Q Chapter 12 Contingency Theories of Leadership “It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data.” ~Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Introduction Leadership is contingent upon the interplay of all three aspects of the leader-follower-situation model The four theories reviewed in this chapter share several similarities: They are theories rather than someone’s 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 McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-3 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese The Normative Decision Model The level of input subordinates have in the decision-making process can and does vary substantially depending on the issue at hand Vroom and Yetton (1973) maintained that leaders could often improve group performance by using an optimal amount of participation in the decisionmaking process The normative decision model is directed solely at determining how much input subordinates should have in the decision-making process McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-4 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese Decision Quality and Acceptance Vroom and Yetton believed decision quality and decision acceptance were the two most important criteria for judging the adequacy of a decision Decision quality means that if the decision has a rational or objectively determinable “better or worse” alternative, the leader should select the better alternative Decision acceptance implies that followers accept the decision as if it were their own and not merely comply with the decision McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-5 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese The Decision Tree Figure 12-1 McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-6 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese Factors From the Normative Decision Model and the Interactional Framework Figure 12-2 McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-7 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese Issues with the Normative Decision Model Questions could or should be placed in another part of the model There are no questions about the leader’s personality, motivations, values, or attitudes The Leader-Follower-Situation framework organizes concepts in a familiar conceptual structure There is no evidence to show that leaders using the model are more effective overall than leaders not using the model The model views decision making as taking place at a single point in time, assumes that leaders are equally skilled at using all five decision procedures, and assumes that some of the prescriptions of the model may not be the best for the given situation McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-8 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese The Situational Leadership Model – Leader Behavior Task behaviors are defined as the extent to which the leader spells out the responsibilities of an individual group Relationship behaviors can be defined as how much time the leader engages in two-way communication Relationship behaviors include: Listening Encouraging Facilitating Clarifying Explaining why the task is important Giving support The relative effectiveness of these two behavior dimensions often depends on the situation McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-9 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese Situational Leadership Figure 12-3 McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-10 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese Factors from the Situational Leadership Model and the Interactional Framework Figure 12-4 McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-13 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese The Contingency Model 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 McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-14 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese The Least-Preferred Coworker 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) McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-15 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese Situational Favorability Situational favorability is the amount of control the leader has over the followers The more control a leader has over followers, the more favorable the situation is, at least from a leader’s perspective Three sub-elements in situation favorability: Leader-member relations Task structure Position power McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-16 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese Contingency Model Octant Structure for Determining Situational Favorability Figure 12-6 McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-17 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese Prescriptions of the Model Leaders will try to satisfy their primary motivation when faced with unfavorable or moderately favorable situations Leaders will behave according to their secondary motivational state only when faced with highly favorable situations Instead of trying to change the leader, training would be more effective if it showed leaders how to recognize and change key situational characteristics to better fit their personal motivational hierarchies and behavioral tendencies McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-18 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese Factors from Fiedler’s Contingency Theory and the Interactional Framework Figure 12-8 McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-19 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese 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 McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-20 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese The Followers Path-goal theory contains two groups of follower variables: Satisfaction of followers Followers perception of their own abilities Followers will actively support a leader as long as they view the leader’s actions as a means for increasing their own level of satisfaction Followers who believe they are perfectly capable of performing a task are not as apt to be motivated by, or as willing to accept, a directive leader as they would a leader who exhibits participative behavior McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-21 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese The Four Leader Behaviors of the Path-Goal Theory Directive leadership Supportive leadership Participative leadership Achievement-oriented leadership McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-22 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese The Situation Path-goal theory considers three situational factors that impact or moderate the effects of leader behavior on follower attitudes and behaviors: Task The formal authority system The primary work group These variables can often affect the impact of various leader behaviors Path-goal theory maintains that follower and situational variables can impact each other McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-23 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese Examples of Applying Path-Goal Theory Figure 12-10 McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-24 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese Concluding Thoughts about the Path-Goal Theory The path-goal theory assumes that the only way to increase performance is to increase follower’s motivation levels The theory ignores the roles leaders play in selecting talented followers, building their skill levels through training, and redesigning their work Path-goal theory provides a conceptual framework to guide researchers in identifying potentially relevant situational moderator variables Path-goal theory illustrates that as models become more complicated, they may be more useful to researchers and less appealing to practitioners McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-25 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese Factors from Path-Goal Theory and the Interactional Framework Figure 12-11 McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-26 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese Summary The four contingency theories of leadership: Normative decision model Situational leadership model Contingency model Path-goal theory All four theories implicitly assume that leaders can accurately assess key follower and situational factors None of the models take into account how levels of stress, organizational culture and climate, working conditions, technology, economic conditions, or type of organizational design affect the leadership process McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-27 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese ... 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. .. that some of the prescriptions of the model may not be the best for the given situation McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12-8 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights rese The Situational Leadership. .. three aspects of the leader-follower-situation model The four theories reviewed in this chapter share several similarities: They are theories rather than someone’s personal opinions They implicitly