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
Neo-Emergent Leadership theory supports that leadership is created through the emergence of information. Leaders can only be recognized after a goal is met. Follower’s perception of leaders is influenced by the ways these goals were accomplished.
All the teams are dynamic in nature and they take time to come together, they form, develop, and grow in stages, over a period of time. Teams go through five progressive stages: Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing and Adjourning. In this article, we want to introduce you to these stages of team development and certain strategies that you can use to help the team grow and develop in each of these stages.
Participative Leadership Theories
Participative leadership theories rely on the involvement of different participants and suggest that the ideal leadership style is one that takes the inputs of others into account. Participative leaders encourage participation and contributions from group members and involve them in the decision-making process. Participative leadership tries to achieve through people, teamwork and collaboration.
The Vroom-Yetton model is designed to optimize for the current situation the leadership style for best decision-making. Its a decision model formulated with contribution from Arthur Jago on how to make group decisions. The leader must gather information from the team prior to making the decision and involves more people in the decision process.
Strategic Contingencies Theory is a theory of intra-organizational power. The power of a subunit or individual depends on a few contingencies and that the more contingencies are controlled by a subunit, the greater is its power. The theory focuses on tasks that need to be done in the form of problems to be solved, thus de-emphasizing personality.
The group and exchange theories of leadership are derived from social psychology. These have their roots in the exchange theory. Leaders from different kinds of relationships with various groups of subordinates. Group theories describe how leaders need to maintain their position in group dynamics.
The social identity theory of leadership views leadership as a group process. Social identity is a person's sense of who they are based on their group membership. Social identity theory sets agendas and goals generated by social categorization, defines who we are based on processes associated with social identity, and motivates to conduct ourselves based on what followers think of the leader.
Blake and Mouton Managerial Grid is a style leadership model that identified five manager styles based on two dimensions viz concern for people and the concern for production. Managerial Grid uses concern for production style which is largely based on McGregor's Theory X.
Trait theories of leadership identify the specific personality traits that distinguish leaders from non-leaders. The trait model of leadership is based on the traits or characteristics of leaders that make them successful in their leading role. These theories use heritable attributes to predict leadership effectiveness.
McClelland's Theory of Needs is a human motivation theory which states that an individual's specific needs are acquired over time through our culture and life experiences. As per the three needs theory, these acquired needs significantly influence the behavior of an individual. The three main driving motivators are the needs for achievement, affiliation, and power.
© 2023 TechnoFunc, All Rights Reserved