A transformational school leader ensures students focus on their studies by being considerate of individuality, being charismatic in influencing them, and inspiring them. Instead of using set problem-solving techniques, he or she involves students and teachers to come up with solutions to problems as they arise. Transformational leaders in a school setting quickly identify areas in need of improvement, seeking out-of-the-box solutions. To know more about leadership styles visit http://www.theedadvocate.org/3-leadership-styles-similar-to-transformational-leadership/

1. 3 LEADERSHIP STYLES SIMILAR TO TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
A transformational school leader ensures students focus on their studies by being
considerate of individuality, being charismatic in influencing them, and inspiring them.
Instead of using set problem-solving techniques, he or she involves students and teachers
to come up with solutions to problems as they arise. Transformational leaders in a school
setting quickly identify areas in need of improvement, seeking out-of-the-box solutions.
The leader identifies cynicism and intentions to quit among teachers, through consultation
and individualized consideration. Realigning their values and goals to resonate with those
of the school, the leader reassures teachers that they are needed and valued.
However, becoming a transformational leader is difficult, especially as this is a leadership
style heavily dependent on charisma. Here are three other contemporary leadership styles
that are similar to transformational leadership.
1. Servant Leadership:
A servant leader shifts focus from his or her own interests to the people he or she serves.
The focus of servant leadership is not on the result, but on the means of achieving the
result – primarily through expression and handling of other people’s needs. This assistance
should be in the form of providing guidance in individual roles, empowering followers, and
developing a culture of trust toward meeting organizational goals.
The concept of servant leadership, though popular and effective, has suffered
tremendously because it has remained largely undefined. Some scholars have recently
taken an interest in servant leadership and have attempted to make the theory more
applicable at the organizational level.
A side-by-side comparison between the transformational and servant leadership reveals
relatively similar attributes; both styles of leadership are people-oriented. Most notably,
both types of leadership involve elements of integrity, trust, respect, delegation, vision,
and influence on followers.
Both leadership styles emphasize the appreciation, mentoring, recognition, and listening
skills of the leader as empowerment tools for the followers.

2. However, there are certain points of departure between the two styles. While it
emphasizes gaining trust and influencing followers, servant leadership calls for more
sacrifice on the part of the leader. The pursuit of profits is secondary for the servant
leader. Followers are more likely to have greater freedom under a servant leader than
transformational leader.
Another principal difference is the leader’s focus. Though both styles call the leader to
service, the servant leader’s ultimate focus is the follower, while the transformational
leader’s greatest concern is to encourage followers to serve the organization diligently.
The fundamental difference between the two styles is that the servant leader focuses on
the followers’ needs, while the transformational leader focuses on organizational goals.
The servant leader’s followers achieve organizational objectives because they become the
leader’s first priority. This is different from transformational leadership, where interests of
the organization are the ultimate priority.
Charisma is a key ingredient for transformational leadership. Charisma refers to charm and
power to inspire, motivate, and excite others. While transformational leadership relies on
the leader’s charismatic power to achieve effectiveness, servant leaders create the same
motivation and influence through the act of service, without grandstanding on the leader’s
part.
While both styles of leadership are effective, there are risks attached to each. Both may fall
prey to manipulation and corruption, since, with these kinds of leadership, the leader
eventually garners some authority or power over the followers, which can be used for
negative purposes. Some followers are too reliant on their leaders and establish strong links
with them to satisfy their pressing dependency needs.
While both transformational and servant leadership may have negative applications, their
benefits far outweigh these negatives.
2. Transactional leadership:
Another historical leadership style is transactional leadership, in which a leader offers
some valuable thing in exchange for the follower’s services. Most traditional relationships
between leaders and followers are transactional, since most people believe “quid pro quo”
(“something for something”) to be the ultimate purpose of negotiation. In such an
arrangement, everyone is happy and thus there is no harm done.

3. The contract between employer and employee is mostly transactional.
Transformational and transactional leadership are different, but can complement each
other occasionally, depending on circumstances. The combination of transactional and
transformational leadership is best. Though it may be easy to augment transactional
relationships, it is not possible to replace it with transformational leadership, since
transactional leadership is also an effective motivation technique.
A transformational leader who fails to charm his or her followers will often resort to
transactional leadership. Transactional leadership is a shortcut and is not as long-lasting as
transformational leadership, because the reward promised may not always be available,
but the charisma of the leader will never be depleted.
Transformational leadership transcends the transactional style. Motivation from within the
follower produces powerful results.
Another trait of transactional leadership is “management by exception.” The active form
of this type of management involves assessing employee performance and taking
corrective measures where needed. In the passive form, the leader only intervenes where
things have gotten out of hand. The last of the transactional traits is the laissez faire
leadership, in which the leader allows employees to do as they like.
3. Emotional Leadership:
Emotional leadership is loosely related to transformational leadership. Here, leadership
involves tapping the leader’s emotional center to lead, where decisions are based on the
feelings of the leader at the time. Some may assert that transformational leadership also
involves a level of emotional influence. However, the two types of leadership are
structurally different, because transformational leadership is, in essence, a rational
process.