COMST 313 Exam 2: Contingency Theory

To measure leadership style: Uses Least Preferred Coworker scale (LPC)

-High LPC score= relationship-motivated -Middle LPC score= socio-independent -Low LPC score= task-motivated

Contingency Theory Researcher

Fiedler

Leaders with high LPC scores (relationship-motivated) are most effective when

Moderately favorable situations

Leaders with low LPC scores (task-oriented) are most effective when

Very favorable and very unfavorable situations *Why is this the case? Unknown as the black box mystery

Contingency Theory Characteristics

-Contingent=dependent ("Plan B is contingent on plan A not working") -Success of leader is contingent of the leader style/situations -2 components: Situation and Leadership style -Uses empirically backed generalizations on which styles best/worst for context -Grounded in a great deal of research

Weaknesses of Contingency Theory

-Fails to explain fully *WHY* people with certain leadership styles are *MORE* effective in some situations that others -LPC scale- questioned because it does *NOT* seem valid on the surface (measures a person's leadership style by asking the person to characterize another person's behavior) -Fails to explain adequately what organizations should do when there is a mismatch between the leader & the situation in the workplace -Advocates "situational engineering" (change situation to fit leader), but gives no clue on *HOW* to do

Favorable situations in Continency Theory

-Most favorable: good leader follower relations, clear structured tasks, and strong leader power -Least favorable: poor leader follower relations, unstructured tasks, and weak leader power If leader has strong power *could* become dictator

Strengths of Contingency Theory

-Supported by a great deal of empirical research 2-Broadened our understanding of leadership by forcing us to consider the impact of situations on leaders -Predictive and therefore provides useful information about the type of leadership that is most likely to be effective in certain contexts -Does not require that people be effective in all situations. (leaders should not expect to be able to lead in every situation) -Provides data on leaders' styles that could be useful to organizations in developing leadership profiles and determining where leaders can best serve

To measure situation 3 factors are assessed:

1. Leader-member relations (good/poor) *group atmosphere, degree of confidence, loyalty, attraction that followers feel for their leader 2. Task structure (high/low) *degree to which the requirements of a task are clear & spelled out 3. Position power (strong/weak) *amount of authority a leader has to reward/punish followers

Research history behind Contingency Theory

Fiedler studied many different leaders who worked in different contexts (primarily military orgs) and he assessed leaders' styles, the situations in which they worked, and whether they were effective After analyzing hundreds of leaders, both good and bad, Fiedler and colleagues made grounded generalizations about which styles of leadership were best and which were worst for a given organizational context

Contingency Theory

Leader- match theory: Tries to match leaders to appropriate situations. Leader effectiveness is contingent on fit (leaders style & context) Leaders will *NOT* be effective in all situations, that's why you want leader-follower match