take action. In this management form, leaders steer clear of intervening, taking action or
making decisions until or unless it is the last recourse (Bass, 1990).
Historically, researchers acknowledged another form of leadership known as the laissez-
fair leadership, which is, in essence, the lack of leadership (Avolio, 1999; Bass, 1985;
Bass, 1990; Bass, 1998; Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Laissez-faire leaders abdicate their
responsibilities as leaders and do not make decisions (Bass, 1990). An individual is
essentially placed in a position where leadership is needed, but decides not to undertake
any leadership actions (Groom, 2006). Such an individual does not clarify expectations of
performance and is not available upon followers’ requirement, abdicates leadership
responsibilities and steers clear of making decisions (Bass, 1990; Hater & Bass, 1988;
Judge and Piccolo, 2004).
Both transformation and transactional forms of leadership have often been distinguished
from the laissez-faire form of leadership. Throughout the late 1990s, and the beginning of
2000s, researches dedicated to management by exception-passive form, which used to be
considered as a type of transactional leadership, urged for its combination with laissez-
faire leadership. These forms are recommended to be combined as they are highly
positively associated with one another and negatively associated with other forms of
leadership (Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1999; Den Hartog, VanMuijen, & Koopman, 1997;
Hetland & Sandal, 2003).
The resulting form of leadership when both the above forms are combined was labeled as
the passive-avoidant leadership, where the contingent reward and management by
exception-active comprise the transactional leadership. However, this change did not last
