Leadership Styles and Employee Ethical/Unethical Behavior Essay

Transformational leading encourage followers to embrace virtuousistic values and to act in the interest of the collective rather than self interest. Transformational leading be image to raise followers direct of moral education and to focus followers attention on higher level necessitate and values. Transactional lead rely on rewards and punishments to direct followers behaviour.Transactional drawing cards are inconsistent with moral leadership beca subprogram transactional approaches ignore followers needs and aspirations and that transactional leaders focus on the status quo rather than on an inspire vision of the future and may be motivated by their induce achievement and power rather than followers needs. Multidimensional transformational leadership bring about with the following dimensions which consist on individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, idealized influence, and sacred motivation.Transformational leadership has been associated with many po sitive outcomes such(prenominal) as kick the bucketers satisfaction with work and the leader, organizational commitment, citizenship behaviours, and job performance. Ethical leadership is not a disused phenomenon in todays business organizations. Ethical leaders are both moral persons and moral jitneys. We think of the moral person as representing the honest part of the term ethical leadership, and we think of the moral manager as representing the leadership part of that term.Ethical leaders are thought to be moral persons because they are honest and trustworthy, take good finagle of their people, and do the right things in both their personal and professional lives. They direct decisions found on values and ethical decision rules, and they are just and concerned about stakeholders interests and long-term outcomes. As moral managers, ethical leaders are clear about their expectations of followers.They are visible use models of ethical behaviour, communicate with their peopl e about their ethical and values-based expectations, and use the reward trunk to hold followers accountable for ethical conduct. The relationship in the midst of leadership and employee ethical conduct can be explain by fond discipline and social exchange. In accordance with a social learning perspective, they behave ethically in their personal and professional lives, and they make decisions based on ethical principles and the long-term interest of multiple stakeholders.Ethical leaders send clear messages to organizational members about expected behaviour and use the reward carcass to hold everyone accountable to those expectations. This aspect of ethical leadership depends on social learning and can be viewed as to a greater extent transactional than transformational because followers behave ethically and pause from unethical conduct by and large due to the observed consequences. In social exchange perspective, ethical leaders were described as being trustworthy and as treati ng their people with care, concern, and fairness.As such, they are liable(predicate) to create social exchange relationships with their subordinates, who can be expected to reciprocate this care and fair treatment by winning in citizenship behaviours and by refraining from unethical conduct. Ethical leaders are likely to influence their followers to engage in ethical conduct and to refrain from unethical conduct by way of multiple processes that rely on both transformational and transactional approaches to leadership. There are several potential limitations on the berth of leadership.First, we expect that some employees will be less influence by leaders than will others. Second, employees at the lowest levels of cognitive moral development (preconventional) should be less influenced by leaders than by reward system contingencies. Third, ethical leadership may be less prestigious in homogeneous settings where leaders and their followers share values based on age and cultural simi larity. Fourth, Supervisory leaders may be to a greater extent or less influential depending on characteristics of their work conclave such as size and type of work.For example, the larger the span of control, the more unwieldy it may be to communicate ethical standards and to hold work group members accountable. Fifth, individual leaders may also be less influential to the extent that the organization has a strong ethical climate and glossiness that incorporates formal and informal systems to support ethical conduct. Lastly, some organizations have a strong culture and climate that supports unethical conduct.For example, Douglas Durand had worked for 20 years at Merck & Company which had a strong ethical culture where morals and social responsibility were taken seriously. Once he arrived, he pronto discovered a culture where sales representatives bribed doctors, did not account fittingly for free samples, and engaged in Medicare fraud. Durand tried to change the culture h ardly failed to do so. Much leadership research does not distinguish between the executive and supervisory levels, although such a distinction is likely to be important for leaders influence on ethics related outcomes. ground on our executive ethical leadership data, we inferred four types of executive leader which are ethical leader, unethical leader, hypocritical leader and ethically impersonal leader. In conclusion, leaders should play an important role in influencing employee and to be an ethical leader who can be viewed as an attractive, credible, and legitimate role model who engages in normatively appropriate behaviour and makes the ethics message salient.