Chapter 3 Contingency Approaches

Contingency Approaches
Chapter 3
Chapter Outcomes:
• Understand how leadership is often contingent on
people and situations.
• Apply Fiedler’s contingency model
• Apply Hersey and Blanchard’s situational theory
• Explain path-goal theory of leadership.
• Use the Vroom-Jago model
• Know how to use the power of situational variables
to substitute for or neutralize the need for
leadership
05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 2
Chapter Background:
• This chapter explores the relationship between leadership
effectiveness and the situations in which leadership
activities occur.
• This approach is because researchers have found that
leaders frequently behave situationally – that is they
adjust their leadership style depending on a variety of
factors in the situations they face.
• Understanding the contingency approach can help a
leader adapt his or her approach, although it is important
to recognize that leaders also develop their ability to
adapt through experience & practice.
The Contingency Approach
• The Contingency approaches are based on the inability to
find universal leader traits or behaviors that would always
determine effective leadership.
• Although leader behavior is still examined, the central idea
of this approach is the situation in which leadership
occurred.
• Contingency means that one thing depends on other
things.
• For a leader to be effective there must be fit between the
leader’s behavior and style and the conditions in the
situation
The Contingency Approaches
• In the previous chapter, researchers were
investigating traits or behaviors that could improve
performance and satisfaction in any or all situations.
• Contingency means that one thing depends or other
things, and for a leader to be effective there must be
an appropriate fit between the leader’s behavior
and style and the conditions in the situation.
• A leadership style that may work in one situation
might not work in another situation.

Ex. 3.1 Comparing the Universalistic and
Contingency Approaches to Leadership
Leadership Outcomes
Universalistic
Traits/behaviors (Performance, satisfaction,
Approach
etc.)
Leader
Style
Traits
Contingency
Behavior
Approach Outcomes
Position
(Performance, satisfaction,
Needs Task etc.)
Maturity Structure
Followers Training Systems Situation
Cohesion Env.
6
• The Contingency approaches seek to delineate
the characteristics of situations and followers
and examine the leadership styles that can be
used effectively.
• The fundamental assumption for the success
of the contingency approaches is that the
leaders can properly diagnose a situation and
muster the flexibility to behave according to
the appropriate style.
• Two basic leadership behaviors that can be
adjusted to address various behavior
contingencies are, task behavior and
relationship behavior.
• These two meta-categories (task and
relationship behavior) have been shown by
research to be applicable in a variety of
situations and time periods.

• Both Fiedler’s contingency model and Hersey
and Blanchard’s situational theory described
in the following slides use the two meta-
categories (task and behavior), but apply them
based on different sets of contingencies.

Fiedler’s Contingency Model:
• Fiedler’s Contingency Model: Is a model designed to
diagnose whether a leader is task oriented or
relationship oriented and match leader style to the
situation.
• The basic idea is simple: Match the leader’s style
with the situation most favorable for his or her
success.
• In other words, the model was designed to enable
leaders to diagnose both leadership style and
organizational situation.
• Leadership Style: A relationship-oriented
leader is concerned about people, he
establishes mutual trust and respect, and
listens to employee needs. A task-
oriented leader is primarily motivated by
task accomplishment, he provides clear
directions and sets performance
standards.
• Leadership Style: Leadership style was
measured with a questionnaire known as the
least preferred co-worker (LPC) scale.
• If a leader describes the least preferred worker
using positive concepts, he or she is considered
relationship oriented.
• If a leader describes the least preferred worker
using negative concepts, he or she is described
as task oriented.
Leadership Self-Assessment:
Leadership Style as Indicated by Least Preferred Co-Worker (LPC)
Scale
Instructions: Think of the person with whom you can work least well. It does not
have to be the person you like least well, but should be the person with whom you
had the most difficulty in getting a job done. Describe this person by circling a
number for each scale.
Pleasant 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Unpleasant
Friendly 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Unfriendly
Rejecting 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Accepting
Helpful 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Frustrating
Unenthusiastic 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Enthusiastic
Tense 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Relaxed
Distant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Close
Cold 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Warm
Cooperative 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Uncooperative
Supportive 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Hostile
Boring 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Interesting
Quarrelsome 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Harmonious
Self-Assured 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Hesitant
Efficient 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Inefficient
Gloomy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Cheerful
Open 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Guarded
©Prentice Hall 2006
3-6
Interpreting Your LPC Score
Your LPC score is the sum of the answers

to the 16 items. According to Fiedler’s
Contingency Theory, a score greater than
76 indicates a relationship orientation,
and a score of less than 62 indicates a task
orientation. A score of 58 to 63 places you
in the intermediate range, which indicates
socioindependent leadership orientation.
©Prentice Hall 2006

3-7
• Situation: There are three key elements in the
leadership situation:
1. Leader member relations: Refers to group atmosphere and
members’ attitudes towards acceptance of the leader. When
subordinates trust, respect and have confidence in the
leader, leader-member relationships are considered good.
2. Task structure: Refers to the extent to which tasks
performed by the group are defined, involve specific
procedures, and have clear explicit goals. When task
structure is high, the situation is considered favorable to the
leaders.

• Situation:
3. Position power: Is the extent to which the leader has
formal authority over subordinates. Position power is
high when the leader has the power to plan and
direct work of subordinates, evaluate it, and reward
or punish them. When position power is high, the
situation is considered favorable for the leader.
• Combining the three situational characteristics
yields a list of eight leadership situations which
are illustrated in exhibit 3.3
• Contingency theory: When Fiedler examined the
relationships among a) leadership style,
b)situational favorability and c)group task
performance, he found the pattern shown on the
top of Exhibit 3.3
• Task oriented leaders are more effective when the
situation is either highly favorable or highly
unfavorable. Relationship oriented leaders are more
effective in situations of moderate favorability.

• The task-oriented leader excels in the favorable situation
because everyone gets along, the task is clear and the
leader has power. All that is needed is for someone to
take charge and provide direction.
• Similarly if the situation is highly unfavorable to the
leader, a great deal of structure and task direction is
needed. A strong leader defines task structure and can
establish authority over subordinates. Because leader-
member relations are poor anyway, a strong task
orientation will make no difference to the leaders
popularity.
• The relationship-oriented leader performs better in
situations of intermediate favorability because human
skills are important in achieving high group
performance.
• A leader then needs to know two things in order to use
Fiedler’s contingency theory:
1. The leader should know whether he has a relationship, or
task-oriented style, and
2. Leader should diagnose the situation and determine
whether leader-member relations, task structure, and
position power are favorable or unfavorable
• An important contribution of Fiedler’s research
is that it goes beyond the notion of leadership
styles to show how styles fit the situation.
• New research has continued to improve
Fiedler’s model and it is still considered an
important contribution to leadership studies.
• However, its major impact may have been to stir
other researchers to consider situational factors
more seriously
Hersey & Blanchard’s Situational Theory:
• The situational theory developed by Hersey

and Blanchard’s is an extension of the
leadership grid, this theory focuses on the
characteristics of followers as an important
element of the situation, and consequently of
determining effective leaders behavior.
• The point of the theory is that subordinates
vary in readiness level

• A leader according to this theory can adopt one of 4

styles based on a combination of relationship
(concern for people) and task (concern for
production) behavior the appropriate style depends
on level of follower readiness.
• The 4 leader styles are:
1. Telling
2. Selling
3. Participating, and
4. delegating
• The telling style reflects a high concern for

tasks and a low concern for people and
relationships. This is a very directive style.
• The selling style is based on a high concern for
both relationships and tasks. The leader
explains the decisions and gives followers a
chance to ask questions and gain clarity about
work tasks.

• The participating style is characterized by high

relationship and low task behavior. Leader
shares ideas with followers, encourages
participation, and facilitates decision making.
• The delegating style reflects a low concern for
both tasks and relationships. Leader provides
little direction or support because responsibility
for decisions and their implementation is
turned over to followers.
• The bell-shaped curve in exhibit 3.4 is called a prescriptive
curve because it indicates when each leader style should be
used.
• Lower part of the exhibit shows the follower readiness level.
R1 is LOW readiness and R4 represents VERY HIGH readiness.
• The essence of the theory is for the leader to diagnose a
follower’s readiness and select a style that is appropriate for
the readiness level.
• Factors contributing to readiness include; degree of
education and skills, experience, self-confidence, and work
attitudes.

• Low Readiness Level: When one or more followers exhibit

very low levels of readiness, the leader has to be very
specific, “telling” followers exactly what do, how to do it,
and when.
• Moderate Readiness Level: A “selling” leadership style
works well when followers lack some education and
experience for the job, but demonstrate confidence,
ability, interest and willingness to learn. Leader gives
some direction, but also seeks input from, and clarifies
tasks for followers rather than merely instructing how
tasks be performed.
• High Readiness Level: A “participating” style can be

effective when followers have the necessary
education, skills, and experience, but they might be
insecure in their abilities and need some guidance
from the leader.
• Very High Readiness Level: The “delegating” style of
leadership can be effectively used when followers
have very high levels of education, experience, and
readiness to accept responsibility for their own task
behavior.
• In summary:
• The telling style works for followers who
demonstrate very low levels of readiness to take
responsibility for their own task behaviors.
• The selling and participatory styles are effective
for followers with moderate-to-high readiness,
and
• The delegating style is appropriate for followers
with very high readiness.
• This theory is easier to understand because

it focuses only on the characteristics of
followers, not those of the larger situation.
• The leader should evaluate subordinates
and adopt whichever style is needed. This
means that the leader in a group may
adopt different styles for different followers
depending on their levels of readiness.
• DISCUSSION QUESTION:
IN YOUR OPINION WHAT LEADER (READ
INSTRUCTOR) STYLE IS MOST
APPROPRIATE FOR A CLASS ON
LEADERHIP?
FOR OTHER COURSES, IS IT MORE
DEPENDENT ON COURSE CONTENT? OR
ON THE COURSE INSTRUCTOR?
Path-Goal Theory:
• Path-goal theory: A contingency approach to
leadership in which the leader’s responsibility is to
increase subordinates’ motivation by clarifying the
behaviors necessary for task accomplishment and
rewards.
• The leader increases follower motivation by either:
1. Clarifying the follower’s path to rewards that are
available, and
2. Increasing the rewards that the follower values and
desires.
Path-Goal Theory:
• Path clarification means that the leader works with the
subordinates to help them identify and learn the behaviors
that will lead to successful task accomplishment and
organizational rewards.
• Increasing rewards means that the leader talks with the
subordinates to learn which rewards are important to them
– that is whether they desire intrinsic rewards from work
itself or extrinsic rewards such as raises or promotions.
• The leader’s task is to increase personal payoffs to
subordinates for goal attainment and to make the paths to
these payoffs clear and easy to travel

Path-Goal Theory:
• This model is called a contingency theory
because it consists of three sets of contingencies:
1. Leader style
2. Followers and situation, and
3. Rewards to meet followers needs
• In the path-goal theory the leaders change their
behavior to match the situation. In the Fiedler
Theory the assumption was that new leaders
could take over as situations change.
Path-Goal Theory:
Leader Behavior: There are four classifications
of leader behaviors.
1. Supportive Leadership: shows concern for
subordinates’ well-being and personal needs.
Leader creates a team climate and treats
subordinates as equals.
2. Directive Leadership: tells subordinates
exactly what they are supposed to do.

Path-Goal Theory:
3. Participative leadership consults with subordinates about decisions.

Leadership behavior includes; asking for opinions and suggestions,
encouraging participation in decision making, and meeting with
subordinates in their workplaces.
This is similar to the selling or participating style in the Hersey and
Blanchard model.
4. Achievement-oriented leadership sets clear and challenging goals for

subordinates.
Leadership behavior : stresses high quality performance and improvement
over current performance. Achievement-oriented leaders also show
confidence in subordinates and assist them in learning to achieve high goals.

Path-Goal Theory:
• The four types of leader behavior are not considered
ingrained personality traits as in the earlier trait
theories, rather they reflect types of behavior that
every leader is able to adopt, depending on the
situation.
Situational Contingencies: The two important
situational contingences in the path-goal theory are:
1. The personal characteristics of group members, and
2. The work environment.

Path-Goal Theory:
• Personal characteristics of followers are similar to Hersey and
Blanchard’s readiness level and include skills abilities etc.
• The work environment contingencies include the degree of
task structure, the nature of the formal authority system, and
the work group itself.
– The task structure is similar to the concept described in Fiedler’s
theory.
– The formal authority system includes the amount of legitimate
power used by leaders and the extent to which policies and rules
constrain employees behavior
– Work-group characteristics include the educational level of
subordinates and the quality of relationships among them

Path-Goal Theory:
• Use of Rewards: As discussed, in this theory it is the
responsibility of the leader to clarify the path to rewards
for followers or to increase the amount of rewards to
enhance satisfaction and job-performance.
• In some situations, the leader works with subordinates to
help them acquire the skills and confidence needed to
perform tasks and achieve rewards already available
• In other situations, the leader may develop new rewards to
meet specific needs of subordinates.
• Exhibit 3.6, illustrates four examples of how leadership
behavior is tailored to the situation.
Path-Goal Theory:
• In all four cases, the outcome of fitting
leadership behavior to the situation produces
greater employee effort by either clarifying
how subordinates can receive rewards or by
changing the rewards to fit the needs.

The Vroom-Jago Contingency Model:
• The Vroom-Jago contingency model focuses on varying
degrees of participative leadership and how each level of
participation influences quality and accountability of
decisions.
• The model focuses specifically on varying degrees of
participative leadership, and how each level of
participation influences quality and accountability of
decisions.
• A number of situational factors shape the likelihood that
either a participative or autocratic approach produce the
best outcome.
• This model starts with the idea that a leader
faces a problem that requires a solution.
• Decision to solve the problem might be made
by the leader alone, or through inclusion of a
number of followers.
• The Vroom-Jago Model tells the leader precisely
the correct amount of participation by
subordinates to use in making a particular
decision.
• The model has three major components:

1. Leader participation styles
2. A set of diagnostic questions with which to
analyze a situation, and
3. A series of decision rules.

• 1. Leader participation Style:

The model employs five levels of subordinate
Participation, see Exhibit: 3.7
The five styles fall along a continuum and the leader
should select one depending on the situation.

2. Diagnostic Questions:
• The leader can apply the appropriate degree
of participation by answering the seven
diagnostic questions:
1) Decision significance: How significant is this
decision for the project or organization?
2) Importance of Commitment: How important is
subordinate commitment to carrying out the
decision?

3) Leader expertise: What is the level of the
leader’s expertise in relation to the problem?
4) Likelihood of commitment: If the leader were to
make the decision alone, would subordinates
have high or low commitment to the decision?
5) Group support for goals: what is the degree of
subordinate support for the team’s or
organization’s objectives at stake in this decision?

6) Goal expertise: What is the level of group

members knowledge and expertise in relation
to the problem?
7) Team competence: How skilled and
committed are group members to working
together as a team to solve problems?

3. Selecting a Decision Style:

• Further development of the Vroom-Jagoo
model added concerns for time constraints and
concern for follower development as explicit
criteria for determining the level of
participation.
• That is the leader considers the relative
importance of time versus follower
development in selecting a decision style.
• We thus have two decision matrixes,

a. A time based model to be used if time is critical,
&
b. A development based model, to be used if time
and efficiency are less important criteria than
the opportunity to develop the thinking and
decision making skills of followers.

Substitutes for Leadership:
• The final contingency approach suggests that
situational variables can be so powerful that
they actually substitute for or neutralize the
need for leadership.
• This approach outlines those organizational
settings in which task-oriented and people-
oriented leadership styles are unimportant or
unnecessary.

Ex. 3.10 Substitutes and Neutralizers for
Leadership
Variable Task-Oriented People-Oriented
Leadership Leadership
Organizational Group cohesiveness Substitutes for Substitutes for

variables Formalization Substitutes for No effect on
Inflexibility Neutralizes No effect on
Low positional power Neutralizes Neutralizes
Physical separation Neutralizes Neutralizes
Task Highly struct. task Substitutes for No effect on
characteristics Automatic feedback Substitutes for No effect on
Intrinsic satisfaction No effect on Substitutes for
Follower Professionalism Substitutes for Substitutes for

characteristics Training/experience Substitutes for No effect on
Low value of rewards Neutralizes Neutralizes
56
Substitutes for Leadership:
• A substitute for leadership makes the leadership
style unnecessary or redundant.
• A neutralizer counteracts the leadership style
and prevents the leader from displaying certain
behaviors.
• The value of the situations described in Exhibit
3.10 is that they help leaders avoid leadership
overkill. Leaders should adopt a style with which
to complement the organizational situation.

Chapter 3 Contingency Approaches

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 3 Contingency Approaches

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 3 Contingency Approaches

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Contingency Approaches

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 5

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 8

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 10

Your LPC score is the sum of the answers

©Prentice Hall 2006

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 16

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 19

• The situational theory developed by Hersey

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 23

• A leader according to this theory can adopt one of 4

• The telling style reflects a high concern for

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 26

• The participating style is characterized by high

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 28

• Low Readiness Level: When one or more followers exhibit

• High Readiness Level: A “participating” style can be

• This theory is easier to understand because

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 36

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 38

3. Participative leadership consults with subordinates about decisions.

4. Achievement-oriented leadership sets clear and challenging goals for

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 39

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 40

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 41

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 44

• The model has three major components:

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 47

• 1. Leader participation Style:

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 48

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 50

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 51

6) Goal expertise: What is the level of group

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 52

3. Selecting a Decision Style:

• We thus have two decision matrixes,

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 54

05/03/2023 Leadership in Organizations 55

Organizational Group cohesiveness Substitutes for Substitutes for

Follower Professionalism Substitutes for Substitutes for

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.