Topic 12

Contingency Theories & Situational Leadership

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 Contingency Approach

(cont.)

The effects of leadership vary from situation to situation. Aspects of the situation that enhance or nullify the effects of a leaders traits or behavior are called situational moderator variables.

The Contingency Approach

Normative Decision Model
(Vroom, Yetton / Vroom,Yetton, and Jago)

(cont.)

The Situational Leadership Theory

(Hershey and Blanchard)

Fiedlers Contingency Theory The Path-Goal Theory

(House, et.al.)

Contigency Approach
The four theories share several similarities:

(cont)

They are theories rather than someones personal opinions. They implicitly assume that leaders are able to accurately diagnose or assess key aspects of the followers and the leadership situation. With the exception of the contingency model, leaders are assumed to be able to act in a flexible manner. A correct match between situational and follower characteristics and leaders behavior is assumed to have a positive effect on group or organizational outcomes.

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.

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.

Normative Decision Model (cont.)

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.

Normative Decision Model (cont.)

The model identifies 5 levels of leadersubordinate (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.

Normative Decision Model (cont.)

A decision tree is required to implement the model. The leader diagnoses situational variables by considering key questions.

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.

The Decision Tree

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

Evaluation of the Model (cont.) :

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 decisionmaking (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

Situational Leadership Theory

The Situational Leadership Theory explains how to match leadership style with follower readiness. The key contingency factors are group member characteristics.

Situational Leadership Theory (cont.)

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)

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.

The Situational Leadership Theory developed by Hershey and Blanchard, answers the following questions:
Is there an optimum way for leaders to adjust their behavior with different followers and thereby increase their likelihood of success?

If so, then what factors should the leader base his behavior on?

The Answer:
Answer is that 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.

Components of Follower Maturity

Job maturity- the amount of task-relevant knowledge, experience, skill, and ability that the follower possesses. (i.e. ability, KSAs) Psychological maturity- the followers self confidence, commitment, motivation, and selfrespect relative to the task at hand (i.e. willingness)

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.

TM 13-6

SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP THEORY

(HIGH)

(Supportive Behavior) RELATIONSHIP BEHAVIOR

High Rel. High Task Low task High Rel. Low Rel. High Task Low task Low Rel.

1
TASK BEHAVIOR

(LOW)
HIGH R4

(HIGH)
LO W R1

FOLLOWER READINESS
MODERATE R3 R2

Hersey and Blanchards Situational Leadership Model

The Situational Leadership Model Caveat

Any given follower could be low on readiness to perform one task but high on readiness to perform a different task.

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

Evaluation (cont)
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.

The Contingency Model

Fiedlers 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 wellknown contingency theory.

 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 leaders 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.

Least Preferred Coworker Scale

To measure leadership style the theory uses an instrument called the Least-Preferred-Coworker Scale (LPC) LPC Handout

LPC Scale
The scale instructs a leader to think of the single individual with whom he has had the greatest difficulty working and then to describe that individual in terms of a series of bipolar activities. Based on their LPC scores, leaders are categorized into two groups:
Low-LPC leaders (primarily motivated by task) High-LPC leaders (primarily motivated by relationships)

Scale Interpretation
One who describes the least preferred coworker in favorable terms is relationship-motivated. In contrast, a person who describes his or her least preferred coworker unfavorably tends to be taskmotivated.

Motivational Hierarchies For Low- and High-LPC Leaders

People

Task

Task Low-LPC leader motivational hierarchy

People High-LPC leader motivational hierarchy

Situation Dimensions:

The situation is assessed to determine the degree of situational control, or favorability, for the leader using three dimensions:
1. Leader-member relations measures how well the group and the leader get along. 2. Task structure measures how clearly the procedures, goals, and evaluation of the job are defined. 3. Position power measures how much authority the leader possesses.

Leader-member relations contribute as much to the favorability of the leadership situation as do task structure and position power combined.

Contingency Model Octant Structure For Determining Situational Favorability

High
Overall situation favorability

Low

Leader-member relations
Structured

Good Unstructured High 3 Low 4 Structured High 5

Poor Unstructured High 7 Low 8

Task structure
High Low 2 Low 6

Position power
1

Octant

Fiedlers Contingency Model

LeaderMember Relations GOOD LO W S III W IV HIGH S V W VI S VII POOR LOW W VIII

Task HIGH Structure Position Power S W

I 1 II Kinds of Leadership Very Situations Favorable

Very Unfavorable

Relationship-oriented managers most effective in IV, V, VI, V Task-oriented managers most effective in I, II, III or VIII.

Prescriptions of the Model

The major proposition in contingency theory is the leader-match concept-leadership effectiveness depends on matching leaders to situations where they can exercise more control. Fiedlers 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.

Path-Goal Theory
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).

The Path-Goal Theory

The underlying mechanism of the path-goal theory deals with expectancy, a cognitive approach to understanding motivation where people calculate:
Effort-to-performance probabilities Performance-to-outcome probabilities Assigned valences or values to outcome

Path-goal theory uses the same basic assumptions as expectancy theory (to be discussed in topic 19Motivation)

Leader Behaviors
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 the Path-Goal Theory Directive leadership Supportive leadership Participative leadership Achievement-oriented leadership

Leaders / Path-Goal
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.

The Followers
Path-goal theory contains follower variables of overall satisfaction,locus of control,and perceived ability. Followers will actively support a leader as long as they view the leaders actions as a means for increasing their own level of satisfaction. Followers who believe they are capable of performing a task are not as motivated by, or willing to accept, a directive leader as they would a leader with participative behavior.

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.