Contingency Theory
Approach
AGED 3153
Leadership should be more participative
than directive, more enabling than
performing.
~Mary D. Poole
Overview

Contingency theory approach perspective

Leadership styles

Situational variables

Research findings

How does the contingency theory
approach work?
Based on…

Fiedler & colleagues

Studied styles of leaders who worked in
different contexts.



Primarily military organizations
Styles of good and bad leaders
Assessed:



Styles
Situations
Effectiveness
Contingency Theory Approach

Why “contingency?”

based on how well the leader’s style fits the
context


To understand performance you must understand the
situations in which one leads.
Concerned with


Contingency Theory Approach
 leader-match
theory
Effective leadership

contingent on matching a leader’s style to the
right setting
Leadership Styles

Leadership styles are described as:

Task motivated


Relationship motivated


goal achievement
developing close interpersonal relationships
Least Preferred Co-Worker or LPC


Used to measure leader style
Measures your style by having you describe a
coworker with whom you had difficulty
completing a job.

Not necessarily someone you don’t like
Situational Variables

Determine favorableness of various
situations in organizations.

Three situation factors


group atmosphere
degree of confidence & loyalty
attraction of followers for leader

degree to which task requirements are clear & defined





designates the amount of authority a leader has to
reward or punish followers
Leader-Member Relations
(LMR)


Positive atmosphere
Subordinates trust, like
and get along with
leader


Unfriendly atmosphere
Friction exists within
group
Task Structure
(TS)
Structured

Gives leader more
control
Requirements clearly
stated & known
 Few alternatives
 Clearly demonstrated
task
 Limited number of
correct solutions
Unstructured

No clear rules
 Many alternatives
 Correctness cannot be
verified
 No best way


Example:
Lessens the leaders
control


Example:
Position Power
(PP)
Includes legitimate power

Strong

Hire or fire or give
raises in rank and pay

Weak

Limited ability to
reward or punish
Contingency Model
Situational Variables
High
Low
High
Low
Structure Structure Structure Structure
Strong Weak Strong Weak Strong Weak Strong
Power Power Power Power Power Power Power
1
2
3
Low LPCs
Middle LPCs
4
5
6
High LPCs
Preferred Leadership Style
7
Weak
Power
8
Low
LPCs
Situational Variables

Favorable


Situations going
smoothly
Situations with some
degree of certainty; not
completely in or out of
leader’s control
Unfavorable

Situations out of control
Most favorable


Moderately favorable





Least favorable




Good LMR
Defined TS
Strong PP
Poor LMR
Defined TS
Weak PP
Moderately favorable

Falls between 2
extremes
Eight categories


Task orientation
LMR - TS - PP


Relationship orientation
LMR – TS – PP

good-structured-strong

good–unstructured–weak

good–structured-weak

poor–structured–strong

good–unstructured–strong

poor–structured-weak

poor–unstructured-strong

poor–unstructured-weak
Interpretation of ineffective leaders
Fiedler (1995)
Leader working in the wrong
situation experiences stress &
anxiety
Leader reverts to less mature
ways of coping
Results in poor decision making
Negative work outcomes
How does the contingency
theory work?
What are strengths of
the contingency theory?
What are weaknesses of
the contingency theory?
How do we use the
contingency theory?