How Level Of Authority Affects Leaders And Followers

Explain How Level Of Authority Affects Leaders And Followers Behavio

Explain how level of authority affects leaders' and followers' behavior. Can you identify reward systems that affect the level of effort students are likely to put forth in team or group projects? Should these reward systems be different from those for individual effort projects? Use the emotional approach to outline a major change of your choice. If you were the leader of the change initiative, then what would you specifically need to do or attend to in order to drive your initiative? Be specific. Discuss the main ideas of Bass's theory of transformational and transactional leadership.

Paper For Above instruction

In organizational and social dynamics, the level of authority held by leaders profoundly influences the behavior of both leaders and followers. Authority establishes the power hierarchy and shapes interactions, expectations, and motivation within groups. When leaders possess high levels of authority, their directives tend to be followed more readily, and followers may exhibit increased compliance, obedience, and reliance on the leader’s guidance. Conversely, with less authority, followers often need more persuasion and motivation, which can result in greater autonomous behavior or a desire to challenge authority (French & Raven, 1959). Leadership effectiveness is thus closely tied to perceived legitimacy and the behavioral responses it incites among followers.

Reward systems are a critical facet of influencing effort and engagement in academic settings, especially in team or group projects. When students receive recognition, grades, or incentives such as praise or privileges based on their performance, they are more likely to exert effort to meet or exceed expectations. For example, awarding extra credit for collaborative success can motivate students to contribute actively. However, these reward mechanisms can sometimes lead to unintended consequences, such as free-riding or unequal participation (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Therefore, the design of reward systems must balance motivating individual effort with fostering equitable contribution.

Distinguishing between reward systems for group and individual projects is essential. While extrinsic rewards such as grades or prizes can incentivize collective effort, they may also diminish individual accountability if not managed carefully. For individual effort projects, personal achievement and mastery are primary motivators, often reinforced through personalized feedback. In contrast, group projects benefit from team-based rewards that promote collaboration and shared accountability. Tailoring reward systems helps align motivation with the desired behaviors, fostering both individual competence and team cohesion (Latham & Pinder, 2005).

In considering major organizational changes, an emotional approach emphasizes understanding and guiding the emotional responses of stakeholders. Suppose one plans a major technological overhaul in a company. As the leader of this change initiative, it would be vital to communicate transparently, addressing fears and anxieties, and fostering a shared vision of benefits. Engagement through active listening, emotional support, and recognition of stakeholders’ concerns ensures greater buy-in. Building a coalition of supporters and managing resistance with empathy enhances the likelihood of success. Leaders must attend to the emotional climate, providing reassurance and motivation to sustain morale through the transition (Kotter, 1997).

Transformational and transactional leadership theories, as formulated by James MacGregor Burns and Bernard Bass, offer contrasting yet complementary perspectives. Transformational leadership involves inspiring followers to transcend self-interest for the collective good by articulating a compelling vision, fostering intellectual stimulation, and providing individualized support (Bass, 1985). It emphasizes motivation through higher ideals and morals, promoting innovation and change. In contrast, transactional leadership focuses on exchanges between leaders and followers, where compliance is secured through rewards or penalties (Bass, 1985). Transactional leadership is effective for maintaining routine operations and short-term tasks, while transformational leadership drives organizational change and long-term development.

References

• Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. Free Press.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The" What" and" Why" of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
• French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The Bases of Social Power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in Social Power (pp. 150–167). University of Michigan.
• Kotter, J. P. (1997). Leading Change. Harvard Business Review Press.
• Latham, G. P., & Pinder, C. C. (2005). Work Motivation Theory and Research at the Dawn of the 21st Century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 485–516.