Content area
Full Text
Transformational leadership theory is one of the most popular theoretical frameworks in the leadership area. In many studies, transformational leadership has been lauded for its superior, positive relationship to subordinate satisfaction, performance, motivation, commitment, and ratings of leader effectiveness over transactional leadership (e.g. [10] Bycio et al. , 1995; [18] Jung and Avolio, 2000; [19] Kane and Tremble, 2000; [21] Lowe et al. , 1996). Moreover, transformational leadership has been recognized for its robustness across conditions ([17] Judge and Piccolo, 2004) and its cross-cultural applicability ([13] Den Hartog et al. , 1999).
Despite the apparent stability and generalizability of transformational leadership, in their most recent review, [7] Bass and Riggio (2006) concluded that further exploration of the contingent nature of transformational leadership is needed. In particular, they suggested that garnering a better understanding of how it translates across different demographic groups is necessary, and future research needs to move beyond the transformational leader and attend more to the followers of transformational leadership.
One demographic area that has yet to be fully explored in the context of transformational leadership, and the other full range of leadership (FRL) factors ([2] Avolio and Bass, 1991), is the hierarchical level of leaders. The original conceptualization of transformational and transactional leadership ([9] Burns, 1978) has since evolved into the nine-factor FRL model which, in addition to five transformational leadership factors (idealized influence behavior, idealized influence attributed, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration) includes three factors of transactional leadership (contingent reward, active management-by-exception, passive management-by-exception), and laissez-faire leadership ([6] Bass et al. , 2003). Transformational leadership elicits effort and commitment from followers by attending to emotions, values, ethics, and long-term goals, and by assessing followers' motives, satisfying their individual needs, and treating them with dignity and respect. Transactional leadership is characterized by leader-follower exchanges, whereby leaders exchange things of value with followers to advance both the leaders' own and followers' agendas. Laissez-faire leadership is represented by the absence of leadership.
Research using military samples has demonstrated that transformational leadership accounts for significant unique variance in outcomes (e.g., extra effort, motivation, affective commitment) over and above transactional leadership ([19] Kane and Tremble, 2000; [24] Waldman et al. , 1990). One possible moderating variable in the relationship between leadership behaviors and measures...