Chapter 5: Contingency Leadership Theories This presentation created by: MANAGEMENT TRAINING SPECIALISTS 5320-D Camp Bowie Blvd / Fort Worth, Texas 76107 / 817 737-2893 e-mail: 2conz@airmail.net And Extensively Adapted by Jeffrey M. Wachtel, Ph. D. 5-1

Chapter 5 Learning Objectives Differences between behavioral and contingency leadership theories. Contingency leadership variables and styles. Leadership models: Contingency —Prescriptive Leadership continuum — Descriptive Path-goal — Substitutes Normative — Situational 5-2 5-2

Carly Fiorina Fiorina is the only female CEO heading a major Silicon Valley company, and only one of four female chief executives among the Fortune 500. But she's not just any woman. Fortune Magazine says she's the "most powerful woman in business." "Fiorina whips H-P into fighting shape," with strong leadership and sound decision making, changing HP's culture...streamlining operations... and cutting costs." –Jon Swatz, USA Today

Contingency Leadership Theories: “It Depends” explain that the appropriate leadership style based on the (1) leader, (2) followers, and (3) situation. If managers can properly diagnose a situation and followers so that they can then use the appropriate leadership style, successful outcomes are highly likely. “Leadership is largely shaped by contextual factors”

Global Contingency Leadership Global companies, like McDonald’s realize that successful leadership styles can vary greatly from place to place. “Companies are now looking for graduates with an international openness and flexibility who can master the complexity of the global economy.”

Global Contingency Leadership: Professor William Ouchi’s Findings: Theory Z observed that Japanese firms were managed and led differently than U.S. organizations. 7 Differences…Japanese found to have: longer employment, collective decision making, collective responsibility, slower promotion, more implicit controls, more unspecialized career paths, and more holistic concern for employees.

Contingency Leadership Use this space for overall reminders or special tips linked to the slide or occassion. Simply select this text and replace it with your own reminders. Contingency Leadership Framework Variables Summary Heading. Text. Followers Capability Motivation Leader Personality traits Behavior Experience Situation Task Structure Environment 5-3

Contingency Leadership Model: Fiedler Is a leader’s style more task or relationship oriented? Does the situation match the leader’s style? If so it will maximize performance. 5-4

The Contingency Leadership Model Variables Within Framework Use this space for overall reminders or special tips linked to the slide or occassion. Simply select this text and replace it with your own reminders. Summary Heading. Text. Leader Situation Task Structure Position Power Leader/Follower Relations* Followers Leader / Member Relations* Situation Task Structure Position Power Leadership Styles Task Relationship 5-5

3 Variables of Situational Favorableness. This slide relates to XX-XX. Leader-member Relations, #1 3 Variables of Situational Favorableness. Task structure, #2 Summary Overview XXXX Major Title Heading. Position power, #3 5-6 3

Situational Favorableness Leader-member relations—good or poor? Task structure—repetitive or non-repetitive? Position power—strong or weak?

Fiedler’s Recommendations: Change the Situation to Fit Your Style How to change the situation: Analyze each variable and then either: Improve relations, Create or lessen task structure by either stating more or less specific standards, Downplay position power or get more and act more powerful.

Form Small Groups: Analyze This Class From The Leader’s Standpoint What is the situation? (This is probably similar for most classes). What is the leader’s predominant style? This may be a tricky question? Should the leader change one of the situational variables? If so, which one?

The Leadership Continuum Model Used to determine which one of seven styles to select based on one’s use of boss-centered versus subordinate centered leadership to meet the situation. 5-7

Tannenbaum and Schmidt’s Leadership Continuum Model Autocratic Participative 1. Leader makes decision and announces it to employees without discussion. 2. Leader makes a decision and sells it to employees. 3. Leader presents ideas and invites employee questions. 4. Leader presents tentative decision subject to change. 5. Leader presents problem, gets suggestions, and makes decision. 6. Leader defines limits and asks employees to make a decision. 7. Leader permits employees to make ongoing decisions within defined limits. 5-8

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE 4 SYSTEMS 1. In a few words, describe each of the four systems: System 1 System 2 System 3 System 4

Case Study Small Group Exercise System Action taken? Attitude/ Behavior Perfor-mance? System 1 System 2 System 3 System 4

The Situational Leadership Model The Contingency Leadership Variables Within The Contingency Leadership Framework Variables Use this space for overall reminders or special tips linked to the slide or occassion. Simply select this text and replace it with your own reminders. Summary Heading. Text. Leader None Followers Follower Maturity Situation Task L’Ship Styles Telling Selling Participating Delegating 5-11

Situational Leadership Theory Readiness of Followers Behavior of Leaders Unable and Unwilling Clear, Specific Directions Unable and Willing High Task Orientation Able and Unwilling Support & Participation Able and Willing Let Followers Perform

House Path-Goal Leadership Model Achievement-oriented Situational Factors Subordinate authoritative locus of control ability Environment task structure formal     authority work group Leadership Styles Directive Supportive Participative Achievement-oriented Goal Achievement Performance Satisfaction 5-10

Leader Participation Model Employee Involvement Continuum Increased Leader Control 1 2 3 4 5 A comprehensive framework related to leader behavior and participation in decision making is the leader-participation model (Vroom & Yetton, 1973). This model identifies five leadership behaviors: 1. The leader makes the decision alone. 2. The leader asks for information from group members but makes the decision alone. Group members may or may not be informed about the decision. 3. The leader shares the situation with each group member and asks for information and evaluation. Members do not meet as a group, and the leader makes the decision. 4. The leader and group members discuss the situation, but the leader makes the decision. 5. The leader and group members discuss the situation, and the group makes the decision. This model originally used seven contingencies (the relevance of which could be identified by making a series of “yes” or “no” choices) to determine the best leadership style from among the five alternatives. Increased Employee Involvement

Contingency Variables in the Revised Leader-Participation Model Importance of the decision Importance of subordinate commitment Whether leader has enough information The structural nature of the problem Acceptability of autocratic decisions Commitment of subordinates to the organization More recent work by Vroom and Jago has revised the Leader-Participation Model. The new model retains the same five alternative leadership styles which range from the leader making the decision alone to sharing the problem with the group and obtaining a consensus decision. But it expands contingency variables to twelve (see the slide above and the one that follows).

Contingency Variables in the Revised Leader-Participation Model Subordinates’ opinions about alternatives Knowledge level of subordinates Time constraints on involvement of subordinates Cost of arranging for subordinates to meet Time constraints on making a decision Importance of participation

Leader-Member Exchange Model Personal Compatibility and/or Subordinate Competence Leader Formal Relations Trust High Interactions The leader-member exchange model asserts that leaders differentiate between followers. The result is a dichotomy: an in-group and an out-group. In-group members are trusted, get extra attention, and receive special privileges. Out-group members get less attention, fewer rewards, and participate in a formal superior-subordinate relationship. In-group members are chosen because they are highly competent, extroverted, and have personal characteristics that are similar to the leader’s. As a result, in-group subordinates have higher performance ratings, less turnover, and greater satisfaction with the leader-subordinate relationship. Subordinate A B C In-Group Subordinate D E F Out-Group

Substitute for Leadership Variables Within the Contingency Use this space for overall reminders or special tips linked to the slide or occassion. Simply select this text and replace it with your own reminders. Substitute for Leadership Variables Within the Contingency Leadership Framework Variables Summary Heading. Text. Followers Subordinates Leader None Situation Task Organization 5-12

Substitutes and Neutralizers for Leadership Defining Characteristics Relationship- Oriented Leadership Task- Oriented Leadership Individual Experience/training Professionalism Indifference to rewards No effect Substitutes Neutralizes Substitutes Neutralizes Job Highly structured task Provides own feedback Intrinsically satisfying No effect Substitutes Substitutes No effect Organization Explicit formal goals Rigid rules & procedures Cohesive work groups No effect Substitutes Substitutes