Chat with us, powered by LiveChat Compare 3 or more effective leadership styles for school administrators. Use the text Cadeau & Fernandez-Calienes (2022) as a guide in choosing the leadership styles. Take a leadership st - Essayabode

 SEE ATTACHED

 

Leadership Theories and Effective Leadership Styles for Educational Leaders

There is extensive research on leadership theory and effective leadership styles for educational leaders.

  • Compare 3 or more effective leadership styles for school administrators. Use the text Cadeau & Fernandez-Calienes (2022) as a guide in choosing the leadership styles.
  • Take a leadership style self-inventory and reflect on both their strengths and weaknesses.

Module 6 Assignment

icon  Final Paper

Leadership Theories and Effective Leadership Styles for Educational Leaders

There is extensive research on leadership theory and effective leadership styles for educational leaders.

This final paper should:

· Review current literature

· Compare three or more effective leadership styles for school administrators. Use the text Cadeau & Fernandez-Calienes (2022) as a guide in choosing leadership styles.

· Take a leadership style self-inventory and reflect on both their strengths and weaknesses.

 

Submission Instructions:

· The paper should be 3-4 pages long and include at least 3 peer-reviewed references.

· The paper must be in current APA format, including in-text citations and the reference page.

·  It should be clear and concise. Points will be deducted for improper grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors.

References:

Momeny, L. S., & Gourgues, M. (2019). Communication that Develops: Clarity of Process on Transformational Leadership through Study of Effective Communication of Emotional Intelligence. Christian Education Journal, 16(2), 226–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739891319829484

Onorato, M. (2013). Transformational leadership style in the educational sector: an empirical study of corporate managers and educational leaders. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 17(1), 33+. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A332655973/SBRC?u=stu_main&sid=ebsco&xid=041b5337

Pijanowski, J. (2017). Teaching Educational Leaders to Move from Moral Reasoning to Moral Action. Education Leadership Review, 18(1), 37–51.

Wood, K. (2023). Learning Leadership: Leading Growth in a Transactional System.  Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy202, 42–55.

Yavas, T. (2022). The Effect of Self-Efficacy Beliefs of School Administrators on Sustainable Leadership Characterictics.  Education Quarterly Reviews5(2), 306–320.

image1.png

,

Article

Christian Education Journal:

Communication that Develops: Clarity of Process on

Research on Educational Ministry 2019, Voi. 16(2) 226-240

© The Author(s) 2019 Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1 177/0739891319829484

journals.sagepub.com/home/cej

T ransformational Leadership through Study of Effective Communication of Emotional Intelligence

USAGE

Leonard Scott Momeny Central Texas College, Alabama, USA

Michael Gourgues Webster University, Alabama, USA

Abstract Transformational leadership was once thought of as a trait-based approach to leadership rather than something that could be taught and learned, and that the process itself somehow lacked clarity. This essay sets out to demonstrate both points to be false, all the while identifying the value of educating Christian leaders on the essence and process of transformational leadership. The Momeny communica­ tion process theory explains process clarity as it relates to transformational lead­ ership, its communication, and education.

Keywords Leadership, Christianity, transformational leadership, emotional intelligence, communication, follower development, leader education, Maslow’s hierarchy

Corresponding author: Leonard Scott Momeny, Central Texas College, BLDG 4502 Kingsman Street, Fort Rucker, AL 36362, USA. Email: [email protected]

Momeny and Gourgues 227

Introduction Leadership is something that is sought after in every comer of life. No matter the activity, be it business, military, family, or ministry, there is always a need for leadership. Leaders provide vision and motivate us toward change for a future that cannot always be seen. Whether good or bad, the leaders that one might be exposed to are destined to leave an indelible mark, because leaders influence and educate, two very powerful activities (Maxwell, 1993, p. 1; Bredfeldt, 2006, p. 13). It is because of this impact that leadership remains a “highly sought-after and highly valued commodity” (Northouse, 2019, p. 1).

In fact, a recent study by the Bama Group recognized a great appreciation for meaningful leadership, all the while indicating a perceived leadership deficit that was only growing more prevalent (2013). The time has come for us to undertake the study and education of meaningful leadership within the church. This need is espe­ cially hue for ministry, as so many fill roles and responsibilities within the local church without ever undergoing formalized or at least meaningful leadership education.

It is important to note that leadership training is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Ministry is a unique pursuit with multiple roles and varying levels of responsibilities and as such is deserving of special consideration. After all, the local church popu­ lates many of its services with the very best that come forward as volunteers to fulfill the needs of the ministry. Some are small group leaders, others host Bible studies, and others still serve as Children’s Church volunteers and teachers. All share a similar situation as Christian leaders for they are people “who follow Christ and whom other persons follow” (Kessler & Kretzschmar, 2015, p. 2).

With that definition in mind it is implied that no matter the leadership solution brought forward it must incorporate tenets that align holistically with the Christian worldview. After all, if leadership is the process of influencing others toward a goal, then Christian leadership is the process of shepherding others on their journey through spiritual formation. Leaders within the local church, especially pastors that tend to large congregations, can be overtasked very easily with the needs or lead­ ership responsibilities that arise as a natural byproduct of simply “being in charge.” However, this does not have to be the norm, for effective leadership education and training for the entire ministry team, regardless the position, can greatly reduce the overall burden on the pastoral team (Stone, 1991). To that end it should also be noted that Christian leaders must be equipped with a leadership education that is just as transformative as grace through faith, because Christianity is itself transformative in nature, thus demanding leaders that are transformative in their approaches.

Interestingly enough, such a transformational approach to leadership does exist and is, funnily enough, referred to as transformational leadership. It is unique to note that once upon a time leadership was only thought of as a trait-based action, rather than a skillset and behavior that could be taught and learned. In fact, even today transformational leadership is looked upon more “as a broad-based perspective” to

228 Christian Education Journal: Research on Educational Ministry 16(2)

leadership, but the process or action of transformational leadership itself is somehow lacking clarity (Northouse, 2019, p. 177). This essay sets out to demonstrate the lack of perceived clarity within transformational leadership to be false. More impor­ tantly, this demonstration through theory-based proposal will provide incredible value in educating Christian leaders on the essence and process of transformational leadership via a simple process-based model that will increase anyone’s ability to develop better leadership skills and presence (Northouse, 2019, p. 188; Bryman, 1992, pp. 100-102). The Momeny communication process theory hopes to provide process clarity, specifically as it relates to communication, and teachability of transformational leadership, in a fashion that is generalized and simple to better support the education and application of this ideal approach to leadership. All this is suggested in hopes of improving the lives of Christian leaders through education, thereby transforming the lives of all they reach and serve.

A need for meaningful leadership education Many in the aforementioned Bama Group research on leadership noted a preference toward caring leaders that possess both a natural integrity and mentorship-like approach. This positive mentorship process is commonly filed under transforma­ tional leadership theory, placing an emphasis on intrinsic motivation and follower development (Northouse, 2019; Bass & Riggio, 2006). Transformational leadership does not forego the value or recognition of the leader position, as sometimes the case with misapplied servant leadership. Transformational leadership instead manages to demonstrate an approach much like servant leadership based on a perspective of leader-follower relationship and active mentorship in order to develop both subor­ dinate and leader (Lingenfelter, 2008, p. 145). It is these points of transformational leadership that seem to share similarities in the mentoring leadership model dis­ played by Jesus, as hallmarks of both methods are focused on follower development and maximizing leadership through personal relationship development (Towns, 2007, pp. 144-148). Additionally, transformational leadership seems to invoke many of the ideal tenets that surround leadership study: a) leadership as process, b) leadership involving influence, c) leadership occurring both in groups and indi­ vidually, and d) leadership involving common goals (Northouse, 2019, p. 5).

One of the key elements identified within the provided four central tenets/ele­ ments of leadership is that of process. Process implies activity, and in leadership that means that something of meaning is occurring between leader and follower, be it influence, relationship, or even education (Northouse, 2019). The process in ques­ tion can be negative, as is the case with pseudo-transformational leadership, but the desire is to harness and propagate positive leadership and mentorship interactions for all followers. Positive leadership and mentorship should ultimately seek to develop/ transform followers toward a desired end state, a sort of ideal person that has achieved full potential. In some respects, this cycle of action, process, and end state mirrors the educational process, and to that end, the teacher-student relationship

Momeny and Gourgues 229

(Estep Jr. et al., 2008, p. 16). The end goal is to achieve maximum potential of the follower or organization, ultimately continuing the purpose/mission of the organi­ zation in a much higher capacity.

Businesses, schools, ministries, and essentially all group associated activities need leaders and meaningful leadership, because those who participate in collective activities “believe [leaders] bring special assets to their organizations and ultimately, improve their bottom line” (Northouse, 2019, p. 1). (Please do not misinterpret the phrase bottom line, as it is only meant to be a generalized term in the sense that it is to draw one’s attention to the desired outcome of a leader’s effort.) On occasion leadership is viewed as “elitist because of the implied power and importance often ascribed to leaders in the leader-follower relationship” (Northouse, 2019, p. 4; Bums, 1978). However, leaders are not meant to be elitist, as they simply play a specific role in the larger organizational mission/purpose, no matter if the organi­ zation is secular or ministry oriented in nature.

In the most basic sense, the role or purpose of the leader within the organization is typically centered around an individual and his or her ability to influence a group toward the accomplishment of a shared goal (Towns, 2007; Bums, 1978; Northouse, 2019; De Pree, 2004). This generalized concept of leadership is consistent with the previously discussed four elements of leadership but can also allow for a fair com­ parison to the concept of management. A significant difference between the two activities can be found in the analysis of J. P. Kotter who noted that leadership produces “change and movement,” while management produces “order and consis­ tency” (Kotter, 1990, pp. 3-8). While both roles are significant in the lifecycle of an organization, it is the leader that forever changes the individual.

Change is a significant concept with which to focus and interact when discussing leadership, as change is a key portion of influence, one of the four necessary tenets of leadership. Stagnation is not OK, and leaders avoid it. To avoid stagnation, leaders provide both influence and vision in order to initiate necessary change. Vision is both necessary and constantly applied by leaders, because as former Secretary of Defense, Dr. Robert Gates notes, a leader is “one who guides, one who shows the way” (Gates, 2016, p. 23). An organization cannot survive on sustainment, or even simple goal achievement alone, and instead must always have its eyes on the future. This means that leaders are ultimately focusing on doing whatever necessary to move the collective forward, and this requires vision and constant energy. Addition­ ally, such organizationally minded phrasing can be more appropriately taken into ministry context by noting a Christian leader, regardless of their role, should know their congregation, or even individual Christians need to possess the necessary skill set to guide them to the desired end state.

Some would say that such activities can only be undertaken by a specific type of person. However, such a statement is only consistent with a trait-based approach to leadership—implying that leadership cannot be taught or performed by those with the capacity to learn and apply knowledge—but that would be false (Maxwell, 1993; Northouse, 2019). Many organizations are against the concept of leadership being

230 Christian Education Journal: Research on Educational Ministry 16(2)

relegated to the trait-based approach, for example the military, identifying instead various types of leaders (assigned and emergent); different types of power (position and personal), and multiple approaches regarding the action of leadership (North- ouse, 2019; Paronto, 2017). This position regarding leadership as something that others can be educated upon is critical, as it allows organizations the ability to train and develop all of their personnel in hopes of making both current and future leaders (Maxwell, 1993, p. viii).

So, no matter the type of organization or its mission, leadership is something that is highly desired. A leader is not someone that is necessarily bom with all the right stuff.; however, it sure is nice when the stars align, and that sort of person can be found and levied against a leadership role. Additionally, leadership is something that can be educated upon and trained, and meaningful leadership training is highly desired. While there are many approaches bucking for the attention of leadership enthusiasts, one theory/approach that is truly gaining in popularity is transformational leadership theory, and just as the name implies, it is focused on a recognizable change.

Transformational leadership theory and supporting tenets As mentioned earlier, there are many types of approaches to leadership and its supporting theories. The trait-based approach was previously mentioned as support­ ing the concept that leaders are bom with specific intrinsic elements that enable their value as leaders (Bryman, 1992; Northouse, 2019). Transactional leadership focuses on leader-follower exchanges, typically consistent with a quid pro quo situation, and stands in stark contrast to more popular types of leadership approaches that include servant, or service focused leadership, and transformational leadership theory (Northouse, 2019; Bums, 1978).

Transformational leadership theory was first identified in 1978 by James Mac­ Gregor Bums in his seminal publication fittingly titled Leadership. Transforma­ tional leadership is defined as “the process whereby a person engages with others and creates a connection that raises the level of motivation and morality in both the leader and the follower” (Northouse, 2019, p. 164). Two important facts to focus on regarding the aforementioned statement: 1) the fact that a connection is made, as this is indicative of a relationship process, and 2) the transformational leadership process speaks to the motivation of both leader and follower.

Bums would not have the last say on transformational leadership, and the theory would see later evolutions that included the likes of pseudo-transformational and authentic transformational leadership (Bass & Riggio, 2006; Northouse, 2019). The first focused on the process that ultimately mirrored transformational leadership but resulted in potentially warped moral values. The second evolution, authentic trans­ formational leadership, references an adjustment to the original theory that is con­ cerned with “socialized leadership, which is concerned with the collective good.. .transcending interests for the sake of others” (Northouse, 2019, p. 165).

Momeny and Gourgues 231

Transformational leadership has four factors of focus that are indicative of the theory. Those four factors are idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellec­ tual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Northouse, 2019). Ultimately, these four factors speak to the fact that “people who exhibit transformational lead­ ership often have a strong set of internal values and ideals, and they are effective at motivating followers to act in ways that support the greater good rather than their own self-interests” (Northouse, 2019, p. 169; Kuhnert and Lewis, 1994). In brief, it is not an unreasonable extension to say that transformational leaders must possess excellent emotional intelligence and communication skills in order to provide the sort of impact that Bums and others have defined across the entirety of the theory. After all, Bennis and Nanus (2007) also noted that transforming leaders had to be like social architects within the confines of their organization, a hallmark of the emotional intelligence domain. This begs the question, what exactly is emotional intelligence, and how does its application align with this discussion/research?

Emotional intelligence (El), or Emotional quotient (EQ), is a measure of a lead­ er’s self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills (Gole- man, 1995). Emotional intelligence is easily considered supportive of transformational leadership because a transformational leader must be able to know and control his or her own emotions before they can speak to their followers in order to support each individual in a “caring and unique way” (Northouse, 2019, p. 179; Goleman, 1995). Additionally, one cannot merely possess a way about themselves and expect transformational leadership styled messaging to exude from their every pore. Instead, a leader must be able to effectively communicate authentically to their follower; specifically, in such a way as to express emotional intelligence, care, and bust, as these areas allow for follower development (Chen et al., 2012).

Understanding the fact that transformational leadership depends on authentic communication spoken in an effective and focused manner to express the appropri­ ate transformational factors is critical. Additionally, it is significant to note that transformational leadership is considered to simply “produce greater effects than transactional leadership … and transformational leadership results in performance that goes well beyond what is expected” (Northouse, 2019, p. 171; Young, 2014). It is with this information that a communication model in support of transformational leadership can now be built in an effort to better understand leader communication that is structured in such way as to achieve meaningful development of followers.

Momeny communication process theory in support of transformational leadership

Again, the authors feel it important to note that the following portion of the essay involves very generalized terms. This is done intentionally in an effort to increase perceived utility of the presented model-oriented theory. Additionally, its presenta­ tion style is meant to increase the ability with which others could educate potential leaders on the proposed process of leadership.

232 Christian Education Journal: Research on Educational Ministry 16(2)

Figure I. Momeny communication process theory.

It would now seem that most leadership study seems to focus a great deal of time and effort upon style. Whether it is transactional, transformational, or servant lead­ ership, there is a great deal of study upon value of one over the other regarding situation and applicability. Many commentators on these leadership styles tend to focus on associated concepts and variables. While the characteristics of these styles are both well-known and regurgitated time and again, leadership process is less understood.

While the value of process cannot be overstated, it is the understanding of process within a transaction that allows for identification of key elements. Additionally, when all key elements are identified within the transaction, they can be studied, and further determination of how those elements interact can be better understood. After this, efforts within the process can be specifically targeted to optimize performance. Leadership is such a process, and once understood the elements and process can be studied together and later even instructed and trained upon.

A communication model/process can serve as an excellent tool to utilize in order to understand the process of influence that occius between leader and follower. The communication model/process is ideal because it is assumed to be the most common core experience within all leader to follower relationships, regardless the environ­ ment and approach. Nothing happens without communication. Additionally, com­ munication has the potential to be both positive and negative, as the perceived level of interpersonal characteristics within communication is incredibly dependent upon the level of emotional intelligence of the sender and receiver (Walton, 2012, p. 91).

Figiue 1 is a visual representation of effective communication in support of a follower’s development. So why select a communication model to better explain, or attempt to identify the process of transformational leadership? The leadership factors associated with transformational leadership happen to be well suited for a communication model and include the following: T) Idealized influence (charisma), 2) Inspirational motivation, 3 ) Intellectual stimulation, and 4) Individualized con­ sideration (Northouse, 2019, pp. 169-172). All the aforementioned aspects require

Momeny and Gourgues 233

some sort of medium in order to convey them to the desired audience, and so, a verbal communication model suffices nicely in support of the proposed theory. Finally, communication is indicative of interrelation development, and the process with which a relationship progresses. As the communication between leader (sender) and follower (receiver) progresses, so too does the manner both are affected by the progressive relationship exchanges.

The communication process is cast against three different communication events in order to demonstrate sequential occurrences/interactions between leader and fol­ lower. It is said that types of communication can depict “different stages of relation­ ships, showing how shared information progressively makes a relationship stronger” (Walton, 2012, p. 92). These identified communication events occur over time indicating the temporal conditions that are so critical to meaningful mentorship and so often overlooked within the study of leadership (Shamir, 2011, p. 307; Shapira- Lishchinsky & Levy-Gazenfrantz, 2015, p. 184). Additionally, the depicted com­ munication events are directed toward specific areas of a receiver’s pyramid, better known as Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs/Motivation (Maslow, 1943), thereby demonstrating focused communication can make meaningful impact upon a person by speaking to their areas of motivation. After all, a leader’s motivation of a person is better known as the ability to influence, and so a leader should speak to what motivates their follower. A follower’s motivation changes with time, because as certain needs are fulfilled, or better put, levels of their pyramid are solidified, their motivations change in response to their current situation (Maslow, 1943). Hence the need to adapt the communication events with respect to temporal considerations. Finally, those communications circulate between communicator and the receiver’s pyramid, and ultimately the combination of these two items influence the outcome of that interaction in the form of a predicted output.

Communication event I: Fear Communication event 1 is obviously early in the relationship between leader and follower, and as such the communication is superficial (Walton, 2012, p. 93). In this first scenario readers are reminded of their own early interactions as new leaders with a new team member. During this relationship probationary period, both the leader and the follower are attempting to understand each other, avoiding potential disappointment at all costs. When leaders are faced with new members to a team they are apt to cautiously gauge the capability and potential of the new member through limited interactions. Opinions of the new member are typically not initially high, and instead the leader and team both enter a period of “feeling out” the new teammate.

This is all very natural, and when trust is not present, interpersonal interactions tend to be transactional. When events turn transactional for leaders the subsequent communications to team members become very “directional” in nature. Expecta­ tions are low and, regardless of output by the individual, there tends to be a

234 Christian Education Journal: Research on Educational Ministry 16(2)

perception of production being interpreted as leaving “room for improvement.” Workers and their output during this first communication event appear to take on an immature persona, and the team member seems to do “just enough not to get yelled at.” This scenario is not ideal for either party.

When this initial communication is placed into the supplied model of transforma­ tional leadership process, the signal obviously focuses on transactional exchanges, and is only received at the receiver’s pyramid base, physiological needs and safety (Maslow, 1943). The communication is direct, most likely lacking care and emo­ tional context that more refined relationships enjoy. The sender is determining key factors about potential and performance, while the receiver is attempting to accom­ plish exactly what is asked, mostly to avoid trouble.

As the relationship develops, or in the case of a particularly savvy leader, this first communication event can display initial efforts of idealized influence, aka, char­ isma. This would be done in an attempt to motivate through inspirational speech, grasping at potential initial motivation. The emotionally intelligent leader is aware of not only his or her own feelings during this period but also the feelings of the follower, thereby tailoring communication in such a way as to potentially put the receiver at ease. If a leader did this, they would certainly be making a welcome investment into the development of relationship and mentorship of the new member.

With all this taken into consideration the leader must make an effort to remove the first block in communication: fear. Fear is natural in the initial onset of such a relationship; as mentioned earlier, expectations are uneasy on both sides. The driv­ ing emotion required by the leader to overcome fear should be empathy, or the concept that they were once new, afraid, and driven to frustration by trying to meet uncommunicated expectations from a new peer group. An emotionally intelligent leader will realize this and hopefully demonstrate through his or her own mastery of stress management that they are flexible, approachable, and optimistic about the future interactions with the new team member. They must communicate confidence, understanding, and patience, thereby informing the receiver that growth and learning are to be expected. Once the follower comprehends and internalizes this communi­ cation-based cue, there will be an understanding that fear is no longer the governing emotion, thereby removing a sense of perceived threat, increasing the perceptual field which increases learning, and this directly impacts their ability to develop. Once the first block of fear is removed, communication event 1 is concluded and the pyramid levels of physiological and safety centric needs are generally addressed (Maslow, 1943). Initial growth and development have occurred and transformation is taking place between the communicator and follower.

C