Live Task

Chapter14_9thEd.pptx

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >Live Task

Chapter 14

Contingency Theories of Leadership

© McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.

Multimedia Lecture Support Package to Accompany Basic Marketing

Lecture Script 6-1

Chapter Outline

Introduction

Leader-member exchange, or L M X, theory

The normative decision model

The situational leadership model

The contingency model

The path-goal theory

Contingency Theories of Leadership

It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, author

Introduction

The leader-follower-situation model is parsimonious

Uses the leader, the followers, and the situation as predictor variables

Similarities among normative decision model, situational leadership model, contingency model, and path-goal theory

Categorized as theories rather than personal opinions

Implicitly assume that leaders are able to accurately diagnose or assess key aspects of the followers and the leadership situation

With the exception of the contingency model, leaders are assumed to be able to act in a flexible manner

A correct match between situational and follower characteristics and leaders’ behavior is assumed to have a positive effect on group or organizational outcomes

Leader-Member Exchange, or L M X, Theory

Leader-member exchanges: In-group and out-group interactions between leaders and followers

Argues that leaders do not treat all followers like a uniform group of equals

Form specific and unique linkages with each subordinate, creating a series of dyadic relationships

Interpersonal interaction is limited to fulfilling contractual obligations with the out-group, or low-quality exchange relationships

Form mutually beneficial, high-quality exchange relationships that go beyond what the job requires with the in-group

Contribute empowerment, sponsorship of subordinates in social networks, and mentoring

Table 14.1: The Cycle of Leadership Making

Source: Adapted from G. B. Graen and M. Uhl-Bien, “Relationship-Based Approach to Leadership: Development of Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) Theory over 25 Years: Applying a Multi-level Multi-domain Perspective,” Leadership Quarterly 6 (1995), pp. 219–47.

Jump to Table 14.1: The Cycle of Leadership Making

Vroom and Yetton’s Normative Decision Model

Directed solely at determining how much input subordinates should have in the decision-making process

Level of input subordinates have in decision-making varies substantially depending on the issue at hand, followers’ technical expertise, or the presence or absence of a crisis

Model was designed to improve some aspects of leadership effectiveness

Components

Levels of participation

Decision quality and acceptance

The decision tree

Levels of Participation

Vroom and Yetton explored how various leader, follower, and situational factors affect the degree of subordinates’ participation in the decision-making process and group performance

Investigated the decision-making processes leaders use in group settings in order to determine which situational and follower factors affect the level of participation and group performance

A continuum of decision-making processes ranging from completely autocratic, or A I, to completely democratic, or G I I, was discovered

Decision Quality and Acceptance

Important criteria for judging the adequacy of a decision

Decision quality: If the decision has a rational or objectively determinable better or worse alternative, the leader should select the better alternative

Decision acceptance: Implies that followers accept the decision as if it were their own and do not merely comply with the decision

Quality or acceptance of a decision is not always critical for implementation

Decision Tree, 1

Vroom and Yetton developed a normative decision model and a set of questions to protect quality and acceptance by eliminating decision processes that would be wrong or inappropriate

Normative model: Based on what ought to happen rather than describing what does happen

Questions concern the problem itself, the amount of pertinent information possessed by the leader and followers, and situational factors

Questions were incorporated into a decision tree in order to make it easier for leaders to determine the amount of participation subordinates should have to optimize decision quality and acceptance

Decision Tree, 2

Using the decision tree

Start at the left by stating the problem and then proceed through the model from left to right

Every time a box is encountered, the question associated with that box must be answered with either a yes or a no response

All paths lead to a set of decision processes that, if used, will lead to a decision that protects both quality and acceptance

Figure 14.2: Factors from the Normative Decision Model and the Interactional Framework

Jump to Figure 14.2: Factors from the Normative Decision Model and the Interactional , Appendix

Normative Decision Model in the Perspective of the L F S Framework

Some questions could or should be placed in other parts of the L F S model, and no questions should address a leader’s personality, values, motivations, or attitudes

L F S framework organizes concepts in a familiar conceptual structure

No proof that leaders using the model are more effective overall than leaders not using it

Views decision making as taking place at a single point in time

Assumes that leaders are equally skilled at using all five decision procedures

Assumes that some of the prescriptions of the model may not be the best for the given situation

Situational Leadership Model, 1

Focuses on the following leadership behavior categories:

Task behaviors: Extent to which the leader spells out the responsibilities of an individual or group

Include telling people what to do, how or when to do it, and who is to do it

Relationship behaviors: Extent to which the leader engages in two-way communication

Include listening, encouraging, facilitating, clarifying, explaining why the task is important, and giving support

Relative effectiveness of the behavior dimensions often depends on the situation

Figure 14.3: Situational Leadership

Source: P. Hersey, K. Blanchard, and D. Johnson, Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources, 7th ed. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1996), p. 200.

Jump to Figure 14.3: Situational Leadership

Situational Leadership Model, 2

Follower readiness: Follower’s ability and willingness to accomplish a particular task

Readiness is not an assessment of an individual’s personality, traits, values, or age

Not a personal characteristic, but rather how ready an individual is to perform a particular task

Any given follower could be low on readiness to perform one task but high on readiness to perform a different task

Situational Leadership Model, 3

When follower readiness levels and the four combinations of leader behaviors are combined, four segments emerge along a continuum

Assessment of follower readiness along this continuum can be fairly subjective

Leader may like to see followers increase their level of readiness for particular tasks by implementing a series of developmental interventions to help boost follower readiness levels

Interventions are designed to help followers in their development

Situational Leadership Model in the Perspective of the L F S Framework

The only situational consideration is knowledge of the task, and the only follower factor is readiness

Situational Leadership usually appeals to students and practitioners because of its common-sense approach and the ease of understanding

Useful way to get leaders to think about how leadership effectiveness may depend somewhat on being flexible with different subordinates, not on acting the same way toward them all

Figure 14.4: Factors from the Situational Leadership Model and the Interactional Framework

Jump to Figure 14.4: Factors from the Situational Leadership Model and the Interactional Framework , Appendix

Fiedler’s Contingency Model

Maintains that leaders are consistent in their behavior

Suggests that leader effectiveness is determined by selecting the right kind of leader for a certain situation or changing the situation to fit the particular leader’s style

Some leaders are better than others in some situations but less effective in other situations

The Least Preferred Co-worker, or L P C, Scale

Requires a leader to think of a single individual with whom he or she has had the greatest difficultly working and then describe that person in terms of bipolar adjectives, such as friendly-unfriendly, boring-interesting, and sincere-insincere

Ratings are then converted into a numerical score

Score represents something about the leader, not the specific individual the leader evaluated

Figure 14.5: Motivational Hierarchies for Low- and High-L P C Leaders

Jump to Figure 14.5: Motivational Hierarchies for Low- and High-L P C Leaders , Appendix

Situational Favorability, 1

Amount of control the leader has over the followers

The more control a leader has over followers, the more favorable the situation is, at least from a leader’s perspective

Subelements in situation favorability

Leader-member relations

Task structure

Position power

Situational Favorability, 2

Relative weights of the subelements, taken together, can be used to create a continuum of situational favorability

When using the contingency model, leaders are first asked to rate items that measure the strength of leader-member relations, the degree of task structure, and their level of position power

Ratings are then weighted and combined to determine an overall level of situational favorability facing the leader

Figure 14.6: Contingency Model Octant Structure for Determining Situational Favorability

Source: Adapted from T. R. Mitchell, C. M. Smyser, and S. E. Weed, “Locus of Control: Supervision and Work Satisfaction,” Academy of Management Journal 18 (1975), pp. 623–30.

Jump to Figure 14.6: Contingency Model Octant Structure for Determining Situational Favorability , Appendix

Figure 14.7: Leader Effectiveness Based on the Contingency between Leader L P C Score and Situation Favorability

Jump to Figure 14.7: Leader Effectiveness Based on the Contingency between Leader L P C Score and Situation Favorability , Appendix

Prescriptions of the Model

Leaders will try to satisfy a primary motivation when faced with unfavorable or moderately favorable situations and will behave according to their secondary motivational state only when faced with highly favorable situations

Hierarchies and tendencies would be difficult to change through training

Leadership training should stress on situational engineering rather than behavioral flexibility

Organizations could be more effective by matching a leader’s characteristics with situational demands instead of trying to change a leader’s behavior to fit the situation

Figure 14.8: Factors from Fiedler’s Contingency Theory and the Interactional Framework

Jump to Figure 14.8: Factors from Fiedler’s Contingency Theory and the Interactional Framework , Appendix

Path-Goal Theory, 1

Underlying mechanism deals with expectancy, a cognitive approach to understanding motivation, where people calculate:

Effort-to-performance probabilities

Performance-to-outcome probabilities

Assigned valences or values of outcomes

Assumptions: Effective leader will:

Provide or ensure the availability of valued rewards for followers, goals, and then help them find the best way of getting there, the path

Help the followers identify and remove roadblocks and avoid dead ends

Provide emotional support as needed

Path-Goal Theory, 2

Leader’s actions should strengthen followers’ beliefs that:

If they exert a certain level of effort, they will be more likely to accomplish a task

If they accomplish the task, they will be more likely to achieve some valued outcome

Leaders may use varying styles with different subordinates and differing styles with the same subordinates in different situations

Different leader behaviors can increase followers’ acceptance of the leader, enhance their level of satisfaction, and raise their expectations that effort will result in effective performance, which in turn will lead to valued rewards

Path-Goal Theory, 3

Follower variables

Satisfaction of followers

Followers will actively support a leader if they view the leader’s actions as a way to increase their own levels of satisfaction

Followers’ perception of their own abilities relative to the task to be accomplished

Situational factors that impact the effects of leader behavior on follower attitudes and behaviors include the task, the formal authority system, and the primary work group

Factors can serve as an independent motivational factor, as a constraint on the behavior of followers, or as a reward, and can affect the impact of various leader behaviors

The Four Leader Behaviors of Path-Goal Theory

Directive leadership: Includes telling the followers what they are expected to do, how to do it, when it is to be done, and how their work fits in with the work of others

Supportive leadership: Supportive leadership behaviors include having courteous and friendly interactions, expressing genuine concern for the followers’ well-being and individual needs, and remaining open and approachable to followers

Participative leadership: Leaders tend to share work problems with followers; solicit their suggestions, concerns, and recommendations; and weigh these inputs in the decision-making process

Achievement-oriented leadership: Leaders exhibiting these behaviors would be seen as both demanding and supporting in interactions with their followers

Figure 14.9: Interaction between Followers’ Locus of Control Scores and Leader Behavior in Decision Making

Source: Adapted from T. R. Mitchell, C. M. Smyser, and S. E. Weed, “Locus of Control: Supervision and Work Satisfaction,” Academy of Management Journal 18 (1975), pp. 623–30.

Jump to Figure 14.9: Interaction between Followers’ Locus of Control Scores and Leader Behavior in Decision Making

Figure 14.10: Examples of Applying Path-Goal Theory

Jump to Figure 14.10: Examples of Applying Path-Goal Theory , Appendix

Figure 14.11: Factors from Path-Goal Theory and the Interactional Framework

Jump to Figure 14.11: Factors from Path-Goal Theory and the Interactional Framework , Appendix

Path-Goal Theory: Criticisms and Uses

Criticisms of path-goal theory

Assumes that the only way to increase performance is to increase followers’ motivation levels

Ignores the roles leaders play in selecting talented followers, building their skill levels through training, and redesigning their work

Provides a conceptual framework to guide researchers in identifying potentially relevant situational moderator variables

Illustrates that, as models become more complicated, they may be more useful to researchers and less appealing to practitioners

Summary

Contingency theories of leadership

Leader-member exchange

Normative decision model

Situational Leadership model

Contingency model

Path-goal theory

All five models specify that leaders should make their behaviors contingent on certain aspects of the followers or the situation to improve leadership effectiveness

Implicitly assume that leaders can accurately assess key follower and situational factors

Have mixed support in field settings because they are all limited in scope

Appendices

Table 14.1: The Cycle of Leadership Making, Appendix

A horizontal arrow, labeled time, extends above the table and points to the right to indicate the passage of time. The table has four columns and six rows. Row 1 contains column headers. The header of column 1 reads characteristic, the header of column 2 reads stranger, the header of column 3 reads acquaintance, and the header of column 4 reads maturity. In row 2, column 1 reads relationship-building stage, column 2 reads role-taking, column 3 reads role-making, and column 4 reads role routinization. In row 3, column 1 reads reciprocity, column 2 reads cash and carry, column 3 reads mixed, and column 4 reads in-kind. In row 4, column 1 reads time span of reciprocity, column 2 reads immediate, column 3 reads some delay, and column 4 reads indefinite. In row 5, column 1 reads leader-member, column 2 reads low, column 3 reads medium, and column 4 reads high exchange. In row 6, column 1 reads incremental influence, column 2 reads none, column 3 reads limited, and column 4 reads almost unlimited.

Jump Back to Table 14.1: The Cycle of Leadership Making

Figure 14.2: Factors from the Normative Decision Model and the Interactional, Appendix

The figure contains three circles that overlap each other. In the anticlockwise direction, the circles are labeled leader, followers, and situation. The leader circle contains two points. The first point reads Decision process preferences. The second point reads B. Does the leader have sufficient information? The followers circle contains four points. The first point reads D. Acceptance important for implementation? The second point reads E. If decision made solely by leader, will it be accepted by subordinates? The third point reads F. Do subordinates share organizational goals? The fourth point reads G. Is conflict over preferred solution likely? The situation circle contains three points. The first point reads A. Quality requirement? The second point reads C. Is problem structured? The third point reads Time criticality? Outcomes are listed on the right side of the figure. They are decision quality, decision acceptance, and subordinate development.

Jump Back to Figure 14.2: Factors from the Normative Decision Model and the Interactional

Figure 14.3: Situational Leadership, Appendix

The graph shows leader behavior. The vertical axis of the graph represents supportive behavior, or relationship behavior. The bottom end of the vertical axis is labeled low, and the top end is labeled high. The horizontal axis of the graph is labeled task behavior, or guidance. The left end of the axis is labeled low, and the right end is labeled high. The decrease and increase in the values on both the axes are indicated by arrows.

A bell curve is presented in the graph, and the graph is divided into four quadrants. The bottom-left quadrant is labeled S 4. The curve begins to rise in this quadrant, and this portion of the curve is labeled delegating. Both relationship and task behaviors are low in this quadrant. The top-left quadrant is labeled S 3. The curve continues to rise in this quadrant and reaches its highest point at the center of the graph. This portion of the curve is labeled participating. Here, relationship behavior is high and task behavior is low. The top-right quadrant is labeled S 2. The curve begins to slope down in this quadrant, and this portion of the curve is labeled selling. Here, both relationship and task behaviors are high. The bottom-right quadrant is labeled S 1. The curve continues to curve down in this quadrant, and this portion of the curve is labeled telling. Here, relationship behavior is low and task behavior is high.

A table that represents follower readiness is presented below the horizontal axis. A double-ended arrow is used to indicate a continuum. Starting from the left, the first column represents high follower readiness, or R 4. In this case, the follower is able and willing or confident. The second and third columns represent moderate readiness. The columns are labeled R 3 and R 2. An R 3 follower is able but unwilling or insecure, and an R 2 follower is unable but willing or confident. The fourth column represents low readiness or R 1. In this case, the follower is unable and unwilling or insecure. The components labeled R 4 and R 3 are follower directed, and the components labeled R 2 and R 1 are leader directed.

Jump Back to Figure 14.3: Situational Leadership

Figure 14.4: Factors from the Situational Leadership Model and the Interactional Framework, Appendix

The figure contains three circles that overlap each other. In the anticlockwise direction, the circles are labeled leader, followers, and situation. The leader circle contains the following points: telling: high task, low relationship; selling: high task, high relationship; participating: low task, high relationship; delegating: low task, low relationship; and decision to use developmental intervention. The followers circle contains a point that reads what is the followers’ readiness? The situation circle contains a point that reads what is the task to be accomplished? Outcomes are listed on the right side of the figure. They are task accomplishment and increased follower readiness, if developmental interventions used.

Jump Back to Figure 14.4: Factors from the Situational Leadership Model and the Interactional Framework

Figure 14.5: Motivational Hierarchies for Low- and High-L P C Leaders, Appendix

The first triangle represents the low-L P C leader motivational hierarchy, and it is divided in two by a staggered line. The upper portion of the triangle is labeled people, and the lower portion of the triangle is labeled task.

The second triangle represents high-L P C leader motivational hierarchy, and it is divided in two by a staggered line. The upper portion of the triangle is labeled task, and the lower portion is labeled people.

Jump Back to Figure 14.5: Motivational Hierarchies for Low- and High-L P C Leaders

Figure 14.6: Contingency Model Octant Structure for Determining Situational Favorability, Appendix

There is a horizontal arrow above the table, labeled overall situation favorability, that points to the left. This arrow denotes a spectrum. The head of the arrow is labeled high and the opposite end of the arrow is labeled low. The table is divided into four rows. The first row represents leader-member relations and is split into two. The columns are labeled good and poor. The second row represents task structure and is split into four columns. The first two columns are labeled structured and unstructured and are aligned below the column labeled good. The next two columns are also labeled structured and unstructured and are aligned below the column labeled poor. The third row represents position power and is divided into eight columns. Two columns are aligned below each of the columns labeled structured and unstructured and are labeled high and low, respectively. The fourth row represents octant and is divided into eight columns. Starting from the left, the columns are labeled from 1 to 8.

Jump Back to Figure 14.6: Contingency Model Octant Structure for Determining Situational Favorability

Figure 14.7: Leader Effectiveness Based on the Contingency between Leader L P C Score and Situation Favorability, Appendix

The y-axis of the graph is labeled overall group effectiveness. Both ends of the y-axis represents opposite ends of a spectrum. The lower end of the y-axis is labeled low, and the upper end is labeled high. The x-axis is labeled situational favorability. Both ends of the x-axis represent opposite ends of a spectrum. The left end of the x-axis is labeled high and the right end is labeled low. The x-axis is divided into eight segments by small lines that rise from it. Below the x-axis are eight small boxes, which fall directly below the eight segments on the x-axis. These boxes are labeled octants. Each box is numbered from 1 to 8. Two curves are presented on the graph. The curve labeled low-L P C, or task, leader begins horizontally below the point labeled high on the y-axis and before the segment 1 on the x-axis. It begins to dip somewhat diagonally at segment 3. At segment 5, the curve has dipped close to the point labeled low on the y-axis. From here, the curve moves horizontally until segment 6, where it starts to slope upward again. It reaches a point directly before the beginning of segment 8 on the x-axis and travels horizontally until the end of segment 8. The second curve, labeled high-L P C, or relationship, leader, is a staggered bell curve. It begins just before segment 1 on the x-axis and moves horizontally until segment 3, from where it arches upward to the point labeled high on the y-axis. From here, it slopes downward to a point just before the beginning of segment 8 on the x-axis. It moves parallel to the x-axis and ends after segment 8.

Jump Back to Figure 14.7: Leader Effectiveness Based on the Contingency between Leader L P C Score and Situation Favorability

Figure 14.8: Factors from Fiedler’s Contingency Theory and the Interactional Framework, Appendix

The figure contains three circles that overlap each other. In the anticlockwise direction, the circles are labeled leader, followers, and situation. The leader circle contains a point that reads motivational hierarchy as determined by the L P C score. The followers circle does not have content. The area where the circles labeled leader and follower overlap contains a point that reads leader-member relations. The situation circle contains two points that read task structure and position power. The outcome is listed on the right side of the figure. It reads effective or ineffective group performance based on match or mismatch between leader and overall favorability of the leadership situation.

Jump Back to Figure 14.8: Factors from Fiedler’s Contingency Theory and the Interactional Framework

Figure 14.9: Interaction between Followers’ Locus of Control Scores and Leader Behavior in Decision Making, Appendix

The y-axis of the graph is labeled follower satisfaction with leader. The lower end of the y-axis is labeled low, and the upper end of the y-axis is labeled high. The x-axis is labeled leader behavior in decision making. The left end of the x-axis is labeled directive, and the right end of the x-axis is labeled participative. Two lines are presented on the graph. The first line is labeled internal-locus-of-control followers. The line is staggered, and it slopes upward. The second line is labeled external-locus-of-control followers, and it slopes downward.

Jump Back to Figure 14.9: Interaction between Followers’ Locus of Control Scores and Leader Behavior in Decision Making

Figure 14.10: Examples of Applying Path-Goal Theory, Appendix

Two examples are presented in two rows with three circles and one square in each row. Starting from the left, the three circles represent the situation, the leader, and the followers. The square represents the outcomes. In the first example, the situation is a newly formed work unit and the leader possesses directive behaviors, which means he tells his or her followers what to do and what not to do. Because of the leader’s directive behaviors, the followers have reduced role ambiguity, which means there is clearer effort-to-performance links. This leads to an outcome of higher efforts and satisfaction. In the second example, the situation involves substandard performance and there are no rewards for performance. This leads the leader to incorporate directive behaviors, where he or she makes rewards available and contingent on performance. This leads to clearer performance-to-reward links or increased valence. This in turn leads to an outcome of higher efforts and satisfaction.

Jump Back to Figure 14.10: Examples of Applying Path-Goal Theory

Figure 14.11: Examples of Applying Path-Goal Theory, Appendix

The figure contains three circles that overlap each other. In the anticlockwise direction, the circles are labeled leader, followers, and situation. The leader circle contains a main point that reads leader behavior. The sub points listed below the main point are directive, supportive, participative, and achievement-oriented. The followers circle contains the following points: traits, skills and abilities, and expectations and work perceptions of own group abilities. The situation circle contains the following points: task characteristics and formal authority system. The outcomes are listed on the right side of the figure. They read acceptance of leader, follower motivation, and follower satisfaction.

Jump Back to Figure 14.11: Examples of Applying Path-Goal Theory