Abstract
Both proponents and critics view the transactional-transformational paradigm (Bass, 1997, 1998) as the brainchild of Burns' (1978) philosophy of transforming leadership. However, Burns (2003) has criticized the paradigm's narrow managerialist orientation and the claim that it is uniformly applicable to any culture and organization. In this article, I first summarize and articulate Burns' (1978, 2003) and Bass' (1985, 1998) approaches toward leadership, then compare them by using a new four-dimensional framework. Extending previous research (Yukl, 2006), the framework represents a useful tool for detecting the commonalities and differences between leadership theories with respect to the core dimensions, categories, and aspects of leadership. My inspection indicates that Burns' and Bass' conceptions stem from disparate contexts and differ in their applicability. Thus, Burns' (1978) ideas stem from political movements ideally characterized by mutual quest for shared meaning and active collaboration between leaders and followers. Conversely, Bass' (1985) approach springs from military training in which leaders transfer existing knowledge to followers and stimulate their activity by using a variety of tools from inspirational motivation to individualized consideration. This study has important practical implications as it delineates the boundary conditions of the transactional-transformational paradigm and warns against its uncritical adoption in incongruent leadership contexts.