Definition of leadership Leadership theories Contingency theory Definition History of Contingency theory Argument about Contingency theory of Leadership(Assumptions, Strengths and criticisms) Conclusion References Gary Yukl (2006) defines leadership as the process of influencing others to understand and agree about what needs to be done and how to do it, and the process of facilitating individual’s and collective efforts to accomplish shared objectives. The very act of defining leadership as a process suggests that leadership is not a characteristic or trait with which only a few, certain people are endowed with at birth. Defining leadership as a process means that leadership is a transactional event that happens between leaders and their followers. 1. Great Man” Theories: 2. Trait Theories: 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Contingency Theories: Situational Theories: Behavioral Theories: Participative Theories: Management Theories: Relationship Theories: Contingency theory is often called the “it all depends” theory, because when you ask a contingency theorist for an answer, the typical response is that it all depends. Contingency theory states that no leadership style is the best in all the circumstances. Leadership approach that is successful in one situation may not be helpful in others. Successful and enduring leaders will use various styles according to the nature of the situation and followers. Gill (2011) Contingency theories suggest that the best leaders are those who know how to adopt different styles of leadership in different situations .These leaders know that just because one approach of leadership worked well in the past, it does not mean that it will work again when the situation or task is not the same The history of contingency theories of leadership goes back over more than 100 years. Contingency theories of leadership were developed by various researchers, the popular contingency models are: Fielder Contingency Model or theory (1960s) Strategic contingency Theory by D.j Hickson (1971) Hershey and Blanchard’s Situation Theory (1969) House Path –Goal Theory This theory was one of the first situation leadership theories proposed by Fred Edward Fiedler in the 1960s. Fred E. Fiedler’s contingency theory of leadership effectiveness was based on studies of a wide group leaders, and concentrated on the relationship between leadership, situations and organizational performance. Leadership Style Determination The model states that there is no one best style of leadership. Instead, a leader's effectiveness is also contingent on the situation. A leaders effectiveness shall be the result of two factors – "leadership style" and "situational favorableness" (later called "situational control) Fiedler believed that leadership style is fixed and it can be measured using a scale he developed called the least preferred Co-worker (LPC) LPC (Least Preferred Coworker Scale) Un friendly Un pleasant Rejecting Tense Cold Boring Back biting Un cooperative Hostile Guarded Insincere Unkind Inconsiderate Untrustworthy Gloomy Quarrelsome 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Friendly Pleasant Accepting Relaxed Warm Interesting Loyal Cooperative Supportive Open Sincre Kind Considerate Trustworthy Cheerful Humorous • The scale asks you to think about the person who you‘ve least enjoyed working with. This can be a person who you have worked with in your job, or in education training. • You then rate how you feel about the person for each other, and add up your scores. • If your total score is high, you are likely to be a relationship oriented leader. (High LPCs) is Relationship motivated. If the score is low then you are likely that you are a Task Oriented Leader ( Low LPCs) According to Fiedler, a leader’s behavior is dependent upon the favorability of the leadership situation. Three factors work together to determine how favorable a situation is to a leader. These are: Leader-member relations - The degree to which the leaders is trusted and liked by the group members Task structure - The degree to which the group’s task has been described as structured or unstructured. Position power - The power of the leader by virtue of the organizational position and the degree to which the leader can exercise authority on group members in order to comply with and accept his direction and leadership. Ability to Reward and Punish Assumptions Leadership Assumptions Leadership style is fixed, Leaders prioritize between task-focus and people-focus. Situation Assumptions Relationships, power and task structure are the three key situational factors that drive leadership effectiveness. Strengths of Fielders Contingency Leadership theory Supported by a lot of empirical research and has been tested extensively. Looks at the impact of the situation on leaders The contingency model is well predictive; there is well defined method to evaluate both LPC and situations. It does not require that people be effective in all situations It provides a way to assess leader style that could be useful to an organization The theory reduces amount of the expectations from a leader, instead it focuses on matching a leader to task. It can be used to create leadership profiles in an organization thus it can be valuable instrument during organization or management change. The new organizational structure can then be matched to profiles of the leaders. It does not account for the position of the leader on how styles change. It does not explain how leaders can change their behavior or style depending upon the situation or features of the group. It fails to explain that the model is developed empirically; it’s unable to provide reasons leadership effectiveness in various situations. There is also an issue with the Least-Preferred Co-Worker Scale – if you fall near the middle of the scoring range, then it could be unclear which style of leader you are This model would have little or no flexibility that means it is rigid model. Its very hard to interpret the LPC Can be used to assess the effectiveness of an individual in a particular role and look at the reasons for one’s effectiveness or ineffectiveness. Can be used to predict whether a person who has worked well in one position in an organization will be equally effective in another position having different situational variables when compared to the existing position based on the contingencies that make one’s style effective. Can help in implementing changes in the roles and responsibilities that management might need to make to bring effectiveness to the role of the person leading the same. This model sometimes can give an inaccurate picture of your leadership style as it relies heavily on the LPC scale, which has been questioned for its face validity and workability. Further this model does not fully explain how organizations can use the results of this theory in situational engineering and hence we recommend taking a cautious approach and using your own judgment to analyze the situation from all angles is paramount. Fielder FE (1964) A theory of leadership Effectiveness inl. Berkowitz(Ed), advances in Experimental social psychology .New York Academic Press Gill R (2011) Theory and Practice of Leadership. London, SAGE publications Hersey, and Blanchard, K.H (1969).An introduction to Situational Leadership, Training and Development Journal, 23, 26-34. Northouse, P. (2001). Leadership: Theory and Practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
