1e. Chapter 7 Contingency Theories of Leadership Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. PowerPoint Presentation by Charlie Cook Chapter Objectives After completing this chapter, you should be able to: Describe and distinguish among the major contingency theories. Understand two contemporary theories of leadership that evolved from the contingency theories. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–2 Contingency Defined • Contingency Is the effectiveness of a particular strategy, structure, or managerial style depends on the presence of absence of other factors or forces. Assumes that there is no one best strategy, structure, or style. Instead, these factors must be gauged relative to the context, circumstances, or other factors. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–3 Contingency (cont’d) • Contingency Theories of Leadership Propose that appropriate leader behavior depends on certain factors, especially the situation and the followers. Try to specify factors, or contingency variables, that help to determine appropriate leader behavior: Government action and policies. Competitive strategies. Work and organizational design changes. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–4 Research Contributions • Foundational Studies The Boys’ Club studies University of Michigan studies • Major Contributors Joan Woodward Burns and Stalker Lawrence and Lorsch Ohio State studies Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–5 Contingency Theories of Leadership • Least Preferred Coworker Theory Proposes that the fit between the leader’s orientation and the favorableness of the situation determine the team’s effectiveness in accomplishing a task. Assumes that a leader’s style is unchangeably either task-oriented or relationship-oriented. Task-oriented leaders focus on accomplishing goals and getting work done. Relationship-oriented leaders focus on developing good, comfortable interpersonal relationships. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–6 Contingency Theories of Leadership (cont’d) • Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) Scale A projective technique in which a leader is asked to think about the person with whom he or she can work least well (the least preferred coworker, or LPC). Classifies a leader’s orientation: Leaders with high (positive) LPC scores are classified as relationship-oriented. Leaders with low (negative) LPC scores are classified as task-oriented, leaders. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–7 Contingency Theories of Leadership (cont’d) • Least Preferred Coworker Theory (cont’d) Posits that situational factors determine which leadership orientation will be most effective: Task structure refers to the rules, regulations, and procedures in place for getting the work done. power is the leader’s legitimate authority to evaluate and reward performance, punish errors, and demote group members. Position Leader–member relations is an indication of the state of the leader’s relationship with the followers. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–8 Least Preferred Coworker Theory (cont’d) Favorable Situation Unfavorable Situation • Highly structure task • Unstructured task • Strong position power • Weak position power • Good leader-member relations • Poor leader-member relations Situational Favorableness Task-Oriented Leader (Low LPC) Relationship-Oriented Leader (High LPC) Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. Task-Oriented Leader (Low LPC) 7–9 Contingency Theories of Leadership (cont’d) • Path-Goal Theory (House) Proposes that the main task of the leader is to smooth the follower’s path to the goal, using the appropriate leadership behavior style to help followers clarify their paths to both work and personal goals. The theory draws on the expectancy theory of motivation in considering the linkages between effort and performance and between performance and valued rewards to be critical to motivation. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–10 Path-Goal Theory • Leadership Styles Directive style: the leader communicates expectations, schedule work, and maintain performance standards. Supportive style: the leader expresses concern for followers and create a supportive climate. Participative style: the leader wants to share decision-making authority with followers. Achievement-oriented style: the leader sets challenging goals, encourages high performance, and show confidence in followers. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–11 The Path-Goal Model Source: House, R. J. (1971). “A Path-Goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness,” Administrative Science Quarterly 16, pp. 321–338; House, R. J., and Mitchell, T. R. (1974). “Path-Goal Theory of Leadership,” Journal of Contemporary Business 3, pp. 81–97. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. Figure 7.2 7–12 Contingency Theories of Leadership (cont’d) • Performance-Maintenance Theory Holds that effective leaders exhibit two behavioral styles: Performance-oriented leadership behavior Maintenance-oriented leadership behavior The leadership styles of lower- and middle-level managers are more important in influencing subordinates’ performance in Japan than in the U.S. Demonstrated that U.S. contingencies may have limited applicability in other cultures. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–13 Contingency Theories of Leadership (cont’d) • Normative Decision Theory (Vroom-Yetton-Jago) Helps leaders identify appropriate decision-making strategies in determining if, when, and how employees should participate in the decision-making process for a given situation. Recognizes the benefits of authoritative, democratic, and consultive styles of leadership behavior. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–14 Normative Decision Theory • Forms of decision making Decide. The leader makes the decision alone Consult (individually). The leader presents problem for individual input, and makes the decision. Consult (group). The leader presents problem to all group members, gets input, and makes the decision. Facilitate. The leader presents problem to group and then acts as a facilitator to get concurrence. Delegate. The leader permits the group to make the decision within prescribed limits. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–15 Reflective Question ▼ • Think of an example from business or government in which the use of the right decision approach worked well or the use of the wrong one proved disastrous. Analyze your example from a contingency perspective. What role did situational factors play in the success or failure? Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–16 Contingency Theories of Leadership (cont’d) • Situational Leadership® Model Suggests that effective leaders adjust their behavior to the readiness of followers—the extent to which followers demonstrate ability and willingness to accomplish a specific task. Ability: the extent to which the follower possesses the skills, experience, and knowledge needed to perform the task without the leader’s intervention. Willingness: the follower’s commitment, confidence, and self-motivation to perform. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–17 Situational Leadership® Model • Situational Leadership Styles Telling style: High concern with the task and strong initiating structure behavior, coupled with low concern with relationships and little consideration behavior. Selling style: High concern with both the task and relationships. Participating style: High concern with relationships and low concern with the task. Delegating style: Low concern with the task and relationships, because the followers accept responsibility. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–18 Reflective Question ▼ • The Hersey, Blanchard, and Johnson (2001) model of Situational Leadership is a widely used prescriptive approach to leadership. Read Chapter 8, “Situational Leadership,” in their book Management of Organizational Behavior: Leading Human Resources, 8th ed., 2001. What are the strengths and weaknesses of this model? Why do you think it is so popular among consultants and management trainers? Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–19 Contingency Theories of Leadership (cont’d) • Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX) Recognizes that leaders may form different relationships with different followers. Leaders form two groups of followers—in-groups and out-groups. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–20 Contingency Theories of Leadership (cont’d) • In-Group Members Have characteristics similar to those of the leader. Are given more responsibilities, rewards, and attention. Work within the leader’s inner circle. Are more satisfied, have lower turnover, and have higher organizational commitment. Are more likely to engage in organizational citizenship behavior. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–21 Contingency Theories of Leadership (cont’d) • Out-Group Members Work outside the leader’s inner circle. Receive less attention and fewer rewards. Are judged more harshly. Are managed by formal rules and policies. Are more likely to retaliate against the organization. Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–22 Contingency Theories of Leadership (cont’d) • Substitutes for Leadership Theory Situational factors can neutralize, negate, or even supplement any behavior by the leader. High task satisfaction Performance High feedback employee skill levels Team cohesiveness Formal organizational controls Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–23 View CD • Go to the CD-ROM and click on the Situational Approach button in each of the case studies. To what extent, if at all, do the case studies support a contingency approach to leadership? How do the leaders involved change their leadership styles based on the development level of their followers and the tasks at hand? Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–24 Leader-Member Exchange Theory • In Group Exhibit characteristics similar to leader Viewed as trusted collaborators Receive more responsibility, rewards, attention, votes of confidence Engage in more organizational citizenship behavior Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. • Out Group Work outside the leader’s inner circle Managed by formal rules and policies Receive fewer rewards, less attention, harsher judgments Viewed as hired hands More likely to retaliate against the organization 7–25 Substitutes for Leadership? • Satisfying task • Experience and ability • Team cohesiveness • Formal controls • Others? Copyright © 2005 South-Western. All rights reserved. 7–26