Bernard M. Bass’s research while affiliated with Binghamton University and other places

Les données d'une étude en cours furent rassemblées dans trois conditions d'échantillonnage variées afin d'examiner si des cadres hommes et femmes, observés par leurs évaluateurs directs, avaient le même style de commandement. L'étude en cours se démarque d'une recherche beaucoup plus ancienne sur les différences entre hommes et femmes en leadership, en ceci que nous y avons examiné des différences dans les deux styles de leadership transformationnel et transactionnel, en utilisant le Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Dans les trois échantillons, les cadres féminins furent reconnues par des évaluateurs à la fois féminins et masculins comme manifestant des aspects-clés fondamentaux du leadership transformationnel (p. ex. charisme, considération individualisée) plus fréquemment que les hommes. Bien que la taille des échantillons fut généralement petites, les données de ces études suggèrent que les femmes ne sont pas moins transformationnelles que leurs homologues masculins et pourraient en fait l'être davantage. Le sexe des noteurs n'apparaît pas comme influençant les résultats obtenus.

Self-rated leadership behaviour (transformational, transactional, laissez-faire), was obtained for a representative, random sample of 155 U.S. Navy surface fleet officers in parallel to the leadership descriptions for the same dimensions provided by the officers' senior subordinates. In addition, Navy records completed by the officers' superiors provided performance and promotion data that were indexed as appraisals of the officers' success. The self-ratings of leadership behaviour tended to be inflated in comparison to subordinates' ratings, but the more successful officers were less likely to inflate their self-described leadership behaviour. A possible explanation for this effect is that subordinates' descriptions of leadership were significantly related to superiors' ratings of performance and promotion, but self-ratings of leadership were not associated with these measures. Thus, congruence of self and others' ratings was related to successful performance.

There is considerable evidence that women encounter a glass ceiling or barrier to advancement into the executive ranks of organizations. Although many expected this barrier to be obliterated with the large influx of women entering the work force over the last two decades, little change has actually occurred in the most senior ranks. In most sectors, women still comprise less than 5 percent of board directorships and corporate officerships. This article focuses on emerging evidence which indicates that the trend in U.S. corporations toward high-involvement work teams, consensus decision making, and empowerment may actually benefit the leadership styles that women already exhibit. Preliminary evidence is also provided which indicates that female managers are seen as more transformational than their male counterparts—a leadership style that has been shown to have a strong positive impact on individual, group, and organizational performance.

Bernard M. Bass, the distinguished professor emeritus of organizational behavior at the State University of New York at Binghamton, is a leading authority on the subject of transformational leadership, a term introduced in 1978 by leadership studies pioneer James McGregor Burns. Bass has researched and written extensively on transformational leadership and has worked closely with business, military, and educational organizations to incorporate transformational leadership principles into real-world settings.

How do leadership ratings collected from units operating under stable conditions predict subsequent performance of those units operating under high stress and uncertainty? To examine this question, the authors calculated the predictive relationships for the transformational and transactional leadership of 72 light infantry rifle platoon leaders for ratings of unit potency, cohesion, and performance for U.S. Army platoons participating in combat simulation exercises. Both transformational and transactional contingent reward leadership ratings of platoon leaders and sergeants positively predicted unit performance. The relationship of platoon leadership to performance was partially mediated through the unit's level of potency and cohesion. Implications, limitations, and future directions for leadership research are discussed.

Executive Summary Among the most prominent developments in recent years in the investigation of transformational leadership has been the confirmation of the utility of transformational leadership for increasing organizational satisfaction, commitment, and effectiveness, and the 6-factor model of the transformational-transactional factorial structure. Also, we have increased our understanding of transformational dynamics. In this paper, I hope to show how transformational leadership relates to the creation and maintenance of the learning organization. To do this, the meaning of transformational and transactional leadership and the Full Range of Leadership will be discussed and how the components of transformational and transactional leadership contribute to a learning organization will be examined. The future of leadership and administration will be considered in the light of the current state of affairs in educational leadership.

The ultimate criterion of Army light infantry unit readiness is its performance in combat. A second criterion is the unit's readiness in peacekeeping missions. A close representation of requirements for peacekeeping is reflected in the unit's effectiveness in home station. A modified military version of the Multifactor leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) was used to profile the individual leadership style of platoon leaders (PLs) and platoon sergeants (PSGs). The Team Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (TMLQ) was used to describe the platoon and company culture. Results for the MLQ were in line with expectations derived from Bass and Avolio's full range model of leadership. If leaders, particularly Pls, were transformational according to their superiors, peers, and subordinates, their platoons were seen by raters in home station as more effective both in home station and in simulated combat arenas. The most accurate predictions were made by the company cadres; the least accurate were made by the platoon members. Overall, the level of transformational leadership exhibited by platoon leaders in garrison predicted performance at the Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC). Similarly the platoon sergeant's transformational leadership also predicted performance at JRTC.

Comments on J. M. Beyer's sociological perspective on the accumulated literature on charisma (see record 1999-01086-007) and the original conception of charisma by M. Weber (1947). Beyer presents the new paradigm of charismatic and transformational leadership as downgrading the original concept. This commentator agrees with some of the issues raised by Beyer but finds her criticisms overgeneralized. For instance, Beyer complains that the new leadership ignores context. She disagrees with the idea that universal traits are associated with charisma and transformational leadership. And she feels that the new leadership ignores the importance of crises in the creation of leaders. This author feels that Beyer should abandon the disparaging "so-called" that she uses as a modifier when she refers to the new paradigm and should be able to see the movement in the field from the work of Weber to the work of herself and H. M. Trice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

A total of 3786 respondents in 14 independent samples, ranging in size from 45 to 549 in US and foreign firms and agencies, completed the latest version of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ Form 5X), each describing their respective leader. Based on prior literature, nine models representing different factor structures were compared to determine the best fit for the MLQ survey. The models were tested in an original set of nine samples, and then in a second replication set comprised of five samples. Results indicated the factor structure for the MLQ survey was best represented by six lower order factors and three correlated higher-order factors.