Leadership Chapter 6 - Contingency Theory

Contingency Theory Approach Description Perspective Contingency theory is a leader-match theory (Fiedler & Chemers, 1974) Tries to match leaders to appropriate situations Leader’s effectiveness depends on how well the leader’s style fits the context Fiedler’s generalizations about which styles of leadership are best and worst are based on empirically grounded generalizations

Contingency Theory Approach Description Definition Effective leadership is contingent on matching a leader’s style to the right setting Assessment based on: Leadership Styles Situational Variables

Leadership Styles Leader Style Measurement Scale (Fiedler) Leadership styles are described as: Task-motivated (Low LPCs) Leaders are concerned primarily with reaching a goal Relationship-motivated (High LPCs) Leaders are concerned with developing close interpersonal relationships Leader Style Measurement Scale (Fiedler) Least Preferred Co-Worker (LPC) Scale High LPCs = Relationship-motivated Low LPCs = Task-motivated

Situational Variables/3 Factors 1. Leader-Member Relations - Refers to the group atmosphere and the degree of confidence, loyalty, and attraction of followers for leader Group atmosphere – Good – high degree of subordinate trust, liking, positive relationship Poor – little or no subordinate trust, friction exists, unfriendly

Situational Variables/3 Factors 2. Task Structure Concerns the degree to which requirements of a task are clear and spelled out High Structure – requirements/rules - are clearly stated/known path to accomplish - has few alternatives task completion - can be clearly demonstrated limited number - correct solutions exist

Situational Variables/3 Factors 2. Task Structure, cont’d. Concerns the degree to which requirements of a task are clear and spelled out Low Structure – requirements/rules - not clearly stated/known path to accomplish - has many alternatives task completion - cannot be clearly demonstrated/verified unlimited number - correct solutions exist

Situational Variables/3 Factors 3. Position Power Designates the amount of authority a leader has to reward or punish followers Strong Power – authority to hire or fire, give raises in rank or pay Weak Power – no authority to hire or fire, give raises in rank or pay

Situational Variables/3 Factors 3 Factors - determine the favorableness of various situations in organizations Situations that are rated: Most Favorable - good leader-follower relations, defined tasks (high structure), & strong leader position power

Situational Variables/3 Factors 3 Factors - determine the favorableness of various situations in organizations Situations that are rated: Least Favorable - Poor leader-follower relations, unstructured tasks (low structure), & Weak leader position power Moderately Favorable – Fall in between these extremes

Research Findings of Leader Style Effectiveness Reasons for leader mismatch ineffectiveness: Leader style doesn’t match a particular situation; stress and anxiety result Under stress, leader reverts to less mature coping style learned in earlier development Leader’s less mature coping style results in poor decision making and consequently negative work outcomes

How Does the Contingency Theory Approach Work? Focus of Contingency Theory Strengths Criticisms Application

Contingency Theory Approach Focus By assessing the 3 situational variables. After the nature of a situation is determined, the fit between leader’s style and the situation can be evaluated Overall Scope By measuring Leader’s LPC score and the 3 situational variables, it is possible to predict whether a leader will be effective in a particular setting

Criticisms Fails to fully explain why leaders with particular leadership styles are more effective in some situations than others Criticism of LPC scale validity as it does not correlate well with other standard leadership measures Cumbersome to use in real-world settings Fails to adequately explain what should be done about a leader/situation mismatch in the workplace