Discussion: Charismatic and Transformational Leadership Styles

Discussion: Charismatic and Transformational Leadership Styles ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS ON Discussion: Charismatic and Transformational Leadership Styles I’m working on a Powerpoint question and need guidance to help me study. Need a 10 page power-point presentation, all instructions and needed resources attached. No plagiarism please. Discussion: Charismatic and Transformational Leadership Styles corporate_boards__new_strategi.pdf u2_required_reading.pdf adult_development_and_transfor.pdf charismatic_leadership_in_orga.pdf u2_instructions.doc W. Henry Lambright, Editor Montgomery Van Wart California State University, San Bernardino Administrative Profile Evaluating Transformational Leaders: The Challenging Case of Eric Shinseki and the U.S. Department of Veterans A?airs Montgomery Van Wart is professor in the Department of Public Administration at California State University, San Bernardino. He has served as chair of his department and dean of the College of Business and Public Administration. He has authored nine books, including Dynamics of Leadership in Public Service, Leadership in Public Organizations, The Business of Leadership (with Karen Dill Bowerman), Administrative Leadership in the Public Sector (with Lisa A. Dicke), and, most recently, Leadership and Culture: Comparative Models of Top Civil Servant Training. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: Evaluating less than fully successful transformational leaders is difficult. One common method of assessing leadership is to focus on a single temporal narrative. A second approach uses a particular theory, such as transformational leadership, to frame the analysis. The latter, less common strategy is used with the example of Eric Shinseki, who served as both chief of staff of the U.S. Army and as secretary of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The analytic framework used here has six major elements that are specified by 22 factors. Using those factors to evaluate Shinseki’s tenure at the VA, he is found to be very poor in only 2 factors but poor in 11, adequate in 6, good in 1, and excellent in only 2. While using a list of factors does not eliminate subjectivity or the challenges of reaching a single assessment, it does clarify the elements of judgment and weighting. Public Administration Review, Vol. 75, Iss. 5, pp. 760–769. © 2015 by The American Society for Public Administration. DOI: 10.1111/puar.12393. 760 valuating individual leaders using a biographical approach can be done in many ways. One method that is common in the public administration literature is to focus on a single temporal narrative. Done well, it provides examples of a leader’s successes and failures with a case-based, non-theorydriven presentation, focusing on special contributions, challenges, and values. The narrative method is useful for context-rich, heuristic, and/or celebratory examples (Dodge, Ospina, and Foldy 2005). While this method is likely to enhance “the story,” it is less likely to produce generalizable and replicable analysis. E This article demonstrates the latter, less common, analytic strategy. It uses the example of Eric Shinseki, who served as both chief of staff of the U.S. Army, where he was largely successful (Kolenda 2003), and as secretary of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), where he was largely unsuccessful and forced to resign after a scandal involving widespread falsified medical appointment wait lists. The article focuses primarily on his tenure as secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, where analysis and evaluation of his record as a transformational leader is most difficult. A second approach is to use a particular theory or recognized model, such as transformational leadership, to frame the evaluation; this superimposes a predefined framework on the chronology. A variety of scholars have urged the use of theory-driven analysis for administrative profiles (DiIulio 1990; Lambright and Quinn 2011; Van Wart 2011). For example, Van Wart noted the underutilization of this method in his leadership literature review: “There is great opportunity for comparative biography using a more rigorous standardized framework. This has . . . yet to occur with explicit leadership frameworks” (2013, 538). Discussion: Charismatic and Transformational Leadership Styles A more theory-driven biographical approach has the advantage of being an extended example of theoretical types and concepts, being more easily integrated into the literature, and being more likely to be relatable to other biographies. Attractive as these advantages are, challenges arise that must be dealt with, including access to sufficient data to flesh out the theory being used, space limitations when using an article format, and the adequacy of a single theoretical model. How Do You Define Transformational Leadership for Applied Settings? Perhaps the most widely known and best respected transformational leadership theory is the full-range leadership theory of Bernard Bass, which was first proposed in his book Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations (1985). It has stood the test of time well as a high-level theoretical model that has been customized for various uses in the public administration literature (Oberfield 2014). It asserts that while transactional leadership is critical for basic organizational performance, transformational leadership provides an important additive quality that is necessary for keeping organizations at the high-performing end of their production. Bass identifies two transactional and four transformational characteristics that contribute to high performance. However, the model as it is typically articulated tends to focus on internal organizational change (because it relies on employee perceptions) over external political forces and nonemployee sources of data, neglects crisis management, Public Administration Review • September | October 2015 and poorly articulates transformation as a process rather than as a set of leader characteristics. The model can be adapted, however, by embedding the change management literature. In doing so, multiple sources of information, such as performance statistics, public opinion data, and event analysis, are more readily incorporated. In order to use a theory-based approach in a biographical case study, indicators were chosen to reflect the six factors. The first transactional characteristic is called management by exception; this aspect of leadership occurs when management reacts to various problems or exceptions. Such problems include dealing with low-performing employees, avoiding future technical mistakes and blunders, addressing performance issues, and stabilizing the organization in a crisis. The second transactional element is called contingent reward; this aspect of leadership is based on the exchange and contractual relationship that exists between employers and employees. The foremost factor in this relationship is pay, but life– work balance is also important. One of the four transformational factors is individualized consideration, which is supportiveness of employees. This can be demonstrated by coaching, delegation, and training opportunities, among other things. A second transformational factor is idealized influence, which is a result of trusting the leader as well as the persuasiveness of the leader. This is demonstrated by the leader modeling exemplary behavior, avoiding personal scandal, and the use of charismatic communication through symbols, evocative language, and personal dynamism. A third factor is inspirational commitment, which results in employees bonding as a group and transcending self-interests. This is demonstrated by pride in the shared work, on one hand, and teamwork, on the other. The final factor is intellectual stimulation, or the vision, planning, and implementation of change. Discussion: Charismatic and Transformational Leadership Styles This critical role of transformational leaders is well articulated in the change management literature. The basics of change management (Fernandez and Rainey 2006) include establishing the need for change, providing a plan, building internal support, ensuring top management support, arranging external support, providing resources, and institutionalizing change. In sum, then, 22 items can be used to critique a leader and arrive at the basis for a holistic assessment. The expanded framework, based on Bass, is summarized in table 1. Table 1 Framework for the Analysis of Transformational Leaders • • • • Contingent reward • • Individualized consideration • • • Idealized influence • • • Inspirational commitment • • Intellectual stimulation • • • • • • • • Management by exception Deal with low-performing employees Avoid technical mistakes and blunders Deal with performance lapses Stabilize organization if needed Pay Life–work balance Coaching Delegation Training opportunities Model exemplary behavior Avoid personal scandal Use of charismatic communication Gain commitment to the work and the profession Teamwork Ensure the need for change Provide a plan Build internal support Ensure top management support Ensure external support Provide resources Institutionalize changes Pursue comprehensive change contextual factor that should be noted, but that is beyond the bounds of this venue to fully explore, is the role of others, as even transformational leaders do not act alone. To what degree was President Barack Obama culpable in selecting a leader who may have been past his prime and out of his area of expertise? To what degree was the senior leadership in the VA to blame, a number of whom focused more on bonuses than on professionalism? Although the focus here is narrowly on Shinseki, a broader analysis would highlight the shortcomings of others more sharply. The evaluation of Secretary Shinseki at the VA illustrates not only the importance of systematically analyzing and comparing a leader’s record but also the challenge of making final judgments when many obstacles are not overcome and when crises overshadow accomplishments or leave an agency in disarray. Background on the Department of Veterans Affairs Today, the Department of Veterans Affairs is among the largest agencies in the federal government, with approximately 300,000 employees, a discretionary budget of $63.5 billion in 2014, and $87.5 billion in mandatory benefits. The department comprises 152 hospitals (124 of which are affiliated with medical schools), 800 How Transformational Does a Leader Need or Try to Be? community-based outpatient clinics, 126 nursing home care units, Not all jobs are equally difficult, and this is critically true when transand 35 domiciliaries. The clinics and hospitals process 230,000 formational efforts are undertaken. If general management is hard veterans a day and deliver 85 million appointments a year to 6.5 (Van Wart and Berman 1999),Discussion: Charismatic and Transformational Leadership Styles transformational leadership is very million patients. The Department of Veterans Affairs also provides hard. While transformational leaders may reap many nonmedical benefits, such as educagreater “glory,” they also increase the likelitional grants, pensions based on service-related While transformational leaders hood of failure. But not all transformations are disability, and home loans. A total of 8.5 may reap greater “glory,” they equivalent. Therefore, when evaluating leaders, million veterans receive treatment or benalso increase the likelihood it is necessary to get a clear sense of (a) just how efits annually, out of a veteran population of of failure. transformational they need or try to be and nearly 22 million. This population has been (b) in comparison to what? One factor is the augmented by the post–September 11 conbreadth of task. A second element is the radiflicts, but a voluntary military and multiple calness of change. A third factor is the complexity of change. A fourth deployments have meant that the numbers have not entirely offset factor is demand on followers. Finally, there is the speed of change. the number of veterans dying who were in former conflicts (and peacetime service). While the veteran population has been decreasAnother question that must be raised in evaluating transformaing slightly in recent years as a large share of World War II and tional leaders has to do with their comparison groups. Still another Korean War vets have died, the needs of veterans have increased as a Evaluating Transformational Leaders: The Challenging Case of Eric Shinseki and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 761 result of fewer battlefield fatalities but higher injury rates and official acknowledgment of a variety of conditions (labeled “presumptive” conditions by the VA) such as post-traumatic stress disorder. Quality of care issues have had a roller-coaster history in the Department of Veterans Affairs and its predecessors (Moore 2014). In the twentieth century, while there have been a number of times when the agency allowed quality of care to disintegrate and mismanagement was rife and sometimes appalling, there have also been substantial highlights, too. One important event was when the VA aligned itself with medical schools across the country after World War II, creating a highly synergistic effect for both veteran care and the medical training of the bulk of American doctors. Another great era for the VA was during the second half of the 1990s, when Kenneth Kizer, a medical doctor, was named to head the Veterans Health Administration. In his five years as medical director of the VA health system, Kizer introduced quality of care metrics, systemic feedback loops to reduce error rates, and computerized patient records, and he also rationalized service imbalances (Edmondson, Golden, and Young 2008; Kizer and Dudley 2009). Discussion: Charismatic and Transformational Leadership Styles The effects were dramatic, leading some to assert that VA health care was second to no other health maintenance organization (Longman 2007) by 2000 and that the effects have been relatively lasting (Glastris 2010; Pear 2014). While health care issues of significance have occasionally occurred in its more than 1,000 facilities, systematic health care lapses generally have been minor and oversight rigorous with a current well-staffed Inspector General’s office of more than 600, as well as a separate Office of the Medical Inspector that assesses quality of care problems or concerns. Access to the VA system as a new enrollee (commonly known as “patient wait times”) and receipt of timely payments for benefits have long been issues. In 2001, the General Accounting Office issued a report about appointment time issues, and subsequent reports have confirmed the ongoing problem. Benefits payment problems seemed to start after the 1988 decision to allow federal court appeals of VA decisions, which, in turn, made the adjudication of veterans’ claims far more litigious and extensive (veterans can appeal decisions numerous times without penalty); routine payments have lagged ever since, and complex cases frequently take years to resolve. As administrator in charge of the army, Shinseki largely designed its relatively radical reorganization (Moran 2007), and he was occasionally the subject of controversy. On the more successful side, he helped move the army from a conventional warfare army relying on large, heavily equipped divisions to one composed of “modular” brigades that could move independently, with some that could be lightly armored for strategic deployment as needed (Johnson et al. 2012). His most unpopular decision in terms of soldiers was his order to expand the use of the elite Rangers’ black beret for all army personnel. His interactions with his political superiors while he was chief of staff were equally important. Within a year after the September 11 terrorist attacks on the United States, the George W. Bush administration was preparing for the possibility, and perhaps likelihood, of a war with Iraq based on allegations of ties to the terrorist group al-Qaeda and the belief that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (Hersh 2003). With significant tension between Shinseki and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld over philosophical differences regarding the size of the military footprint necessary for army incursions, Shinseki announced his retirement nearly a year before it was to become effective, and Rumsfeld, with unusual haste, named his replacement soon thereafter. Later, when asked to testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee in February 2003, Shinseki stated that it would take “several hundred thousand soldiers” to secure Iraq after an invasion because of the size of the territory and ethnic tensions; this was strongly contradicted by Secretary Rumsfeld. Ultimately, Shinseki’s recommendation to plan on a larger ground force for longer-term peacekeeping was considered prescient (Ricks and Tyson 2006).Discussion: Charismatic and Transformational Leadership Styles Shortly after Shinseki’s retirement as army chief of staff, he published a book (as second author) with Frances Hesselbein titled Be-Know-Do: Leadership the Army Way (2004), which was published in conjunction with the Leader to Leader Institute. In the book, Shinseki and Hesselbein assert that the “Army’s record for developing leaders is superb” (xv) and that “all leaders can benefit” (xviii) from the way the army teaches leadership, and they provide lessons from the army for civilian organizations in all chapters. The book is consistent with the contemporary mainstream leadership literature emphasizing leader character, empowerment, being a model, teamwork, focusing on change management, and providing the tools and support to be a learning organization. However, there are Eric Shinseki’s Background and Rise to Chief of Staff of several ironies. First, Shinseki frequently was unable to live up to the Army his own advice when he was given the chance at the VA, as quotes Eric Shinseki was born on November 28, 1942, in Hawaii, where he from the book will indicate. Second, his fundamental assumpgrew up. In high school, he was a Boy Scout and served as class presi- tion that the leadership found in the army is easily transferred to dent. He attended the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, graduat- civilian organizations with very different missions and cultures is ing in 1965. Among his early assignments, he served two combat highly suspect. Army leadership draws on extensive basic training, tours in Vietnam. During that time, as a forward artillery observer, he and thus inculcation, in a hierarchical setting that is not present in stepped on a land mine, which blew off the front of one of his feet. most civilian organizations outside public safety. Although the VA Although it took him nearly a year to recover, may have former soldiers as its clientele (but he returned to active duty, which was unusual. who seek services as civilians), it is primarily a Army leadership draws on He rotated among various commands, among professional organization that tends to value extensive basic training, and which was a 10-year period in Europe. In professional over bureaucratic discipline. thus inculcation, in a hierarchi1997, he became a general after 32 years of sercal setting that is not present vice. In 1998, he assumed the important role Eric Shinseki as Secretary of the VA of chief of staff of the U.S. Army, reporting As a senator, Barack Obama served on the in most civilian organizations directly to the secretary of defense. In 2003, he Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs and outside public safety. retired from military service. thus knew the veterans policy area well. As a 762 Public Administration Review • September | October 2015 candidate for president, he spoke regularly about the importance of improving the Department of Veterans Affairs, stressing “comprehensive reform” and the poor service and care at some facilities that was “totally unacceptable,” often calling the situation “a betrayal” and, even occasionally, “an outrage” (Obama 2008; see also Kaczynski 2014). Obama advocated expanding benefits, eliminating means testing, and adding funding to help eliminate homelessness among veterans. He also asserted that his “Secretary of the Veterans Administration will be just as important as my Secretary of Defense” (Obama 2007). When President-Elect Obama announced his intention to nominate Shinseki on December 7, 2008, it was with the expectation that Shinseki would institute major reforms and get more attention from the president than is common. In making his selection, Obama chose a for … Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10

RECOMMENDED: [SOLVED] Transformational Leadership Report