcomes of the interactions are clearly stated. Transactional leadership is the basis for developing transformational leadership. The development of effective transactions over time and the building up of trust encourage transformational leadership.


Laissez-Faire Leaders

Laissez-faire leadership is the avoidance or absence of leadership and is, by definition, most inactive, as well as, most ineffective according to almost all research on the style (Bass, 1998, p. 7). This leader displays an absence of behaviors where decisions are not made, actions are delayed and authority is not utilized.

Full Range of Leadership Development

Fundamental to the Full Range of Leadership Model is that every leader displays each style to some amount (Bass, 1998, p. 7). Hater and Bass (1988) tested the "augmentation hypothesis." They believed that transformational leadership augmented transactional leadership by building upon the interactions between leaders and followers. This, in turn, predicted individual and group effort and effectiveness of performance. Bass conceptualized the "augmentation effect" in response to Burns' original assumption that transformational and transactional leadership were on opposite ends of the same continuum. Transformational leadership styles build on the transactional base in encouraging the extra effort and performance of the followers. Avolio (1999) stated that "transformational leadership adds or augments transactional in its effects on follower motivation, satisfaction and performance" (p. 55). Bass (1998) stated that, "the best leaders are both transformational and transactional" (p. 16). One of the most glaring differences between the leader and the bureaucrat is the leader's inclination to encourage risk taking, to encourage others to step out in the unknown and not play it safe. (Kouzes & Posner, 1987, p. 61).

Control is the language of too many leaders (White, Hodgsen & Crainer, 1996). The element of strict control is waning. Jantsch (198) writes:

In life, the issue is not control, but dynamic interconnectedness. I want to act from that knowledge. I want to move into a universe I trust so much that I give up playing God. I want to stop holding things together. I want to experience such safety that the concept of "allowing" - trusting that the appropriate forms can emerge - ceases to be scary. I want to surrender my care of the universe and become a participating member, with everyone I work with, in an organization that moves gracefully with its environment, trusting the unfolding dance of order. (Wheatley, 1992, p. 23).

In order to facilitate this example, Helgesen (1995b) proposed a "web of inclusion" for an organization with the leader positioned in the middle, able to be connected and accessible to members of the organization. This promotes communication and knowledge of the intricacies within the web.

Voice and Leadership

The literature also defined leadership as finding your voice so that you can speak passionately about something (Matusek, 1997). It also entailed listening to the voices from within the organization. Gilligan (1993) defines voice "…as the core of self. Voice is natural and also cultural. It is composed of breath and sound, words, rhythm and language. And voice is a powerful psychological instrument and channel, connecting inner and outer worlds." (1993, p. XVI). women's voice is relational while men's voice is one of individuation (Gilligan, 1993). Helgesen (1995b) sees voice as an expression of personality and an instrument for creating the vision of the organization. "Today, an increasing number of people favor a pluralistic view of managerial talents and contributions, which emphasizes the value of women's "different voice" (Daly & Ibarra, 1995, p. 2). Leadership has changed:

Giving a voice to all people is the foundation of an organization that is willing to experiment and learn. But, in fact, whistle-blowers, creative deviants, and other such original voices routinely get smashed silenced in organizational life. They generate disequilibrium, and the easiest way for an organization to restore equilibrium is to neutralize those voices, sometimes in the name of teamwork and "alignment"…but buried inside a poorly packaged interjection may lie an important intuition that needs to e teased out and considered. to toss it out for its bad timing, lack of clarity, or seeming unreasonableness is to lose potentially valuable information and discourage a potential leader in the organization (Heifetz & Laurie, 1997, pp. 129-130).

Masculine Leadership versus Feminine Leadership

Kanter (1977) described the 'masculine ethic' of managers. In this "masculine ethic", the traits that are associated with men being effective managers is described. These are qualities such as a tough-minded approach to problems: analytic abilities to abstract and plan; a capacity to set aside personal, emotional considerations in the interests of task accomplishment; and a cognitive superiority in problem solving and decision-making. These characteristics supposedly belonged to men; but then practically all managers were men from the beginning. "however, when women tried to enter management jobs, the "masculine ethic" was invoked as an exclusionary principle" (Kanter, 1977, pp. 22-23). Kanter (1977) explored women in leadership roles and found that leadership styles varied from "commanding-affirming to controlling-disabling." Individual differences seemed more striking than gender differences. The structure of the organization shaped the behavior of how the leaders functioned. In service organizations that were predominantly run by women, the traditional bureaucratic hierarchy seemed intact. Women dominated other women. When women possessed power within an organization, their effectiveness was similar to that or men. Gender differences played a limited role when there was a balance in the power structure. There were three important factors influencing leadership behavior: opportunity, power and the numbers in the organization who are similar or different in gender, race or ethnicity.

Loden (1985) identified important managerial functions such as use of power, managing work relationships, problem solving, conflict, management, motivation of employees, goal-setting, decision-making and teamwork. She interviewed 200 women and 50 men in a wide variety of organizations and entrepreneurial businesses. The results traced two different styles of leadership---masculine and feminine. Feminine leadership was found to be involved with the emotional cues of human interaction, maintenance of close personal relationships and collaboration. It is a style that is linked to gender differences, early socialization and the unique set of life experiences of a woman. Masculine leadership sees the need for tight control, aggressive behavior and the ability to think with little emotional interaction. At the core of the difference are those women respond to situations by thinking and feeling. It deviates from the traditional role where the attainment of power is at the core. The participants agreed that both these styles can complement each other but at the time historically, this was not supported in organizations. There was corporate resistance to the feminine style.

Helgesen (1995a) focused on the patterns of woman leaders. She described the differences through the administration of their tasks. In her extensive diaries of women leaders, she found that women displayed more interconnectedness with their constituents and life, in general. They were involved in a complex network of relationships of caring and helping and scheduled time for sharing information. They were disseminators of information. The qualities ascribed to women's leadership styles included collaborative agreement, which was helpful in long term negotiating, analytic listening and creating an atmosphere where people work with zest and spirit. From the polarity of styles with males being the "warriors" and females being the "caretakers", there emerges a blend of both--that of interpretive guid for the world (Hauser, 1994, p. 50). A "caretaker" leader is able to interact with one's followers and synthesize events and knowledge in terms of what is best for the representative constituency. It is done with respect, interest and trust.

Rosener (1990) described this style as interactive leadership rooted in socialization and career paths. The women participants in her study felt this was a quality that came naturally, based on their backgrounds. She predicted that women leaders would display a transformational style of leadership while men would display a more transactional style. Her female participants were asked to fine male counterparts within their organizations to be the male participants. The instrument used was an eight-page survey. In analyzing the low response rate of 31%, it seemed that contributing factors included the long survey employed and the pressure of female participants for being responsible to find male participants. Male and female participants were 51 years of age and older. These participants were raised in an age of distinct gender differences and expectations but assuming leadership within organizations takes a considerable amount of time. The survey showed that a non-traditional leadership style that is more participatory can be effective in organizations immersed in change if are ready to accept it. Crises in the workplace and fast changing environments create new opportunities especially for better-educated workers.

Transformational leadership would seem to be congruent with a better educated work force. For example, a better educated work force that is eager to apply and develop its abilities on a job would probably thrive under a leader who transmitted a sense of mission, stimulated learning experiences, and aroused new ways of thinking. On the other hand, leaders who simply reward performance as contracted are not likely to energize a work force expecting personal enrichment (Hater & Bass, 1988, p. 702).

Numerous studies on gender differences in leadership styles have produced conflicting results. Some of these studies are Eagly, Karau & Makhijani (1995), Druskat (1994), Bolman & Deal (1992) and Eagly & Johnson (1990). Gender differences in leadership styles are discussed in terms of the psychological perspective versus the structural perspective (Daly & Ibarra, 1995). "The situational perspective argues that when men and women are in similar situations, operating under analogous expectations, they tend to behave in similar ways" (Daly & Ibarra, 1995, p. 2). "The presumed differences in behaviors of men and women are better explained by differences in power, status and opportunity" (Daly & Ibarra, 1995, p. 2). they psychological perspective is supported by Gilligan (1993) and Helgesen (1995a) while the situational perspective is explained by Kanter (1977).




Today's leader must know their core values and be able to voice them. They must be flexible, able to relate to all groups within the constituency, adapt well to change and be prepared for times of uncertainty. The literature reflects qualities of masculine leadership such as analytic thinking, control, little emotional interaction and feminine leadership such as collaboration and emotional and interpersonal connection (Laden, 1985). A blend of both sets of qualities reflected in masculine and feminine leadership is needed in order to enhance the interactive relationship between leader and followers. As organizational structures change from hierarchy to web (Helgesen, 1995b), the conception of a leader is changing also. The interconnectedness and empowerment of the followers resound in the literature; thus helping to create the age of a more collaborative leader regardless of gender. The role of the follower is equally important in the dynamic leadership process. Leaders have always had a voice but now followers do also. The description of transformational and transactional leadership blend all of these qualities in the Full Range of Leadership (Bass & Avolio, 1999).

Historically, the idea of women in leadership roles is new with much of the research taking place from the 1970's to the present. Cases have been made for differences in moral development (Gilligan, 1982), in the development of self, voice and mind (Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger & Tarule, 1997) and conversation (Tannen, 1990). The case for gender differences in leadership styles has also been made as more women attain leadership roles. Research in the 70's and 80's produced more evidence for differences and later research produced less evidence for differences (Hare-Mustin & Maracek, 1988).

The changing view of leadership encourages the need for the Full Range of Leadership model (Bass & Avolio, 1999). In this model transactions are built on mutual respect and trust between the leader and the followers. As a result of the positive transactions, this creates a transformational leader who is compassionate, collaborative and open to new ideas. This leader would be successful in any organization whether business or educational institution. The Full Range of Leadership model allows the leader to be flexible and adapt to today’s changing world. It will take time, care, and effort to emulate the model. Think of the smaller domain of a classroom where the teacher, as a transformational leader, can compel students to think analytically, problem solve and motivated them to learn. Mutual respect permeates the classroom. In this situation, the teacher, as transformational leader, has great impact and the opportunity to produce positive results.




Adams, Jerome and Yoden, Janice D. (1995) Effective leadership for women and men. New Jersey: Ab1ex Publishing Corporation.

Avolio, Bruce J. (1999) Full leadership development: building the vital forces in organizations. Thousand Oaks. Sage Publications.

Bass, Bernard M. (1998). Transformational leadership: industrial, military and educational impact. Mahwah: Lawrence Er1baum Associates, Publishers.

Bass,Bernard M. & Avolio, Bruce J. (1999) Training full range leadership: a resource guide for training with the MLQ .Redwood City , CA: Mind Garden

Bass, Bernard M. & A volio, Bruce j. ( 1996) Multifactor leadership. [ 16 pages] Mind Garden leadership develovment demonstration [On-line]. Available http://leadership.mindgarden.com

Belenky, Mary Field, Clinchy, Blythe McVicker, Goldberger. Nancy Rule & Tarule, Jill Mattuck. ( 1997 ). Women's ways of knowing. New York: Basic Books, Inc.

Bolman, Lee G. & Deal, Teuence E. (1992) Leading and managing: effects of context, culture, and gender. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28. 314- 329.

Daly, Kristin & Ibarra, Hermarlla(1995) Gender differences in managerial behavior: the ongoing debate. Cambridge: Harvard Business School.

Druskat, V.U. (1994). Gender and leadership style: transfomlational and transactional leadership in the Roman Catholic Church. Leadership Quarterly,5, 99-119.

Eagly, Alice H. ( 1987). Sex differences in social behavior: a social-ro1e interpretation. Hillsdale,N.J. T.Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.


Eagly, Alice H. & Johnson, Blair T. (1990). Gender and leadership style: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 233- 256.

Eagly, Alice H., Karau, Steven J. & Makhijani, Mona G. (1995). Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: a meta-analysis. PsychologicaI Bulletin, 117, 125-145.

Gardner, Howard & Laskin, Emma.(1995). Leading minds: an anatomy of leadership. New York: Basic Books, Inc.

Gardner, John W. (1990). On leadership. New York: The Free Press.

Gilligan, Carol. (1993). In a different voice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Goleman, Daniel. What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review, November-December 1998, 92-102

Hare-Mustin R. & Maracek, J. (1988). The meaning of difference: gender theory, postmodernism, and psychology. Clinchy, B. M. and Norem, J.K. (Eds.) The gender and psychology reader (pp. 125- 143). New York: New York University Press.

Hater, John J. & Bass, Bernard M. (1988). Superiors' evaluations and subordinates' perceptions of transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75 695- 702.

Hauser, Barbara R. (1994). Cinderella can be tough, John Wayne can cry. In John Renesch (Ed.). Leadership in a new era, (pp.39-50). San Francisco: New Leaders Press

Heifetz, Ronald A. & Laurie, Donald L. ( 1997) The work of leadership. Harvard Business Review, January -February, 124-134.

Helgesen. Sally. (1995a). The female advantage. New York: Currency Paperback.

Helgesen, Sally. (1995b) The web of inclusion. New York; Currency, Doubleday.

Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.

Klenke, Karen.( 1996) Women and leadership: a contextual perspective. Springer Publishing Company.

Kouzes, Jalnes M. & Barry Z. (1993). Credibility. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Kouzes, James M. & Posner, Barry Z.(1987). The leadership challenge: How to get extraordinary things done in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass Publishers.

Lewin, K., Lippett, R. & White, R.K. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created "social climates". Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 271- 299.

Loden, Marilyn. (1985). Feminine leadership or how to succeed in business without being one of the boys. New York: Times Books.

Matusak, Larraine R.( 1997). Finding your voice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Nieva, V. & Gutek, B. (1981). Women and work. New York: Praeger.

Rosener, Judy B. Ways women lead. Harvard Business Review. November 1990, 119-1

Sadker, Myra & Sadker, David. (1994). Failing at fairness: how America's schools cheat girls. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.


Tannen, Deborah (1990. You just don't understand: women and men in conversation. New york: Ballantine Books.

Wheatley, Margaret J. (1994). Leadership and the new science. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, Inc.

White, Randall P., Hodgson, Philip & Crainer, Stuart. (1996). The future of leadership. Lanham: Pitman Publishing.