Response 4
2 years ago 6
Response4.docx
Publicadministrationintheoryandapplication.pdf
Response4.docx
100 word response for each public organization
1 reference intext citation Due 9/24/2024
According to contingency theory, each public organization may require a different style of leadership. Discuss to determine an appropriate leadership approach or theory (as introduced in the prior slides, pp. 18-25) for the following public organizations.
(1) Welleby Elementary School (public) in Broward County
(2) The DMV in Sunrise
(3) Coral Springs Fire Department
Publicadministrationintheoryandapplication.pdf
DIFFERENT APPROACHES/TYPES OF LEADERSHIP SECTION II
TRADITIONAL APPROACH
Trait theory
Assumption
Leaders are born
Inductive approach
Stogdill (1948) analyzed 124 studies between 1904-1947: (1) intelligence, (2)
responsibility, (3) being active in social situations
Stogdill (1974) analyzed 163 studies: (1) strong drive for responsibility and task
completion, (2) considerable vigor and persistence in the pursuit of goal, (3)
creativity in problem solving, (4) willingness to accept the consequences of their
decisions, (5) or capacity for absorbing stress (Denhardt et al., 2013: 196)
Holzer & Schwester (2016): (1) Height, (2) intelligence, (3) self-confidence,
(4)sociability, (5) integrity, and (6) diligence (p. 291).
TRADITIONAL
APPROACH
The managerial Grid
Feature
From personality to behavior
Key components
Concern for production: Focusing on
results, performance, and the
bottom line
Concern for people: Focusing on job
satisfaction, working conditions, and
wage and salary
CONTINGENCY
APPROACH
Situational Leadership
Proponents
Hersey & Blanchard in late 1960s
Main arguments
Different situations require different
styles of leaderships
Leaders need to understand key
characteristics of their orgs and adapt
their behaviors to fit the situation
Key components
Follower readiness: D3 & D4 = follower
directed; D2 & D1 = Leader directed
Source: (https://inbody.es/2020/04/20/when-context-meets-challenge-an-approach-of-situational-leadership/)
CONTINGENCY APPROACH
Contingency theory
Main argument
Task-oriented leaders are more likely to thrive in both favorable and unfavorable situations
Relationship-oriented leaders is good for the moderate situation
Key components
Task-oriented leader: Efficient and goal oriented
Relationship-oriented leader: Derived satisfaction from successful interpersonal relationship
Position power: The degree to which the position enable to get others to comply with leader’s direction
Task structure: The degree to which the task is structured or clearly defined
Leader-member relations: Whether the work environment is positive or negative (friendly vs. confrontational)
Source: https://www.paretolabs.com/fielders-contingency-theory/
CONTINGENCY APPROACH
Path-Goal Theory
Assumption
Derived from expectancy theory, this concept posits that individuals will be more
satisfied with their work when they believe that their efforts will lead to valuable
rewards, thereby motivating them to be more diligent.
Key components
Directive leadership: Dealing with clearly informing subordinates→(1) when employees
are dogmatic, (2) when rules are unclear, (3) when the demands of task are ambiguous
Participative leadership: Dealing with including subordinates in decision making→(1)
when subordinates have a great sense of autonomy, but the tasks are ambiguous
Supportive leadership: Dealing with human needs (e.g., friendly & approachable)→ (1)
when subordinates are engaged in work that is stressful, frustrating, or unsatisfying
Achievement-oriented leadership: Dealing with challenging subordinates to do their
best→ (1) when subordinates perform ambiguous nonrepetitive tasks
CONTEMPORARY TYPOLOGY:
TWO PRIMARY TYPES OF LEADERSHIP
Transactional leadership
Source: Bureaucratic authority and legitimate power
Emphases: Task assignment, work standard, employee compliance
Mechanism: Relying on punishment to influence employees’ behaviors
Focus: Protecting individual’s right bases on the consideration of utility
maximization
Source: (Ng & Sears 2012)
CONTEMPORARY TYPOLOGY:
TWO PRIMARY TYPES OF LEADERSHIP
Transformational leadership
Source: Appealing to higher ideals and moral values
Emphases: Defining a vision and inspiring followers to carry it out
Dimensions: (1) idealized influence; (2) inspirational motivation, (3) intellectual stimulation, and (4) individualized considerations
Focus: What is morally right?; protecting individual’s rights and dignity
Anticipation: Inclusivity and social responsibility
Source: (Ng & Sears, 2012)
Response4.docx
100 word response for each public organization
1 reference intext citation Due 9/24/2024
According to contingency theory, each public organization may require a different style of leadership. Discuss to determine an appropriate leadership approach or theory (as introduced in the prior slides, pp. 18-25) for the following public organizations.
(1) Welleby Elementary School (public) in Broward County
(2) The DMV in Sunrise
(3) Coral Springs Fire Department
Publicadministrationintheoryandapplication.pdf
DIFFERENT APPROACHES/TYPES OF LEADERSHIP SECTION II
TRADITIONAL APPROACH
Trait theory
Assumption
Leaders are born
Inductive approach
Stogdill (1948) analyzed 124 studies between 1904-1947: (1) intelligence, (2)
responsibility, (3) being active in social situations
Stogdill (1974) analyzed 163 studies: (1) strong drive for responsibility and task
completion, (2) considerable vigor and persistence in the pursuit of goal, (3)
creativity in problem solving, (4) willingness to accept the consequences of their
decisions, (5) or capacity for absorbing stress (Denhardt et al., 2013: 196)
Holzer & Schwester (2016): (1) Height, (2) intelligence, (3) self-confidence,
(4)sociability, (5) integrity, and (6) diligence (p. 291).
TRADITIONAL
APPROACH
The managerial Grid
Feature
From personality to behavior
Key components
Concern for production: Focusing on
results, performance, and the
bottom line
Concern for people: Focusing on job
satisfaction, working conditions, and
wage and salary
CONTINGENCY
APPROACH
Situational Leadership
Proponents
Hersey & Blanchard in late 1960s
Main arguments
Different situations require different
styles of leaderships
Leaders need to understand key
characteristics of their orgs and adapt
their behaviors to fit the situation
Key components
Follower readiness: D3 & D4 = follower
directed; D2 & D1 = Leader directed
Source: (https://inbody.es/2020/04/20/when-context-meets-challenge-an-approach-of-situational-leadership/)
CONTINGENCY APPROACH
Contingency theory
Main argument
Task-oriented leaders are more likely to thrive in both favorable and unfavorable situations
Relationship-oriented leaders is good for the moderate situation
Key components
Task-oriented leader: Efficient and goal oriented
Relationship-oriented leader: Derived satisfaction from successful interpersonal relationship
Position power: The degree to which the position enable to get others to comply with leader’s direction
Task structure: The degree to which the task is structured or clearly defined
Leader-member relations: Whether the work environment is positive or negative (friendly vs. confrontational)
Source: https://www.paretolabs.com/fielders-contingency-theory/
CONTINGENCY APPROACH
Path-Goal Theory
Assumption
Derived from expectancy theory, this concept posits that individuals will be more
satisfied with their work when they believe that their efforts will lead to valuable
rewards, thereby motivating them to be more diligent.
Key components
Directive leadership: Dealing with clearly informing subordinates→(1) when employees
are dogmatic, (2) when rules are unclear, (3) when the demands of task are ambiguous
Participative leadership: Dealing with including subordinates in decision making→(1)
when subordinates have a great sense of autonomy, but the tasks are ambiguous
Supportive leadership: Dealing with human needs (e.g., friendly & approachable)→ (1)
when subordinates are engaged in work that is stressful, frustrating, or unsatisfying
Achievement-oriented leadership: Dealing with challenging subordinates to do their
best→ (1) when subordinates perform ambiguous nonrepetitive tasks
CONTEMPORARY TYPOLOGY:
TWO PRIMARY TYPES OF LEADERSHIP
Transactional leadership
Source: Bureaucratic authority and legitimate power
Emphases: Task assignment, work standard, employee compliance
Mechanism: Relying on punishment to influence employees’ behaviors
Focus: Protecting individual’s right bases on the consideration of utility
maximization
Source: (Ng & Sears 2012)
CONTEMPORARY TYPOLOGY:
TWO PRIMARY TYPES OF LEADERSHIP
Transformational leadership
Source: Appealing to higher ideals and moral values
Emphases: Defining a vision and inspiring followers to carry it out
Dimensions: (1) idealized influence; (2) inspirational motivation, (3) intellectual stimulation, and (4) individualized considerations
Focus: What is morally right?; protecting individual’s rights and dignity
Anticipation: Inclusivity and social responsibility
Source: (Ng & Sears, 2012)
- what is it called when you lose the right to vote
- need help with this assignment. Using Strengths to Increase Motivation
- Week 3 Homework Questions 1) The following questions are based on the same scenario I used for question 3 in your week 1 homework. That question addressed violations of the Code of Conduct. I want to apply the same scenario to legal liabilities. Here
- MN504 unit 1 dq topic 2 case study Review the facts of the case and discuss how would you find the evidenceneeded to address the clinical question. Include at least 3 references
- course work in IT
- STAT 3001 Week 5 Project Complete Solution
- POS371 Learning Team Pseudo
- MKT 421 multiple choice question use it as a guide only1
- MGT216 Final - 24 questions - Sample 1
- Analysis Question (Just one page response needed)