5.5: Transformational leadership qualities

The transformational leadership style is one that fosters the values of honesty, loyalty, fairness, authentic, morally and ethically centered and continually professes the organization values based on justice, equality and human rights. These are terms often described by Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle. In contrast the pseudo-transformational leader endorses more wicked, unreasonable and vicious values such as favoritism, special interest, and self-preservation over that of the organization (Price, 2003). The latter can serve to create divisiveness, consternation and rebellious attitudes by organizational members; in turn serving no legitimate purpose for accomplishing the organizational goals/mission. The relevance of the former describes the authenticity required of leaders today, especially in changing societies. The transformational leader and the pseudo-transformational leader may begin with altruistic values, but the pseudo leader loses perspective and falls prey to more self-serving goals.

Within any organization, specifically in a CJ system, one may find differing layers of leadership styles. This is mainly dependent upon the task at hand, tactical as compared to strategic goals, and over-all mission. More often than not, the terms of management and leadership are juxtaposed when in reality they have different purpose and the style required is relevant to task, goal and mission to accomplish and they co-exist.

Leadership is without a single definition and is a complex process of constant change from moment to moment from member (follower) to member within environments made of multiple variables in a constant state of motion. However, I have reserved my position under the transformational umbrella as my personal style, at least as a starting point due to my belief that you first build a relationship and the leadership will follow in most cases. The honest and forthright leader finds communications a critical component for the development of members, future leaders and keeping external variables informed. Regardless of the legitimate style selected by the modern leader, there is no room for the pseudo-transformational leader in a successful venture.

Contemporary CJ leaders, as is public managers and leaders, must be flexible, adaptable, compassionate, influential, highly ethical and a good listener to point to a few differences from the old military/industrial autocratic style. The ability to align members and coordinate motivation, articulate goals, stressing values of the members, involve the members in decision making is critical (Kotter, 2001). Essential to the process is the ability of the transformational leader to energetically and enthusiastically motivate members as no human venture succeeds without strong motivation (Gardner, 1993). Bass and Steidlmeier (1999) concur with these modeling descriptors of the authenticity/transformational leadership and conclude the inauthentic leader ultimately acts against any altruistic values for the purpose of benefiting self and does so freely of choice.

Environmental considerations are essential to this proposition, it is important to understand where your members are and where they need to go in order to achieve a transforming organization. It is not sufficient to attempt leadership without a firm understanding of the generational differences compounded by economics, current events, and where an organizational member has gained their life’s programming (Salahuddin, 2010). The transformational leader understands and models communications, coaching and team building. During the same time frames the leader must coordinate efforts through organizational transformation in-spite of periods of disobedience and impatience (Hagen, 2010).

Consistent with the pseudo-transformational leader is the by-product of the Industrial age leadership/autocratic style and the law enforcement leader is mired in the outdated hierarchy military style of leadership, in turn creates stagnation rather than an atmosphere of achievement, change, learning and moving their organization in a positive direction. Since the early 1970’s and with the advent of bargaining units, police will no longer tolerate autocratic leadership. Where the winds of change have not advanced then I suggest there may exist strong bargaining unions in opposition to the police chief (other than right to work states, however is constantly being challenged in legislatures across the country). In reality the new entrants into the criminal justice system arrive with the goal of becoming all you can be, meaning more than achieving rank, a leadership that clings to the old management systems is destructive and serves in most cases no legitimate purpose (generally outside police tactical implications) and is destine for failure.

Furthering the lack of courage to embrace transformational leader styles, specifically within CJ systems, may be the lack courage to take the risks the role demands. This may require those things such as turning hiring over to human resource units, the use of hiring standards that contain not only ethical standards but also leader quality standards, and provide training and education for the development of leaders within the organization (Kouzes & Posner, 2007). If leaders lead from what they know and have never been trained differently than most will find a comfort zone that they wish to exercise authority from rather than perform their function from the ethical center and do what is right for the organization and not self.

Failing to become the new leader, the ethical leader, the change agent leader is particularly relevant to the police leader. The police leader that lacks the inability to bring about change, fosters the dissatisfaction of the rank and file, nurtures stagnation and has been the cause for rapid changeover at the top in the industry. Specifically, good leaders have been discounted as a result of a new Mayor’s/City Managers’ deal with bargaining units to bring in new leadership to gain support of the police.

However when the lack of positive change is evidenced by community and external groups and the leader is without requisite skills as discussed, then the final ax shall fall. While pseudo-transformational leadership is the antithesis of transformational leadership, both may have begun the journey with altruistic values the former sought the easy path in some situations and lacked courage and stamina to carry on ethically. Leaders failing to create vision, build future leaders, create learning environments and the atmosphere for change is failing to lead, explicitly evident during periods of constant change, politically, economically, socially and environmentally.