Contingency theories of leadership focus on both the leader's persona as well as the situation/environment in which that leader operates. These theories consider the context of leadership which means whether or not the leadership style suits a particular situation and states that a leader can be effective in one circumstance and a failure in another one. A leader will be most effective when he applies the right leadership style to a given situation and environment around him. Contingent leaders are flexible and adaptable.
What is your natural leadership style and do you have the flexibility to change your style based on situations or environments? In this article, we will explore Fiedler's Contingency Model, and focus on particular variables related to the environment that might determine which particular style of leadership is best suited for the given situation.
Contingency theories are a class of behavioral theory that contends that there is no one best way of leading and that a leadership style that is effective in some situations may not be successful in others.
Contingency theories are a class of behavioral theory that claims that there is no best way to organize a corporation, to lead a company, or to make decisions. Instead, the optimal course of action is contingent (dependent) upon the internal and external situation. An effect of this is that leaders who are very effective at one place and time may become unsuccessful either when transplanted to another situation or when the factors around them change.
The contingency and path-goal approaches are an extension of behavior approaches in the sense they also stress on motivational aspects of the leader and followers. However, they equally stress the interactional aspects of leadership particularly the interaction of individual and organizational factors.
Previous theories such as Weber's bureaucracy and Taylor's scientific management had failed because they neglected that management style and organizational structure were influenced by various aspects of the environment: the contingency factors. There could not be "one best way" for leadership or organization.
Contingency theories of leadership attempt to solve this shortcoming of earlier theories by focusing on particular variables related to the environment that might determine which particular style of leadership is best suited for the situation. According to contingency theory, a leader’s success depends upon a number of variables, including the leadership style, qualities of the followers, and aspects of the situation.
Further, situational and contingency theories overlap to a great extent. Because of their closely related philosophy, the situational theory and contingency theory are often mentioned together.
The contingency model of leadership suggests that individual and organizational factors must be correctly matched for effective leadership and the group effectiveness is contingent upon the match between leadership style and the extent to which the group situation is favorable to the leader's effectiveness depends on the interaction of the leader's behavior with certain organizational factors.
This helps to explain how some leaders who seem for a while to have the 'Midas touch' suddenly appear to go off the boil and make very unsuccessful decisions. Thus, we can say that the basic assumption of this theory is that the leader's ability to lead is contingent upon various situational factors, including the leader's preferred style, the capabilities and behaviors of followers, and also various other situational factors.
In the contingency theory of leadership, the success of the leader is a function of various contingencies in the form of subordinate, task, and/or group variables. The effectiveness of a given pattern of leader behavior is contingent upon the demands imposed by the situation.
To understand this theory we should examine the individual leader, the organizational factors (or leadership situation), and the interaction of these factors. As per this model, leader effectiveness is based on two factors, "the leadership style" and "the situational favorableness" (also known as "situational control"). In short, the contingency theory is concerned with styles and situations.
Sometimes the success of a leader does not depend upon the qualities, traits, and behavior of a leader alone. The context in which a leader exhibits her/his skills, traits, and behavior matters, because the same style of functioning may not be suitable for different situations. Thus the effectiveness of leadership also depends upon situations.
Several research studies, when analyzing the reason for inconsistent results in differing conditions with the same leadership style, laid their focus on situational variables.
The contingency theory allows for predicting the characteristics of the appropriate situations for effectiveness. According to Fiedler, the ability to control the group situation (the second component of the contingency model) is crucial for a leader. This is because only leaders with situational control can be confident that their orders and suggestions will be carried out by their followers.
This theory views leadership in terms of a dynamic interaction between a number of situational variables like the leader, the followers, the task situation, the environment, etc.
Fiedler broke this factor down into three major components: leader-member relations, task structure, and position power. Both low-LPC (task-oriented) and high-LPC (relationship-oriented) leaders can be effective if their leadership orientation fits the situation.
Jack Welch has once commented “It goes without saying that you cannot pigeonhole. Good people are too multifaceted. That said, I would still make the case that due to their skills and personalities, some people work more effectively in commodities and others are better in highly differentiated products or services... The right people for [a commodity] business are hard-driving, meticulous, and detail-oriented. They are not dreamers; they’re hand-to-hand combat fighters. . . . At the other end of the spectrum, it’s generally a different kind of person who thrives, not better or worse, just different”.
According to contingency theory also, leadership styles can be described as task-oriented or relationship-oriented. Task-oriented leaders are concerned primarily with reaching a goal or completing a task whereas relationship-oriented leaders are concerned with developing close interpersonal relationships with their followers.
Several contingency approaches were developed concurrently in the late 1960s, however; the most widely recognized is Fiedler’s (1964, 1967; Fiedler & Garcia, 1987). Contingency theory is a leader–match theory which tries to match leaders to appropriate situations. It is called contingency because it suggests that a leader’s effectiveness depends on how well the leader’s style fits the context or the situation.
Some of the noteworthy studies on situational contexts that gained wide recognition include
Michigan Leadership Studies led to behavioral Leadership Theory as a result of a leadership study conducted at the University of Michigan. Michigan studies identified three important behaviors of leadership called task-oriented behavior, relationship-oriented behavior, and participative leadership. Two leadership styles associated with studies are employee orientation and production orientation.
Servant Leadership is a recent revolutionary theory of leadership that focuses on leaders achieving authority rather than power. A servant leader considers the needs of others and tries to serve the followers by becoming a servant first. Servant leadership is leading with a desire to better serve others.
Theory Z also called the "Japanese Management" style is a leadership theory of human motivation focused on organizational behavior, communication, and development. It assumes that employees want to enter into long term partnerships with their employers and peers. Offering stable jobs with an associated focus on the well-being of employees results in increased employee loyalty to the company.
The two-factor theory also known as Herzberg's motivation-hygiene theory and dual-factor theory. This motivator-hygiene theory states that certain factors cause job satisfaction whereas certain separate factors cause dissatisfaction in the workplace. An organization can adjust these factors to influence motivation. These factors are respectively termed as motivators and hygiene factors.
What are the functions which a leader does to establish as a leader? What are the activities undertaken by them to become great leaders, rather revolutionary leaders? The most important tasks done by a leader in all situations are defining the vision, mission, and goals, leading the team, administrative functions, motivating followers, decision making and conflict resolution, and continuous development.
Bass's Transformational Leadership Theory
Bass Transformational Leadership Theory is based on performance beyond expectations approach which defines four elements of transformational leadership. The 4 elements described by Bernard A. Bass in 1985 are Idealised Influence, Intellectual Stimulation, Individualised Consideration, and Inspirational Motivation. This study highlights four key insights about performance beyond expectations and associated criteria to measure it.
Rensis Likert studied the patterns and styles of managers and developed four management systems known as Likert's management systems. These styles developed by him are known as Likert management systems. System 1 - Exploitative Authoritative; System 2 - Benevolent Authoritative; System 3 - Consultative and System 4 - Participative.
Transformational Theories of Leadership
Transformational leadership theories focus on the leadership approach where the leader encourages, inspires employees to innovate and create positive and valuable organizational change. A transformational leader works towards “transforming” the culture to one that cultivates trust, mutual admiration, loyalty, and respect with the end goal of developing followers into leaders. Transformational leaders are known to be visionary, inspiring, daring, risk-takers, and thoughtful.
Symbolic Interaction and Social Change
George Herbert Mead, an American philosopher, affiliated with the University of Chicago founded the theory of symbolic interactionism. A major aspect of this is that people interact by symbols both verbal and non-verbal signals and every interaction makes a contribution to the mental make-up of the mind thus every interaction with someone, changes you and you go away a different person signifying that humans and change go together.
The Psychodynamic Approach to leadership focuses on leaders building an understanding of their personality characteristics to know why they act or react in certain ways. Psychodynamics theory aims to explain the dynamics of human behavior in which lies the essence of leadership, by analyzing various motives that govern a person's behavior. This information can be used to develop leaders and followers by understanding their responses based on their personalities.
© 2023 TechnoFunc, All Rights Reserved