DYADIC RELATIONSHIPS and (B) CHARISMATIC AND TRANSFORMATION LEADERSHIP - Case Study Example

Comment on “Most leaders develop a high exchange relationship with a small number of trusted subordinates who function as assistants, lieutenants or advisers.AnswerThe intensity of the leader’s relationship and the interaction quality is a determinant of the successful organisation (Malloch, 2009, p. 231). Being a leader, it becomes of a paramount importance for a leader to interact, direct, motivate and provide requisite guidance to the subordinates, and those who look towards the leader’s guidance.

As a result, this exchange relationships between and among leaders and the subordinates ensure the attainment of organisational objectives. First, when leaders interact with the subordinates and give them a due time to share their part of version over a particular issue; this gives subordinates confidence and sense of ownership that they are a valuable part of the organisation. And, at the same time, this brings total and practical rather than superficial participation in decision making, besides, this exchange relationship motivates them to avail more subordinate autonomy.

In these times, many would not disagree that organisations succeed when they allow their organisational leadership to extend autonomy and ensure the concept of decentralisation aggregately.2. Comment on “Dyadic relationships typically progress through a series of ups and downs with shifts in attitudes as the two parties attempt to reconcile their desire for autonomy with their desire for closer involvement” The LMX theory is under-developed. It has yet to fully define the all areas and way exchange relationships evolve over time (Yukl, 2010, p.239). This theory suggests that exchange relationships construct and evolve in a very smooth but continuous fashion, taking their base from the initial impressions.

However, some longitudinal studies contend that the LMX relationships develop faster and remain stable. But, other researches do not agree with this claim, they contend that dyadic relationships undergo a series of ups and downs, where roles of behaviours cannot be undermined.The closer elaboration surfaces some facts. Without any doubt, perceptions play a vital role in developing or dissolving any exchange relationships. Many further studies within this area would greatly be helpful in analysing and understanding the each party’s perceptions of the relationships.3. What are the fundamental differences between charismatic and transformation leadership?

Charismatic leaders are by nature transformational (Lussier, 2010, p.349). However, not all transformational leaders become successful in achieving their transforming results via the charismatic of their personalities. Charismatic leaders prefer to promote their personal image and identification in contrast to transformational leadership, which is destined to emphasize internationalization rather than personal identification and manifests individualized consideration (Bass, 1998, p.43). In addition, charismatic leaders do not avoid using ideological appeals to access to power to gain their personal advantages, after which ideology is ignored.

On the other hand, transformational leaders do not use ideology to achieve their personal objectives; rather they use ideology to augment the true spirit among the followers to attain organisational objectives. Furthermore, charismatic leaders use their personality charisma to subjugate followers and making them dependent; this highlights the centralisation of authority rather than the delegation and sharing of authority and power sharing that is found and practised by the transformational leaders; who greatly believe in and encourage an active participation of the followers in the decision making and they ensure rewards must be based on performance.4. Discuss the “dark” side of Charismatic leadership.

Charismatic leaders may bring some negative consequences such as:Excessive optimism and confidence may blind the leader to real dangers.Key followers may be alienated if complete credit is allocated only to the charismatic leaders.Charismatic leaders disallow developing successors creating an eventual leadership crisis.Charismatic leaders deny or disassociate themselves with the problems and failures; this would reduce organisational learning and growth process.References1. Bass, B. (1998). Transformational leadership : industrial, military, and educational impact.

Mahwah  N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.2. Lussier, R. (2010). Leadership : theory, application, & skill development, (4th ed.). Mason  OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.3. Malloch, K. (2009). The quantum leader : applications for the new world of work (2nd ed.). Sudbury  Mass.: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.4. Yukl, G. (2010), Leadership in Organisations, Global Edition (7th ed), Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, Pearson Prentice-Hall Inc