The Transactional Leader/Follower Exchange: Tri-American Business Analysis

1590 Words 6 Pages
The Transactional Leader/Follower Exchange Low-level managers are usually transactional leaders that operate the business entity (Kotter, 2013). They are the face of the business and execute the operational aspects of the organization on a day to day basis by following the strategic business plan for success which includes enforcing rules and policies and meeting goals and objectives devised by executives (Bisel, Messersmith, & Kelley, 2012; Kotter, 2013). Transactional leadership is grounded in processes (Hoyt, & Blascovich, 2003; Ruggieri, 2009; Northouse, 2012). Process driven transactional leaders reward followers based on how well they execute processes or obey rules, adhere to policies and achieve individual and collective …show more content…
Tri-American employed a decentralized organizational structure that increased operational autonomy and empowered the workforce. Tri-American’s organizational culture of increased operational freedom should have facilitated innovative solutions to inter-organizational challenges by sharing knowledge in a collegial effort and refining the manufacturing processes to increase efficiency. Instead, Tri-American’s organizational culture, organizational climate and lack of strategic leadership and human resources management represents a systemic problem that created a barrier to the management of change and organizational learning at Tri-American branch locations (Vera, & Crossan, 2004; Atkinson, 2005; Schimmel, & Muntslag, 2009; Drucker, 2011). Dick Spenser’s failure to implement change and innovation as a plant manager is a direct result of Tri-American’s lack of top down strategic leadership and human resources management as well as Spenser’s deficit of transformational leader behaviors (Vera, & Crossan, 2004; Huang, Hsu, & Chiau, 2011). Tri-American did not employ a formal employee recognition and secession training program. This would suggest that Tri-American is not an adaptive and resilient organization poised to retain and transfer institutional knowledge internally between branches as a function of the organizational culture or climate (Vera, & Crossan, 2004; Drucker, 2011). This is a significant strategic failure because the retention, professional development and intra-organization transfer of human resources internally provides a means to maintain the organizational culture and stabilize the organizational climate as well as facilitating the intra-organizational sharing of knowledge by individuals and

Related Documents