1. Contingency Theories of Leadership

2. Theory Similarities & Assumptions
Empirically tested
Leaders can accurately diagnosis characteristics of followers & situation
Leader behavior is flexible
A correct match between leader and situational and follower characteristics has a positive impact.

3. Normative Decision Model
The Normative Decision Model, developed by Vroom and Yetton, is solely directed at determining how much input subordinates should have in the decisions making process.
Vroom & Yetton believed decision makers could improve group performance by using an optimal amount of participation in the decision-making process. The optimal amount of participation is a function of a number of factors:

4. Factors Influencing Decision Approach
Quality requirement
Information available
Problem structure
Importance of subordinate acceptance
Likelihood of subordinate acceptance if autocratic decision
Goal congruence between subordinates & company, and
Likelihood of conflict
The two most important characteristics to good decision making, according to V&Y are Decision quality & decision acceptance.
Decision quality refers to a rational or observably determinable better or worse alternative. In other words, if the decision could result in a better or worse outcome for the group or company, the leader should select the better decision. Examples of objectively determinable outcomes include profit, customer service, delivery times, costs, etc.
Decision acceptance refers to the degree to which followers will accept the decision as if it were their own. There are many cases when acceptance of a decision outcome is critical to success, especially when it is the followers who bear responsibility for implementation.
Not listed in the model directly is also time.

5. Decision-making processes
To determine which situational and follower factors affect the level of participation and group performance, Vroom and Yetton investigated the decision-making processes leaders use in group settings. They discovered a continuum of decision-making.

6. Leader Participation Style
Autocratic Processes
AI: The leaders solves the problem or makes the decision using available information
AII: Leader obtains necessary information from followers, then decides on solution. May or may not tell followers purpose of questions or information about problem itself.
Note: in the autocratic process, followers do not play a role in problem definition or in generating or evaluating alternative solutions.

7. Autocratic DM Style
An autocratic decision making style is appropriate when:
The leader has sufficient information
When the quality of the decision is not essential
When employees do not agree with each other
When employees do not agree with goals of organization
An autocratic style is appropriate when:
The leader has sufficient information. I the leader has sufficient information, it is usually more efficient to use an autocratic style. This is especially true in cases where subordinates are cohesive, agree with the organization’s goals, and are likely to implement decisions despite a lack of evolvement.
When the quality of the decision is not essential. It is generally more efficient to allow the leader to make a decision that does not need to be high quality. No one should involve a group when deciding where to buy a pack of pencils.
When employees do not agree with each other. If employees cannot agree, then a decision might never be made unless the leader takes charge.
When employees do not agree with goals of organization. Even when leader does not have all information he/she needs to make decision alone, needs to make decision because employees might not benefit the organization.

8. Leader Participation Style (cont.)
Consultative Process
CI: The leader shares the problem with the relevant followers individually, getting their ideas and suggestions without bringing them together as a group. The leader makes the decision, which may or may not reflect follower’s influence.
CII: Leader shares the problem with followers as a group, obtains ideas & suggestions, and makes decision.

9. Consultative Style A consultative style is appropriate when:
The leader has sufficient information, but employees demand participation to implement decision
The leader has insufficient information, and employee consultation will help leader gather more information as well as develop commitment
When followers generally agree with goals of the organization

10. Leader Participation Style (cont.)
Group Process
GII: The leader shares the problem with followers as a group. Together they generate and evaluate alternatives and attempt to reach consensus.
Note: in this process the leader’s role is much like that of a chairman, coordinating the discussion, keeping it focused, making sure critical issues are discussed. Provides group with information or ideas, but does not try to force them on group. Is willing to implement any solution that has group support.
Notice as we go from autocratic to Group process the leader’s participation style changes from dictatorial to democratic.

11. Group DM Style A group-oriented decision style is appropriate when:
The leader does not have all the information
Quality is important, and
Employee commitment is essential

12. When the critical questions are strung together and place in flowchart form, we have a model to advise the leader on the decision style to be used. For example, if a problem requires high quality (there is an objective difference in outcome alternatives), the decision maker has sufficient information, the acceptance by subordinates is important, an autocratic decision would be accepted, but subordinates do not share goal, then three approaches would be appropriate, AII, CI, & CII; that is, autocratic but obtaining info from followers, or consulting with followers either individually or as a group.
Which of the three acceptable approaches would you choose? Why? While according to this model an autocratic style would not diminish the quality of the decision, in today’s business environment, when given the choice and the time, a more participative style would be best.

13. The Situational Leadership Theory, developed by Hersey and Blanchard, answers the following questions:
Is there an optimum way for leaders to adjust their behavior with different followers and thereby increase their likelihood of success?
If so, then what factors should the leader base his behavior on?
This approach directs leader behavior as a function of follower characteristics. As followers become more “ready” the leader should change style to give them more responsibility.
H&B recognize subordinates have varying degrees of task readiness. People may be low in readiness from little ability, training, or insecurity. These people need a different leadership style from those with high task readiness; that is those w/good ability, skills, confidence, and a willingness to work.

14. Situational Leadership
The upper part of this exhibit indicates the style of leader, which is based upon a combination of relationship behavior and task behavior. The curve is a prescriptive curve because it indicates the style the leader should use.
The four styles are telling, selling, participating, and delegating.
Telling: Very directive, giving explicit direction about how the task should be accomplished. E.g. Mickey Drexler, president of Gap provides specific guidelines then checks closely for conformance.
Selling: Providing direction, but seeks input from others before making decision. E.g. George Bush gulf war.
Participating: Focuses on supporting growth and improvement of others by guiding skill development and acting as a resource for information and advice. E.g. Tom Leonard president of Stew Leonards’s communicated in all directions and enabled decision making for all employees.
Delegating: a style that affords little direction and little support. Under such conditions, employees assume responsibility for their work and the success of the organization. E.g Ted Turner gives almost free reign to employees of Cable Network News. Of course, it can bite you as it did with CNN when they broadcast knowingly untrue stories.

15. The Contingency Model
The Contingency Model, developed by Fiedler, recognizes that leaders have general behavioral tendencies and thereby specifies situations where certain leaders (or behavioral dispositions) may be more effective than others.
The basic idea behind Fiedler’s Model is relatively simple--Match the Leader’s style with the situation most favorable for his or her success. The model is developed to assist leaders with assessing their own style as well as the characteristics of the situation.

16. The Contingency Model Task-Motivated Leaders
Draw self-esteem from completion of task
Focuses on task first
Can be hard with failing employees
Considers competence of coworkers to be key trait
Enjoys details
A TO individual draws their self-esteem primarily from accomplishing their tasks well. When the TO leader or their groups fail, they tend to be harsh in judging their subordinates and often highly punitive. When task is going well, they are comfortable with details and monitoring routine events. People with low LPC scores who give low ratings to their least preferred worker describe them as incompetent, cold, untrustworthy, and quarrelsome.

17. The Contingency Model Relationship Oriented Leader
Draws self-esteem from interpersonal relationships
Focuses on people first
Likes to please others
Considers loyalty of coworkers to be key trait
Gets bored with details
A relationship-oriented leader is concerned with people--a task-oriented leader is primarily motivated by task accomplishment.
A RO leader establishes mutual trust and respect and listens to employee’s needs. People with high LPC scores rate their LP worker relatively positively, e.g. loyal, sincere, and warm accepting. RO leaders draw their self esteem primarily from having good relationships with others. To them the LP worker is someone who has been disloyal and unsupportive rather than incompetent. RO people are bored with details and focus on social interactions

18. Contingency Model Leadership Style
Examples of Fiedler’s bi-polar adjectives
Open…………………Guarded
Quarrelsome………….Harmonious
Efficient………………Inefficient
Self-assured………… Hesitant
Gloomy……………….Cheerful
The cornerstone to Fiedler’s theory is the extent to which the leader’s style is relationship-oriented or task oriented..
Fieldler had managers visualize their least favored employee and describe them on an eight point scale along 16 different bi-polar dimensions.

19. Contingency Model Situation
Leader-member relations
Task structure
Position power
Fiedler represents the leadership situation in terms of three key elements that can be either favorable or unfavorable to a leader:
Leader-member relations refers to group atmosphere and member attitudes and acceptance of the leader. When subordinates trust, respect, and have confidence in the leader, leader-member relations are considered good.
Task structure refers to the extent to which tasks performed by the group are defined, involve specific procedures, and have clear, explicit goals. Routine, well-defined tasks, such as assembly workers, have a high degree of structure. Creative, ill-defined tasks such as research or strategic planning, have a low degree of task structure. When task structure is high it is considered favorable to the leader.
Position power is the extent to which the leader has formal authority. Position power is high when formal authority exists (leader has power to plan and direct the work of subordinates, reward and punish) and is considered favorable to the leader.
Combining the three situational characteristics yields 8 leadership situations. Situation 1 is most favorable--Situation 8 is most unfavorable. (Page 66 in text)

20. Contingency Model Interesting Implications
Task-motivated leader & relation-motivated leader in highly favorable situation
Task-motivated leader & relation-motivated leader in moderately favorable situation
Task-motivated leader & relation-motivated leader in unfavorable situation
1) In high control situations the TO leader feels at ease. The basic source of self-esteem, getting things done, is not threatened, so the leader relaxes, takes care of details , and helps followers perform. The RO leader in this scenario is affected differently. He/she feels bored, and that no one needs him/her. Because the group is cohesive and the task clear, the leader is needed mainly to get the group resources, take care of details, and remove obstacles. These activities do not appeal to the RO leader, who may start to being over controlling and interfere with the group’s performance to demonstrate that he/she is needed.
2) The moderate control situation stems from either lack of cohesiveness or lack of task structure. In either case, the situation is ambiguous and task completion is in jeopardy. The RO leader’s skills at interpersonal relationships and participation are well suited for this situation. He/she draws followers’ participation and focuses on resolving task and relationship conflicts. The TO leader uses the group as a resource to accomplish the task. The same elements that make moderate control attractive to the RO leader make the situation threatening. The lack of group support, ambiguity of task or both make the TO feel like the task may not be completed. The To becomes autocratic, ignores the task and relationship conflicts and tries simply to get the task done to get the sense of accomplishment. The TO leader performs poorly in this environment.
Nixon & Carter (TO’s) vs Reagan & Clinton (RO’s)
3)As situation becomes chaotic & reaches crisis with no group cohesion, no task structure, and no position power, the TO leaders push to complete task and become autocratic w/o worrying about group. Although performance is not very high, in chaotic situations, Tos get work done. For RO, chaos is a nighmare. Group’s lack of cohesion is further fueled by inability to perform makes efforts at reconciliation close to impossible. Ros efforts to gain support from group are useless. In an effort to get self-esteem, the RO withdraws leaving the group to fend for themselves causing low performance.

21. Tower Building Questions
How did the group handle responsibilities of leadership and followership?
Did you have sufficient time to carry out your plan? Did you plan for a time limit?
Was there competition among groups?
What were the characteristics of the followers?
Describe the behaviors of each group member.
What leadership style did leader(s) adopt?
Was your group successful? By what criteria?

22. Learning Check
If, as Fiedler suggests, training for improving leader skills is ineffective, what should be the focus of a leadership course?

23. Fiedler’s Contingency Theory and the Interactional Framework
Leader
Outcomes:
Effective or ineffective group performance based upon match or mismatch between leader and overall favorability of the leadership situation
Motivation hierarchy
(as determined by LPC score)
Leader-member relations
Considerable empirical evidence exists to support model--at least in lab settings. Field observations have not been as supportive, primarily because of the interpretation of the scoring along 16 dimensions.
Task structure
Position Power
Followers
Situation

24. The Path-Goal Theory
The Path-Goal Theory, the most sophisticated of the four contingency models, deals with expectancy, performance-to-outcome probabilities, and assigned valences or values to outcome.
Look at that explanation. What in the world do you suppose that means? I don’t think I talk like that nor do any of the management people I have ever worked with. Don’t have to wonder too much to realize how academics got branded as eggheads. Let’s see if we can come up with a better explanation of this theory.

25. The Path-Goal Theory
According to P-G Theory, the leader’s responsibility is to increase subordinates’ motivation to attain personal and organizational goals by either 1) clarifying the follower’s path to the rewards that are available or 2) increasing the rewards the follower values and desires.

26. The Path-Goal Theory
Path clarification means that the leader works with subordinates to help them identify and learn behaviors that will lead to successful task accomplishment and organizational rewards. Increasing rewards means that the leader talks with subordinates to learn which rewards are important to them--that is whether they desire intrinsic rewards from the work itself or extrinsic rewards such as raise or promotions.
The leader’s job is to increase personal payoffs to subordinates for the goal attainment and to make the paths to these payoffs clear and easily to travel.

27. The Path-Goal Theory Leader Behavior
Supportive leadership
Directive leadership
Participative leadership
Achievement-oriented leadership
SL shows concern for subordinates’ well being and personal needs. Leadership behavior is open, friendly, and approachable, and the leader creates a team climate and treats subordinates as equals.
DL tells subordinates exactly what they are supposed to do. Leader behavior includes planning, making schedules, setting performance goals and behavior standards, and stressing adherence to rules and regulations.
PL consults with subordinates about decisions. Leader behavior includes asking for opinions and suggestions, encouraging participation in decision making, and meeting with subordinates, encouraging participation in decision making, and meeting with subordinates in their workplaces.
AOL sets clear and challenging goals for subordinates. Leader behavior stresses high quality performance and improvement over current performance. AOL also show confidence in subordinates and assist them in learning how to achieve high goals.

28. The Path-Goal Theory Situational Contingencies
Personal characteristics of followers
The work environment
Personal characteristics are similar to H&B readiness levels and include such factors as ability, skills, needs, and motivations. It is up to the leader to identify needs and characteristics of followers--need more training?, self-centered and needs more extrinsic reward? Who needs clear direction? Who needs more freedom?
Work environment contingencies include the degree of task structure, the nature of the formal authority system, and the work group itself. We have already discussed task structure under Fiedler’s contingency 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. Workgroup characteristics include educational level of subordinates and the quality of relationships among them.

29. The Path-Goal Theory
In the P-G approach, the leader’s responsibility is to clarify path to rewards and or to increase the amount of rewards. In some cases the leader develops training programs to acquire skills or improve confidence; in others the leader may develop rewards to meet specific needs of a subordinate.
Above example explanation.

30. Path-Goal Theory and Interactional Framework
Leader
Outcomes:
Acceptance of leader
Follower motivation
Follower satisfaction
Leader behavior: Directive, Supportive, Participative, Achievement-oriented
According to P-G theory, the leader assesses the situation and selects the appropriate leader behavior appropriate to the situational demands. This in turn should increase follower’s ability and successes and simultaneously their expectations for rewards because they have succeeded.
The theory has received only marginal empirical support. Most of the criticism fall on the exclusion of variables that influence leadership processes (selection of workers, increasing work abilities, and work redesign as examples) and with methodologies used to test the theory. It does, however, present a framework demonstrating the complexity of the leadership process. The theory may be more useful as an explanatory device than a prescriptive one for leaders to follow.
Traits
Skills and abilities
expectations and work perceptions of own group abilities
Task characteristics
Formal authority system
Followers
Situation

31. P-G Update
In 1996, House reformulated the P-G Theory to include ten leader behaviors and their impact on subordinate empowerment, satisfaction, ability, performance, and work unit performance.
Twenty-six propositions are presented relating different types of leader behaviors and situational characteristics to individual and work outcomes.

32. P-G Update House’s new Leader behaviors include:
Clarifying Participative
Achievement-oriented Supportive
Work facilitation Charismatic
Interaction facilitation Shared leadership
Group-oriented DM Representing and
Networking
House, R.J. (1996) Path-Goal Theory of Leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory. Leadership Quarterly, 7,

33. Learning Check
The P-G theory suggests the leader’s responsibility is to identify an individual’s motivating factors and reward accordingly. What problems do you see with this individualized approach?