Transformational leadership is held by its theorists to consist of charisma (mission articulation, empowerment, and confidence in followers), intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. lt is alleged to result from flexible structure, crisis, and high socio-economic status (except for charisma in connection with the latter) and to produce a favorable organizational climate, identification with the organization, expectation of success, and, most of all, extra effort. The present research, however, discloses serious problems with the model based upon theory: the inability of a principal component analysis to distinguish the leadership dimensions and the outcomes of identification and expectation of success; an absence of effects of SES and crisis on the leadership variables; and the direct effects of the exogenous variables on organizational climate. Even with regard to the central concept of charisma, considerable ambiguity is found. The conclusion of the present research is that transformational leadership theory represents "theoretical desperation" in a sociological sub-discipline increasingly perceived to be unproductive of significant results. While the relationship between charisma and extra effort holds up in the present study, the connection is problematic, since extra effort is uncorrelated with positive changes in the churches. A possible interpretation of the lack of correlation between extra effort and substantive changes is that leadership operates to create and maintain fictions functional for both the leader and his/her host organization. The use of language in the development of meaning also highlights the importance of' incorporating the idea of power in leadership studies. / Ph. D.