Transformational Leadership Would Be The Best Approach For T

Transformational leadership would be the best approach for the case study of Breitt, Starr & Diamond LLC.

Transformational leadership would be the best approach for the case study of Breitt, Starr & Diamond LLC. The company was formed with three founders, each bringing their specialized creative expertise. As the organization grew, hiring seven new employees to sustain its expansion, the company's foundational culture centered on being a small, creative, open, and trustworthy environment. This culture aligns closely with the principles of transformational leadership, which emphasizes inspiring and motivating followers to achieve organizational goals while fostering a positive and trust-based environment (Stone, Russell, & Patterson, 2004).

Transformational leadership, as conceptualized by Avolio, Waldman, and Yammarino (1999), encompasses four primary behaviors: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. These behaviors facilitate a transformational climate where followers are motivated beyond immediate self-interest to support the shared vision. In the context of Breitt, Starr & Diamond LLC, these behaviors would support a culture of trust, creativity, and open communication, essential for a creative agency that relies heavily on individual initiative and innovation.

The leadership challenge arose when the founders brought in Brad Howser as the general manager. Howser adopted an authoritarian and transactional leadership style, focusing on efficiency, control, and adherence to schedules. His management approach aligned with the authority compliance grid, emphasizing task completion and operational controls (Bateman, Snell, & Konopaske, 2019). While this approach yielded short-term financial efficiencies and internal controls, it inadvertently eroded the organizational culture by failing to consider employees' emotional and motivational needs. The lack of empathy and participatory decision-making led to employee dissatisfaction, as evidenced by resignations and a hostile work environment.

Transactional leadership, characterized by a focus on reward and punishment mechanisms, can be effective in achieving specific organizational tasks, especially in structured environments (H. James & Voehl, 2015). However, overreliance on this approach in a creative setting like Breitt, Starr & Diamond can stifle innovation, reduce employee engagement, and undermine long-term organizational health. This aligns with findings that transactional leadership, when rigid and punitive, can diminish trust and intrinsic motivation—crucial elements for a creative agency (Stone, Russell, & Patterson, 2004).

The introduction of Howser’s leadership style highlights the importance of cultural change management (CCM). Effective CCM involves embracing change as a collective effort, aligning it with organizational culture and strategic needs (H. James & Voehl, 2015). Critical steps include engaging employees in the change process, establishing a clear transformation strategy, and ensuring psychological readiness for change. The failure to adopt these practices in Breitt, Starr & Diamond resulted in resistance and dissatisfaction, illustrating the risks of neglecting comprehensive change management.

From a leadership perspective, the situation underscores the necessity for leaders to adopt behaviors that foster trust, collaboration, and shared vision. As Canning (2016) emphasizes, leaders must find a leadership style they are comfortable with but also one that is effective within their organizational context. Personal growth in leadership involves transitioning from a "Country Club" management style, which prioritizes pleasing everyone, towards a more strategic and transformational approach that balances empathy with the achievement of organizational objectives (Bateman, Snell, & Konopaske, 2019).

In terms of leadership development, the author reflects on their own evolution from a management style focused on harmony and consensus to one emphasizing strategic vision and empowerment—characteristics aligned with authentic and Machiavellian leadership typologies (Rego, Pereira Lopes, & Volkmann Simpson, 2017). Such development demonstrates the importance of adaptive leadership that can cater to different organizational needs and stakeholder expectations, especially in environments requiring innovation and trust-building.

Overall, while transactional leadership can optimize short-term operational efficiency, in the context of a creative agency like Breitt, Starr & Diamond LLC, transformational leadership offers a sustainable model that promotes innovation, employee satisfaction, and organizational resilience. Leaders who embody transformational behaviors inspire followers to transcend self-interest for the collective good, foster trust, and create an environment where both individual and organizational growth are possible (Stone, Russell, & Patterson, 2004). Implementing such leadership practices would help the company sustain its creative culture amidst growth and change, ensuring long-term success.

References

• Avolio, B., Waldman, D., & Yammarino, F. (1999). Leading in the 1990s: The four Is of transformational leadership. Journal of European Industrial Training, 15(4), 9-16.
• Bateman, T. S., Snell, S. A., & Konopaske, R. (2019). Management: Leading & Collaborating in a Competitive World. McGraw Hill Education.
• Canning, B. (2016). Define Your Leadership Style. MotorAge.com.
• H. James, H., & Voehl, F. (2015). Cultural Change Management. International Journal of Innovation Science, 7(1), 55-74.
• Rego, P., Pereira Lopes, M., & Volkmann Simpson, A. (2017). The Authentic-Machiavellian Leadership Grid: A Typology of Leadership Styles. Journal of Leadership Styles, 11(2), 48-51.
• Stone, A., Russell, R. F., & Patterson, K. (2004). Transformational versus servant leadership: A difference in leader focus. Emerald Insight, 25(4).
• Sarros, J. C., & Santora, J. C. (2001). The transformational-transactional leadership model in practice. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(8).
• H. James & Voehl, F. (2015). Cultural Change Management. International Journal of Innovation Science, 7(1), 55–74.
• Rego, P., Pereira Lopes, M., & Volkmann Simpson, A. (2017). The Authentic-Machiavellian Leadership Grid: A Typology of Leadership Styles. Journal of Leadership Styles, 11(2), 48-51.
• Stone, A., Russell, R. F., & Patterson, K. (2004). Transformational versus servant leadership: a difference in leader focus. Emerald Insight, 25(4).