Contingency Theory-study by Arab academy.pptx

Contingency Theory

1. Contingency Theory leader–match theory (Fiedler & Chemers , 1974)

2. DESCRIPTION Contingency theory suggests that a leader’s effectiveness depends on how well the leader’s style fits the context. Fiedler developed contingency theory by studying the styles of many different leaders who worked in different contexts, primarily military organizations. Contingency theory is concerned with styles and situations. It provides the framework for effectively matching the leader and the situation.

3. Leadership Styles Task-motivated leaders are concerned primarily with reaching a goal. Relationship-motivated leaders are concerned with developing close interpersonal relationships. Fiedler developed the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) scale . Leaders who score high on this scale are described as relationship motivated, and those who score low on the scale are identified as task motivated.

4. Situational Variables Contingency theory suggests that situations can be characterized in terms of three factors: leader–member relations. task structure. position power

5. Core of the theory Based on research findings, contingency theory posits that certain styles are effective in certain situations. People who are task motivated (low LPC score) will be effective in both very favorable and very unfavorable situation that is, in situations that are going along very smoothly or situations that are out of control. People who are relationship motivated (high LPC score) are effective in moderately favorable situation that is, in situations in which there is some degree of certainty but things are neither completely under their control nor completely out of their control.

6. Fiedler explanation A leader whose LPC style does not match a particular situation experiences stress and anxiety. Under stress, the leader reverts to less mature ways of coping that were learned in early development. The leader’s less mature coping style results in poor decision making, which results in negative work outcomes.

7. STRENGTHS It is supported by a great deal of empirical research, many researchers have tested it and found it to be a valid and reliable approach to explaining how effective leadership can be achieved. Contingency theory has broadened our understanding of leadership by forcing us to consider the impact of situations on leaders. Before contingency theory was developed, leadership theories focused on whether there was a single, best type of leadership (e.g., trait approach).

8. Contingency theory is predictive and therefore provides useful information about the type of leadership that is most likely to be effective in certain contexts. This theory does not require that people be effective in all situations. So often leaders in organizations feel the need to be all things to all people, which may be asking too much of them. Contingency theory argues that leaders should not expect to be able to lead in every situation. Contingency theory provides data on leaders’ styles that could be useful to organizations in developing leadership profiles.

9. CRITICISMS Contingency theory has been criticized because it fails to explain fully why people with certain leadership styles are more effective in some situations than in others. Fiedler (1993) called this a “black box problem”. The LPC scale has been questioned because it does not seem valid on the surface, it does not correlate well with other standard leadership measures (Fiedler, 1993), and it is not easy to complete correctly. A final criticism of contingency theory is that it fails to explain adequately what organizations should do when there is a mismatch between the leader and the situation in the workplace.

10. APPLICATION It can be used to answer a host of questions about the leadership of individuals in various types of organizations. For example, it can be used to explain why a person is ineffective in a particular position even though the person is a conscientious, loyal, and hardworking manager. The theory can be used to predict whether a person who has worked well in one position in an organization will be equally effective if moved into a quite different position in the same company. Contingency theory can point to changes that upper management might like to make in a lower-level position in order to guarantee a good fit between an existing manager and a particular work context.