Bryant Devine
Leadership Styles and Theories
Dr. Cusaac
August 19, 2012
Pseudo-Transformational Leadership and the American Electorate
The relevance of learning the difference between authentic transformational leadership and pseudo transformational leadership can help an emerging leader understand the importance of morality and ethic in leadership. Authentic transformation leadership shows the emerging leader the proper way to set high goals for his followers; whereas, pseudo-transformational leader sets goals for self-interest or self-serving purposes. These lessons can help a leader avoid the pitfalls of immoral and unethical leadership. Moreover, it helps the leader learn the importance of morality and ethics in leadership, and the example it sets for the moral fiber of an organization as a whole. Nonetheless, immorality and unethical behavior is a tornado, that if willingly runs rampant, will rip apart the morale of an organization. Nevertheless, authentic transformational leadership can bring followers together to accomplish goals; whereas, pseudo-transformational leadership act as a tornado that rips them apart.
We can relate this to our government through the congress and executive branches. By first asking how leadership works in these two branches. Secondly, what impact does it have on the American people as a whole, and methods to change the governmental leadership? First, we must see how the founders viewed leadership at our founding.
The Essay on Theory Of Leadership Transformational Leader
While I would like to believe I am a transformational leader, there are times I find that I demonstrate the characteristics of the transactional theory in my everyday practice in formal leadership roles. Transformational leadership theory, as I understand it as described by James Burns, 'looks for potential motives in followers, their needs, values, and morals' and 'involves attempts by leaders to ...
Our founders wanted a nation that was organized to promote liberty, freedom, and prosperity, and prevent tyranny and oppression, or pseudo-transformational leadership. They did this by placing checks and balances, along with separation of powers, on each branch of the government.
In Federalist No. 57, James Madison writes what the aim of any constitution ought to do. “First to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to disarm, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of society, and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust” (Kesler, Hamilton, Madison, & Jay, 2003).
Nonetheless, if pseudo-transformational was to set in to destroy the national fabric, the people could use the ballot box to check the power and leadership of those in power.
Alexander Hamilton furthers this notion in Federalist No. 70, “The Republican Principle demands that the deliberate sense of the community should govern the conduct of those to whom they entrust the management of their affairs… it is the duty of the persons whom they have appointed to be the guardians of those interests…” (Kesler, Hamilton, Madison, & Jay, 2003).
Since the system is set up in such a way to prevent tyranny and oppression, how does leadership work inside the government?
According to the Thirteenth Edition of Congress and Its Members, “Congress is a partisan body… The majority in the House and senate controls not only the top leadership posts and each chambers agenda, but also chairmanships and majorities on committees and sub committees” (Davidson, Oleszek, & Lee, 2012).
Nonetheless, these parties have an elaborate organization, the leaders hold many roles and duties within this structure, and typically, leaders cannot command their colleagues. However, their leadership is based solely on the ability to persuade colleagues to follow them – fractionalized constituencies further contribute to this inability to form cohesion.
The committee system however, shapes policy congress acts on, and leads to conflict within the party structure because the party system promotes aggregation, whereas, the committee system promotes fragmentation. Nonetheless, leaders struggle to manage an institution that disperses policy-making authority to so many working groups, where leaders must try to offset committee’s centrifugal influence. Since the Congress is fragmental into small constituencies, it is hard to get consensus. The President has a larger constituency, and is able to communicate more effectively to the mass of Americans. However, he has better success at affecting foreign policy, whereas, congress has more control over domestic affairs. Occasionally, Presidents can act independent of others. However, according to The Paradoxes of the American Presidency by Thomas E. Cronin and Michael Genovese, “such unilateral acts (except in a crisis) are the exception, not the rule. In most cases, presidents share power” (Cronin & Genovese, 2010).
The Term Paper on Congress National Policy
There is a definite need for Congress in the United States. It serves many roles such as making laws, implementing national policy and watching over the other two branches of government. These are just a few of the duties of our U. S. Congress. Although they are essential to our government, there are potential problems. People are not always satisfied with the length of time involved in passing a ...
The major building blocks of Presidential Leadership are vision, skill, and political timing. Nonetheless, The President has to appeal to the American people as a whole. He has to be able to educate, inform, and enlighten the American People. This allows the President and citizens to engage in dialogues and develops a vision that will animate needed action. What effect does it have on the American public?
The majority of Americans understand little of how a complex system of checks and balances initially works, and assists in preventing tyranny and oppression. However, they do know that they can affect policy that they disagree with. For example, in 2006, Americans disapproved of certain policy formed by the Bush administration. Consequently, this election proved that the American people could affect change on our government over unpopular issues. Another example would be the 2010 election, after the adoption of the Affordable Health Care Act. The majority of the change usually takes place in the mid-term elections, after the President has settle in for two years: in order, to halt unpopular policy, and perceived unethical or immoral behavior. Consequently, the ballot box affects the Congress and the President. Ultimately, the American Public can affect change, if they see fit, and they understand that they can place their own checks on our government, through the ballot box.
The Essay on How American politics was changed by Andrew Jackson.
The first paragraph contains the essay instructions.During the Jacksonian Period, American politics were altered. What were the most significant changes from previous policies? What were the long-term implications of the new political methodology? Were the long-term results beneficial or detrimental to the quality of government? Why? What was the role of Andrew Jackson in this process? As a ...
Works Citied
Kesler, C., Hamilton, A., Madison, J., & Jay, J. (2003).
The Federalist Papers.
(pp. 348, 430-431).
New York: Signet Classic.
Davidson, R. H., Oleszek, W. J., & Lee, F. E. (2012).
Congress and its Members. (Thirteenth ed., p. 241).
Washington D.C.: CQ Press.
Cronin, E., & Genovese, M. A. (2010).
The Paradoxes of the American Presidency. (Third ed., p. 105).
New York: Oxford University Press.
