After reading both burns’ and bass’ articles, I realized that both transactional and transformational leadership are effective methods of leading in modern-day. They are polar opposites in the sense that transactional leadership uses an incentive for motivation while transformative leadership is more personal, working for the progress of the community as a whole. When I think of transactional leadership I think of a business person who is negotiating for their personal gain. Although the follower would be gaining something in the process of this transaction, I do not think that this is a very effective way of leading.
Transformational leadership, I think most would agree, is a more effective way of leading. As the leader grows, they bring the people up with them. Instead of exchanging goods for mutual gain, transformational leadership focuses on the progress of society as a whole. As a follower, I believe that looking up to a leader that has your personal well being in mind is much more desirable than looking up to someone that benefits you, but for their own personal gain. Obviously, there are scenarios where each leadership tactic is more effective, but it seems to me that in general, people would prefer their leaders to be transformational rather than transactional.
I liked how you gave both transactional and transformational leadership examples of the kind of leadership they are. The business man example in my opinion is a good way of showing transactional leadership. I also agree with you that transformational leadership is the better way of leading.
I agree that transformational leadership is more effective because a common goal is reached to benefit the entire community. I liked how you made your post more personal, imagining how you yourself would like to be led. Having a leader who puts your best interests at heart is definitely more desirable.
I like the example you gave for transnational leadership, as that is exactly what I was thinking as the best example, which is where it would work the best. as a transnational leader one could definitely build a strong business focused on profit. however the transnational leadership falls short of the servant leadership which i would say is closer to the transformative leadership style if not the same.
I agree that the best method for leadership would be a combination of the two, I think that both transactional and transforming leadership add benefits to both the leaders and the followers. I also agree with your point about how generally followers would much more prefer a transforming leader because people like to have a connection with the person that is leading them.
I like how you said it kinda depends on the scenario to decide what leadership tactic is best. That’s why I would say neither one is better or more effective than the other.
I agree that the best form of leadership is utilizing both transitional and transactional leadership . However, I do agree that transformational leadership is more effective .
I agree that it is difficult to place one type of leadership over the other as either one could be more beneficial depending on the situation. Like one of the comments earlier said, transactional leadership would be more beneficial in a business setting, while transitional leadership could be more beneficial in another. In politics, I believe that transitional leadership would be better because the leader is bringing up society with them.
I liked how you fleshed out your ideas of transformational and transactional leadership, demonstrating the pros and cons of both. However, I disagree with you in that transformational is more effective, but I agree that I like it more. I think transactional is more effective/efficient in that they have goals and structures in place to attain those goals, with little flexibility to not achieve the goals.