Criticisms Of Transformational Leadership Theory (TLT)

Transformational Leadership Theory (TLT) Transformational leadership, also referred to as (TL) is a theoretical approach that changes the norm of people and social systems. It creates positive and valuable change in its followers with an ultimate goal of transforming them into leaders. In its enhanced form, TL enhances motivation and performance through various its authentic mechanisms. The operations entail connecting the follower with their sense of identity in regard to the mutual interests of an organization. The move challenges followers to own their duties, become inspiring role models, and understand the strongholds and weaknesses of followers. Thus, the leader can align their followers with roles that optimize their performance (Groves

Transformational leadership, as a development tool, leaders believe in the philosophy that they only influence followers by practicing what they preach such that followers seek to emulate them. The followers’ needs are prioritized, leaders exhibit high ethical standards and sacrifice their individual gains for them (Sagnak, 2010). Therefore, theses leaders make use their authority to influence followers to strive for the organization’s common goals.

Criticisms of Transformational Leadership

The leadership employs impression management, thereby, lending itself to a moral promotion by leadership. It is hard to e-taught or train on as it combines other various theories. The leaders are capable of manipulating the followers. However, most of them stand a chance of either losing or gaining. Thus, this theory has some disadvantages that can be harmful for a leader’s team or organization.

Inculpation of Transformational

Understanding the ethics within this relationship, helps individuals gain a better understanding of leadership since some of the fundamental issues in ethics are central leadership issues, as well (Johnson, 2012). These are an individual’s challenges of personal-interest, authenticity, self-discipline, and moral duty associated with duty and the general good. Therefore, leadership and good leadership can be differentiated in the long run.

A leader operating under transformational leadership would employ Rawls’ justice as ethical fairness perspective. Similar to Kant in regard of every human arriving at the principle of common good, Rawls, however, avoids Kant’s theory problems by not offering any justifications for the morally outrageous tasks that could be justified by utilitarian principles. Transformational leadership supports the proposed Rawls’ principles of justice: everyone has to possess equal rights to the most extensive overall system of identical fundamental liberties that are well-matched to a parallel system of liberty for all. Economic and social inequalities are aligned such that they are both attached to positions and offices that are open to everyone under environments of fair equality of opportunity. In addition, both are to find the greatest advantage of the most disadvantaged, unswerving