Reward and punishment in Transactional Leadership

Transactional leadership is the reward and punishment thought social organizations. It is also the fundamental motivators of human behavior . It focuses on more of the personal side of the organizational the interactions, as well as vision, teamwork, values, development this things are the foundation of leadership. That help make up other styles of leadership. Transactional leadership was first described by Max Weber in 1947 and also by Bernard Bass in 1981. Transactional leadership theory developed by Weber and Bass later became part of a three style model . Bass believed each leader exhibited a style along a continuum and he later developed the Multifactor Leadership. The transactional leadership style developed by Bass is based on the hypothesis that followers are motivated through a system of rewards and punishment. The theory behind transformational leaders on the other hand is based on the hypothesis that leaders can exploit a need of the follower. These particular needs are not based on quid pro quo transactions, but higher order needs. These needs are those of the total person and are closely aligned with the internal motivational factors of the follower.

So at one end of the spectrum we have transactional leaders that are making many “deals” with those being led. On the other end of the spectrum we’ve got transformational leader that are looking to satisfy a greater need of an individual. The types of transactional leaders described by theorists include categories such as Opinion Leaders, Group Leaders, Governmental / Party Leaders, Legislative Leaders and Executive Leaders.

If you think about these categories, you should have a greater appreciation for what makes the transactional leadership style “tick.” These are leaders we read about in the press all the time. They are constantly meeting new people, making deals (completing transactions) and moving on. In practice, there is sufficient truth in Behaviorism to sustain Transactional approaches. This is reinforced by the supply-and-demand situation of much employment, coupled with the effects of deeper needs, as in Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. When the demand for a skill outstrips the supply, then Transactional Leadership often is insufficient, and other approaches are more effective. When rewarding a subordinate, a transactional leader must create a clear structure of what is required of said worker when following orders. Alongside rewards, there should be a well understood formal system of discipline in place, although not always talked about. Often the transactional leader will work under the expectation that if something isn’t broke, don’t fix it. In other words, if a principle is operating to expectations, it doesn’t warrant notice. Along with this is the expectation that anything above expectations merits praise and rewarding, and anything below expectations needs corrective action..

Get Help With Your Essay

If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Find out more about our Essay Writing Service

The type of leadership that is mostly found in the hospitality industry is transactional leadership, where as the manager is try to motivate the employees to be productive. When rewarding a subordinate (employee), a transactional leader must create a clear structure of what is required of said worker when following orders. Alongside rewards, there should be a well understood formal system of discipline in place, although not always talked about.

The early stage of Transactional Leadership is in negotiating the contract whereby the subordinate (employee) is given a wage and other benefits by company. Burns studied Weber and reasoned that transactional leadership were like bureaucrats leadership. It is a since of power and control direct orders. Transactional leadership makes clear that what is required and expected from their subordinates. It also mentions that subordinates will get award if they follow the orders seriously. Sometimes punishments are not mentioned but they are understood. In the early stages of transactional leadership, subordinate is in the process of negotiating the contract. The contract specifies fixed salary and the benefits that will be given to the subordinate. Rewards are given to subordinates for applied effort. Some organization use incentives to encourage their subordinates for greater productivity. Transactional leadership is a way of increasing the performance of its subordinates by giving them rewards. Transactional leadership is also called as ‘true leadership style as it focuses on short term goals instead of long term goals. Transactional leadership has more of a ‘telling style’. Transactional leadership is based on the fact that reward or punishment is dependent on the performance. Even though researchers have highlighted its limitations, transactional leadership is still used by many employers. More and more companies are adopting transactional leadership to increase the performance of its employees. This approach is prevalent in real workplace. In Transactional leadership, when the leader assigns work to its subordinates, then it is the responsibility of the subordinate to see that the assigned task is finished on time. If the assigned task is not completed on time or if something then punishment is given for their failure. But if they accomplish the task in time then the subordinates are given reward for successfully completing the task. Subordinates are also given award and praised for exceeding expectations. A subordinate whose performance is below expectation is punished and some action is taken to increase his or her performance.

The main limitation of this leadership is that it assumes that people are largely motivated by simple rewards. Under transactional leadership, employees can’t do much to improve job satisfaction. Transaction leadership has been ineffective in providing skilled employees to their organization. This style of leadership is least interested in changing the work environment.

This leadership also assumes that when people agree to do a particular assignment, a part of that agreement is that they give up all authority to their boss. The leader holds control and power over the subordinates. The main goal of the employee is to obey the orders of their managers. The idea is that when a subordinate takes up a job, he or she agrees to obey their manager totally. The ‘transaction’ is the money or any other award that the company pays to its subordinates for their compliance and effort. The relationship between the subordinate and the leader becomes transactional. In transactional leadership the leader has the right to punish his or her subordinates if their performance is not according to the predetermined standard.

Leadership in organizations is important in shaping workers’ perceptions, responses to organizational change, and acceptance of innovations, such as evidence-based practices. Transformational leadership inspires and motivates followers, whereas transactional leadership is based more on reinforcement and exchanges. When the Transactional Leader allocates work to a subordinate, they are considered to be fully responsible for it, whether or not they have the resources or capability to carry it out. When things go wrong, then the subordinate is considered to be personally at fault, and is punished for their failure just as they are rewarded for succeeding.

As a starting point, let us review our everyday life. In general, a relationship between two people is based on the level of exchange they have. Exchange need not be money or material; it can be anything. The more exchange they have the more stronger the relation. Your manager expects more productivity from you in order to give good rewards. In this way, if something is done to anyone based on the return then that relation is called as ‘Transactional’ type. In politics, leaders announces benefits in their agenda in exchange to the vote from the citizens. In business, leaders announces rewards in turn to the productivity. These relation is all about requirements, conditions and rewards (or punishment). Leaders who show these kind of relationship are called transactional leadership.

Within all of these theories, frameworks, and approaches to leadership, there’s an underlying message that leaders need to have a variety of factors working in their favor. Effective leadership is not simply based on a set of attributes, behaviors, or influences. You must have a wide range of abilities and approaches that you can draw upon.

How leaders behave impacts on their effectiveness. Researchers have realized, though, that many of these leadership behaviors are appropriate at different times. So, the best leaders are those who can use many different behavioral styles and use the right style for each situation. With this in mind, there are many different frameworks that have shaped our current understanding of leadership, and many of these have their place, just as long as they’re used appropriately.

Transactional leadership was thought of by Max Weber. Weber was born in 1864 and died 1920. Weber was a bureaucracy and usually described as having believed that bureaucracy is the most efficient form of an organization . So, whether you manage a team at work, captain a sports team, or lead a major corporation, which approach is best? Consciously, or subconsciously, you’ll probably use some of the leadership styles in this article at some point. Understanding these styles and their impact can help you develop your own, personal leadership style – and help you become a more effective leader

The Leader subject to strict and systematic discipline and control in the conduct of the office. Claims to obedient based on rational values and rules and established agreement. The office holder restricted to impersonal official obligations and commands. Exercise authority. Each office holder office defined by Sphere of competence! Person does not owe Obedience to the individual, but to the Impersonal order! Rules regulate the conduct of an office! Complete separation of property belonging to the personal and to the organization! The leader subject to strict and systematic discipline and controlling the conduct office.