The Myth of the Additive Effect of The Transformational Leadership Model

Abstract

This paper reexamines the additive effect of the transformational leadership model to refine the perception of the transformational leadership theory. It concludes that transformational leadership does not produce a total effect the same as the sum of the effects of the four I's. It argues that the additive effect of transformational leadership is a myth and that the four I's do not have an additive influence. Therefore, researchers should not introduce the four I's as a legitimate model of transformational leadership. For future research, this paper highlights the need for a new theory that justifies transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles with conceptual clarity.

Untitled

“…While the Four I's represent the four elements of transformational leadership, there is some debate as to how effectively they characterise this leadership style (Alatawi, 2017). Alatawi's (2017) study "proposes [that the Four I's] are not unique to transformational leadership" (p. 22), and that they may not fully characterise the influence of the transformational model due to correlations with other leadership styles, such as transactional (leaders retain most of the power and motivate other adults solely through the use of rewards or punishments) and laissez-faire (referred to as hands-off leadership). Pounder and Coleman (2002) state that transformational leadership builds on transactional leadership and that qualities derived from both models can be employed "at one and the same time" (p. 123).…”

“…While the literature informs us that there is an association between these leadership styles, it is not clear where this association begins or ends, or how leaders utilise a blend of both. Another limitation is the paucity of theoretical evidence presented by researchers that would allow us to distinguish between the four factors, and little evidence for what leaders say or do to influence followers in relation to the Four I's (Alatawi, 2017;Pounder & Coleman, 2002). Eisenberg et al's (2019) empirical study of 53 innovation teams assessed the relationship between geographically dispersed teams and team performance.…”

“…Interest in transformational leadership has grown over the past three decades, in part due to its use in organisational psychology and management (Hay, 2006;Odumeru & Ifeanyi, 2013). Modification of the original theory involves four factors, known as the Four I's: idealised influence (II), inspirational motivation (IM), intellectual stimulation (IS) and individualised consideration (IC) (Alatawi, 2017;Bass, 1999;Dionne et al, 2004;Hay, 2006;Kark et al, 2003;Katene, 2010;Reza, 2019;Sun & Henderson, 2017). The Four I's have emerged as a means of quantitatively assessing transformational leadership, as they provide a measure of the guidance provided by a given leader and a gauge for the level of responsiveness from their followers (Bass, 1999;Reza, 2019).…”

“…Most authors agree on the positive impacts that transformational leaders have on their followers, including self-efficacy and the inculcation of attitudes and values (Abdulrahman & Amoush, 2020;Hay, 2006;Popper et al, 2000;Shepherd, 2017); however, others warn of boundaries to its effectiveness (Alatawi, 2017;Eisenberg et al, 2019;Hay, 2006).…”

The limitations of transformational leadership

“…Interest in transformational leadership has grown over the past three decades, in part due to its use in organisational psychology and management (Hay, 2006;Odumeru & Ifeanyi, 2013). Modification of the original theory involves four factors, known as the Four I's: idealised influence (II), inspirational motivation (IM), intellectual stimulation (IS) and individualised consideration (IC) (Alatawi, 2017;Bass, 1999;Dionne et al, 2004;Hay, 2006;Kark et al, 2003;Katene, 2010;Reza, 2019;Sun & Henderson, 2017). The Four I's have emerged as a means of quantitatively assessing transformational leadership, as they provide a measure of the guidance provided by a given leader and a gauge for the level of responsiveness from their followers (Bass, 1999;Reza, 2019).…”