contingency theories & situational leadership

Leadership & team management

1. The Contingency Approach The essence of the contingency approach to leadership is that leaders are most effective when they make their behavior contingent upon situational forces, including group member characteristics. Leadership effectiveness is maximized when leaders correctly make their behaviors contingent on certain situational and follower characteristics. The effects of leadership vary from situation to situation. Aspects of the situation that enhance or nullify the effects of a leader’s traits or behavior are called situational moderator variables.

2. The Contingency Approach Fiedler’s Contingency Theory The Path-Goal Theory The Situational Leadership Theory (Hershey and Blanchard) Normative Decision Model (Vroom, Yetton / Vroom,Yetton , and Jago )

3. Fiedler’s Contingency Theory The basic idea is simple: Match the leader’s style with the situation most favorable for his/her success. Fiedler’s contingency theory of leadership states that best leadership style is determined by the situation in which the leader works. It recognizes natural behavioral tendencies of leaders and suggests certain situations where these behaviors may be more or less effective. Probably the earliest and certainly the most well-known contingency theory.

4. Fiedler’s Contingency Theory (cont.) Some leaders may be generally more supportive and relationship-oriented , whereas others may be more concerned with task or goal accomplishment . The contingency model suggests that leader effectiveness is primarily determined by selecting the right kind of leader for a certain situation or changing the situation to fit the particular leader’s style. To understand the contingency theory one must look first at the critical characteristics of the leader and then at the critical aspects of the situation .

5. Fiedler’s Contingency Theory (cont.) Least Preferred Coworker - LPC Scale The LPC scale measures the degree to which a leader describes favorably or unfavorably an employee with whom he or she could work least well . Not the coworker you LIKED least, but the one you had the most difficulty getting a job done with. A relationship-motivated leader tends to describe their LPC in favorable terms. A task-motivated leader tends to describe their LPC in unfavorable terms.

6. Fiedler’s Contingency Theory (cont.) Measuring the Leadership Situation Leadership situations are classified as High, Moderate, or Low control. More controllable situations are viewed as more favorable for the leader. Control is determined by three dimensions: Leader-Member Relations Task Structure Position Power

7. Fiedler’s Contingency Theory (cont.) Summary of Findings From Fiedler’s Contingency Theory

8. Evaluating Fiedler’s Theory (cont.) Fiedler’s research suggests that low LPC leaders will perform better in either low favorability situations or in very high favorability situations. High LPC leaders will perform best in moderate favorability situations. However, Fiedler’s Contingency Theory was found to be too complicated to have had much of an impact on the majority of leaders.

9. Path-Goal Theory Developed by Robert House The path-goal theory of leadership effectiveness specifies what the leader must do to achieve high productivity and morale in a given situation. Path-goal theory, in its most basic form, is based upon expectancy theory. The effective leader will ensure valued rewards are available to the followers (the goal) and will help them find ways of getting to these goals (the path).

10. Path-Goal Theory (cont.) Leader behaviors - unlike contingency theory, path-goal theory suggests that leaders may use varying styles with different subordinates or even with the same subordinates in differing situations. The four leader behaviors of path goal theory are Directive leaders give specific directions. Supportive leaders strive to create a positive climate. Participative leaders consult with subordinates taking their suggestions into account. Achievement-oriented leaders push goal setting, higher standards, and show strong confidence in their followers.

11. Path-Goal Theory (cont.) Evaluation of Theory Path-Goal Theory is so complicated and has so many nuances – it is primarily studied by researchers and scholars in the field of leadership – it has little value or at best questionable value for practicing leaders.

12. Situational Leadership Theory Developed by Kenneth Blanchard and colleagues. The Situational Leadership Theory explains how to match leadership style with follower readiness. The key contingency factors are group member characteristics. The theory has its roots in the Ohio State Studies on Leader Behavior. That study identified 2 distinct leader behavior categories: Initiating structure (task behavior) Consideration (relationship behavior)

13. Situational Leadership Theory (cont.) Basics of the Model Task behavior is the extent to which the leader spells out the duties and responsibilities of an individual or group. Relationship behavior is the extent to which the leader engages in two-way or multi-way communication. leaders adapt their style or behavior based on he maturity of their followers. The most effective style depends on the readiness level of group members. Readiness is the extent to which a follower is able and willing to accomplish a specific task.

14. Situational Leadership Theory (cont.) Components of Follower Maturity Job maturity- the amount of task-relevant knowledge, experience, skill, and ability that the follower possesses. (i.e. ability, KSA’s) Psychological maturity- the follower’s self confidence, commitment, motivation, and self-respect relative to the task at hand (i.e. willingness)

15. Situational Leadership Theory (cont.) Four Levels of Readiness Style 1 - High task and low relationship. The “telling” style is directive. Style 2 - High task and high relationship. The “selling” style is also directive, but in a more persuasive, guiding, manner. Style3 - High relationship and low task. In the “participating” leadership style there is less direction and more collaboration between leader and group members. Style 4 - Low relationship and low task. In the “delegating” style, the leader delegates and is kept informed of progress.

16. 3 2 4 1 High Rel. Low task Low Rel. Low task High Task High Rel. High Task Low Rel. DELEGATING SELLING (LOW) (HIGH) TASK BEHAVIOR (Supportive Behavior) RELATIONSHIP BEHAVIOR (HIGH) FOLLOWER READINESS MODERATE HIGH LOW PARTICIPATING TELLING R4 R3 R2 R1

17. Situational Leadership Theory (cont.) Evaluation of the Theory Best used with new hires Can be valuable in training and development Based on fundamental truth about leadership: Competent people require the least specific direction Gives false impression that all situations are clear-cut Popular because of its commonsense approach but not a lot of empirical research to support its validity Situational Leadership is a useful way to get leaders to think about how leadership effectiveness may depend somewhat on being flexible with different subordinates, not on acting the same way toward them all.

18. Normative Decision Model The Normative Decision Model views leadership as a decision-making process. It specifies what a leader ought to do in a given situation. It is solely directed at determining the amount of subordinate input in the decision-making process. Normative refers to the idea that the leader should follow certain prescriptions indicated in the model. Two key factors in the model are decision quality and decision acceptance.

19. Normative Decision Model (cont.) Decision quality refers to the objective aspects of a decision that affect group or individual performance. When an effective alternative is chosen, decision quality is said to be high. Decision quality is not important when the consequences of choosing various alternatives are about the same, or when the consequences of the decision are unimportant. Decision acceptance refers to how committed group members are to implementing a decision effectively. If group members are responsible for implementing a decision, acceptance is crucial. At times decision acceptance is not an issue because very few employees are involved in implementation.

20. Normative Decision Model (cont.) The model identifies 5 levels of leader-subordinate (follower) participation: AI- leader decides completely alone AII- leader obtains information from subordinates, leader decides CI- Leader shares problem individually with subordinates, obtains opinions, leader decides. CII- leader shares problem collectively with subordinates, obtains opinions, leader decides. GII- leader shares problem with group, group decides. A decision tree is required to implement the model. The leader diagnoses situational variables by considering key questions.

21. Normative Decision Model (cont.) The Decision Tree- provides a branching set of questions to be answered either “yes” or “no” which lead to a set of decision processes that will protect quality and acceptance. Time and subordinate development may be factored in if of importance AFTER ensuring quality and acceptance by using the decision tree.

22. Normative Decision Model (cont.) Evaluation of the Model Pro : Supported by numerous empirical studies Prompts leaders to ask themselves intelligent, perceptive, focused questions Following step-by-step procedures increases decision-making effectiveness Con: Decision processes are treated as a single, discrete episode that occur at one point in time Being a good decision-maker is not enough to be a good leader Excludes “trial-balloon” approaches to decision-making (leader floating tentative decisions) More about management than about leadership, and therefore has little to do with inspiring and influencing others and bringing about important changes