Contingency Theory Yonsei University International Business JaeEun, Lee
Contents 1. Description 2. How does contingency theory work? 3. Strengths 4. Criticisms 5. Application 6. Leadership instrument 7. Summary
1 Description Contingency theory is a leader-match theory (Fiedler & Chemers, 1974), which means it tries to match leaders to appropriate situations. Contingency : leader s effectiveness depends on how well the leader s style fits the context. Fiedler developed CT(Contingency Theory) by studying the styles of many different leader who worked in different context. In short, CT is concerned with styles and situations. Leadership Styles Task-motivated leaders are concerned primarily with reaching a goal. Relationship-motivated leaders are concerned with developing close interpersonal relationships. Fiedler developed Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) scale. high score on the scale relationship-motivated leader low score on the scale task-motivated leader
1 Description Situational Variables CT suggests that situations can be characterized in terms of three factors : leader-member relations task structure position power - leader-member relations consist of the group atmosphere, the degree of confidence, loyalty, and attraction that follower feel their leader. - task structure is the degree to which the requirements of a task are clear and spelled out. : completely structured task give more control to the leader : vague and unclear task lessen the leader s control and influence - position power is the amount of authority a leader has to reward or to punish follewers. : position power is strong if a person has the authority to hire and fire or give raises in rank or pay.
1 Description Together, these three situational factor determine the favorableness of various situations. most favorable situation : good leader-follower relationship, defined tasks, and strong leader position power least favorable situation : poor leader-follower relationship, unstructured tasks, and weak leader position power moderately favorable situation : between these two extremes CT posits that certain styles are effective in certain situations. task motivated leaders will be effective in both very favorable and very unfavorable situations relationship motivated leaders are effective in moderately favorable situations It is not entirely clear why leaders with high LPC scores are effective in moderately favorable situations why leaders with low LPC scores are effective in both very favorable and very undavorable situations
1 Description Fiedler(1995) provides the following line of reasoning for why leaders who are working in the wrong or mismatched situation are ineffective a leader whose LPC styles does not match a particular situation experiences stress & anxiety under stress, the leader reverts to less mature ways of coping that were learned in early development the leader s less mature coping style result in poor decision making, which results in negative work outcomes
2 How does contingency theory work? By measuring a leader s LPC score and the three situational variables, one can predict whether the leader is going to be effective in a particular setting. Once the nature of the situation is determined, the fit between the leader s style and the situation can be evaluated. low LPCs are effective in Categories 1, 2, 3, and 8. high LPCs are effective in Categories 4,5,6, and 7. middle LPCs are effective in Categories 1,2, and 3.
3 Strengths CT has several major strengths. It is supported by great deal of empirical research(peters, Hartke, & Pohlman, 1985). CT has broadened our understanding of leadership by focusing us to consider the impact of situations on leaders. CT is predictive and therefore provides useful information about the type of leadership that is most likely to be effective in certain contexts. CT is advantageous because it does not require that people be effective in all situations. CT provides data on leaders styles that could be useful to organizations in developing leadership profiles.
4 Criticisms Although many studies support the validity of CT, it has also received much criticism in the research literature. CT has been criticized because it fails to explain fully why people with certain leadership styles are more effective in some situations than in others. Fiedler(1993) calls this a black box problem. A second major criticism of CT concerns the LPC scale. The LPC scale has been questioned because it does not seem valid on the surface, it does not correlate well with other standard leadership measures(fiedler, 1993). It is not easy to complete correctly. The LPC scale measures a person s leadership style by asking the person to characterize another person s behavior. It does not make sense on the surface to measure your style through your evaluations of another person s style. *** LPC scale is a measure of a person s motivational hierarchy. The LPC scale measures a respondent s style by assessing the degree to which the respondent sees another person getting in the way of his or her own goal accomplishment.
4 Criticisms Although many studies support the validity of CT, it has also received much criticism in the research literature. Another criticism of CT is that it is cumbersome to use in real-world setting. it entails assessing the leader s style and three complex situational variables(leadermember relations, task structure, and position power), each of which requires a different instrument. A final criticism of CT is that it fails to explain adequately what organizations should do when there is a mismatch between the leader and the situation in the workplace. CT does not advocate teaching leaders how to adapt their styles to various situations as a mean to improve leadership in an organization. Rather, this approach advocates that leaders engage in situational engineering, which means in essence changing situations to fit the leader. In fact, situations are not always easily changed to match the leader s style.
5 Application CT has many applications in the organizational world CT can be used to answer a host of question about the leadership of individuals in various types of organizations. CT can be used to predict whether a person who has worked well in one position in an organization will be equally effective if moved into a quite different position in the same company. CT can point to changes that upper management might like to make in a lower-level position in order to guarantee a good fit between an existing manager and a particular work context. These are just a few of the ways in which this theory could be applied in organizational setting.
6 Leadership instrument The LPC scale is used in CT to measure a person s leadership style. It measures your style by having you describe a coworker with whom you had difficulty completing a job. This needn t be a coworker you disliked a great deal but rather someone with whom you least like to work. Low LPCs are task motivated. Their primary needs are to accomplish tasks, and their secondary needs are focused on getting along with people. Middle LPCs are socio-independent leaders. In the context of work, they are self-directed and not overly concerned with the task or with how others view them. High LPCs are motivated by relationships. These people derive their major satisfaction in an organization from interpersonal relationships. See the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) measure in the textbook(p.124).
6 Leadership instrument Scoring interpretation Your final LPC score is the sum of the numbers you circled on the 18 scales. If your score is 57 or below, you are a low LPC you are task motivated. If your score is within the range of 58-63, you are a middle LPC you are independent. If your score is 64 or above, you are a high LPC you are relationship motivated. Because the LPC is a personality measure, the score you get on the LPC scale is believed to be quite stable over time and not easily changed. Research shows that the test-retest reliability of the LPC is very strong (Fiedler & Garcia, 1987).
7 Summary CT represents a shift in leadership research from focusing on only the leader to looking at the leader in conjunction with the situation in which the leader works. It is a leader-match theory that emphasizes the importance of matching a leader s style with the demands of a situation. To measure leadership style, a personality-like measure called the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) scale is used. highly task motivated : low LPCs socio-independent : middle LPCs relationship motivated : high LPCs To measure situations, three variables are assessed. leader-member relations task structure position power
7 Summary CT suggests that low LPCs are effective in extremes and that high LPCs are effective in moderately favorable situations. The strengths of CT include that it is backed by a large amount of research it is the first leadership theory to emphasize the impact of situations on leaders it is predictive of leadership effectiveness it allows leaders not to be effective in all situations it can provide useful leadership profile data On the negative side, CT can be criticized because it has not adequately explained the link between styles and situations it relies heavily on the LPC scale, which has been questioned for its face validity and workability CT is not easily used in ongoing organizations it does not fully explain how organizations can use the results of this theory in situational engineering