3. Contingency Theory:
Various research has been done to define the parameter leading to effective leadership. Three most dominant parameter has been as follows.
1. Personality trait
2. Leadership style
3. Interaction between leadership style and group situation
Fiedler talked about the idea of effective leadership style. According to him leadership effectiveness depends upon the situation. The interaction between leadership style and various different situation predicts the effectiveness of leadership behavior. Fiedler contingency model state that effective groups depends on a proper match between a leader style of interacting with sub-ordinates and degree to which situation gives control and influence to the leader.
Fiedler believes
…show more content…
Rejecting 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Accepting
4. Tense 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Relaxed
5. Distant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Close
6. Cold 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Warm
7. Supportive 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Hostile
8. Boring 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Interesting
9. Quarrelsome 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Harmonious
10. Gloomy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Cheerful
11. Open 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Guarded
12. Backbiting 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Loyal
13. Untrustworthy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Trustworthy
14. Considerate 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Inconsiderate
15. Nasty 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Nice
16. Agreeable 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Disagreeable
17. Insincere 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Sincere
18. Kind 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Unkind
Scoring:
Compute your LPC score by totaling all the numbers you circled. Enter that score below:
LPC = _____
Interpretation:
The LPC scale is used by Fiedler to identify a person’s dominant leadership style. Fiedler believes that this style is a relatively fixed part of one’s personality, and is therefore difficult to change. This shows Fiedler to his contingency views, which suggest that the key to leadership success is finding good “matches” between style and situation.
If your score is 73 or above, you are considered a “relationship-oriented” leader. If your score is 64 or below, you are considered a “task-oriented” leader. If your score is 65 to 72, you are a mixture of both, and it is up to you to determine which leadership style is most like
…show more content…
Over the years, LPC has had 5 different meanings.
1) Social distance:
The first interpretation of LPC, in these days called Assumed Similarity between Opposites, was a generalized index of psychological closeness (Fiedler, 1953, 1954). Subjects showed. Less assumed Similarity between themselves and group members they disliked than between themselves and those they liked. Furthermore. it was found that high LPC persons conformed to social pressures more and they were more closely involved with other group members. When re-analyzing some studies which investigated the reactions of others to high and low LPC persons.
2) Task orientation vs. relations orientation:
In (1964, 1967) Fiedler interpreted the LPC score as a personal need in the social context. High LPC subjects were considered to have strong needs to maintain good relationships, while low LPC subjects had strong needs for successful task performance. It was found that high LPC leaders were generally relationship oriented, also. They gained satisfaction and self-esteem from good interpersonal relations. Low LPC leaders. On the other hand, tended to behave in a more task oriented direction. While, they gained most satisfaction and self-esteem from successful task
The MLQ original factor structure was originally formed with transformational leadership according to Burns’ (1978) (as cited by Avolio, Bass, & Jury, 1999). It was based on research in which 198 US Army field grade officers had to evaluate their superior officers using the MLQ (Form 1) (Avolio, Bass, Jung, 1999). Later, there were several problems found in the instrument that were observed and thus, revisions of this instrument took place. Hater and Bass (1988) (as cited by Avolio and et al., 1999), analyzed a revised format of the revision account of the MLQ (Form 4R), which separated active and passive from within the management-by-exception portion. The MLQ instrument has been used for decades in the area of leadership. This instrument
According to Fiedler (cited in Bolden, Gosling, Marturano & Dennison, 2003)., there is no single characteristic or trait that will create a successful leadership style. Rather, he argues that situations actually shape a general leadership style of a manager. Bolden, Gosling, Marturano and Dennison (2003) have observed that within an environment with repetitive tasks, the most effective leadership style might be a directive one, while a participative leadership style might be required in a dynamic environment. Being an effective leader means to control important specific situations. Taking into account these situations, Fiedler presented three situational components that are considered essential for an effective leadership: leader-member relations, task-structure and position power.
Directive leadership is characterized as leaders taking the decision into their own hands and expecting the followers to just follow the instructions. We all have been in one of those groups where someone wants to become Adolf and control everything, am I right? Last but not least, Participative Leadership, which is my favorite, in which the leader involves the group in a goal setting to give input and share feedback with one another. This next theory completely opened my eyes. The dependencies for effective leadership is defined as situations where a mix of factors the control and influence productivity. The contingency theory used LPC to measure a leader’s motivation, and task motivation vs relationship motivation. People who are relationship motivated have an inclination to describe their least favored associates in a more optimistic, pleasant and efficient, and they also received higher LPC scores. Task motivated people have a tendency to rate their least favored associates in a more negative manner. Thus, they receive lower LPC scores. Therefore, the LPC scale is actually not about the least desired coworker. In fact, it is actually about the person who takes the test, and this person 's motivation type. This got me thinking - what kind of LPC am I? Apparently my leader member relationship is good, my task structure was unstructured, and my leader position power is strong. Also , my LPC was Low. I don’t think of myself as the all-out leader, but I have some great followership in my opinion. I feel that leaders can lead more effectively when there is a match between your motivation type and the situation. These matches exist between a task and relationship motivated leader. When a leader and the situation does not match, many things have to be altered. Since
Leadership is a quality which cannot be acquired by any person from the other but it can be acquired by self-determination of a person. Leadership can best be called the personality of the very highest ability-whether in ruling, thinking, imagining, innovation, warring, or religious influencing. Leadership is practiced not so much in words a it is in attitude and in actions. Their actions leave a long lasting memory in the line of history and lead up to may events that occur today. To be a leader one will need many qualities. Leaders have a purpose and strategies to accomplish that purpose. They are driven and motivated. In the end they should be able to attain good results. These innate talents help to make up a leader that will succeed and be efficient in carrying out tasks. But, the purpose of this paper is determine what truly makes a leader successful. A successful leader should be considered more on their impact rather than their accomplishments of their organizations alone for they are not sufficient in determining the key to their success .
The Trait Theory points out that there is a certain type of person making a good leader, with the decisive factor being: having or not having distinctive qualities of being a leader. Despite that, being an effective leader can still be a challenge. External and internal influences impact the effectiveness of the program and must be considered in order to succeed. Which leads us to the Behavioural Theory, thinking of what a good leader actually does. Kurt Lewin developed three leadership types, such as the autocratic leader who is a maker, someone who makes decisions without consultation with others.
The general personality traits, which are related to success both in and outside the workplace, are all inherent in my answers given in the Leadership Assessment Quiz. With statements such as, “it is easy for me to compliment others” and “team members listen to me when I speak,” it is apparent I possess these characteristics. Whereas my task- related personality traits associated with successful leadership, such as courage, still need to be developed. Not only do I know this in myself, but it is clearly pointed out throughout the test, with statements such as, “resolving conflict is an activity I enjoy” and “I would enjoy coaching other members of the team”.
Many Scholars characterize the core qualities and skills necessary for an effective leader. Useem defines leadership as “Creating a vision and translating that vision into actions”. Historically, an effective leader was assumed to be exceptionally knowledgeable, authoritative, and dominate. Those leaders applied the command and control method to lead an organization. With the passage of time, this definition has been changed. The modern definition of an effective leader is honest, courageous, trustworthy, inspirational, and result-oriented. Today’s leaders create shared values and vision, and empower others to achieve their targets.
In my view, people employ certain traits that differentiate us from our neighbor next door, and leadership is no different. The test produced by the University of Kent in the United Kingdom (University of Kent, n.d.) has developed a process that I feel accurately defines what sort of leader you are based on 50 simple questions. I was not surprised by the results and found them to be quite accurate and expected. In this essay, I will explore why I feel the test is an accurate way to determine your leadership style due to my personal experience with
Personality as well as intelligence tells people a lot about an individual. Certain characteristics of one’s personality such as impression and reputation in a social environment may or may not be a good way to gain acknowledgement. In becoming a leader, work ethics must be strong, precise, and others must be able to feel one’s presence. The three abilities that successful leaders have are; the ability to get along with others and build teams, the ability to make sound and timely decisions and the ability to get things done. The mass amounts of leaders only possess one or two of these abilities and a smaller percentage having all three. According to the Five Factor Model (FFM), it is important for leaders to possess dependability, adjustments and surgency. (Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy, page 235)
The Social Motives in the Work Setting assessment begins by asking, “Why would I want to be a leader” (Bethel College, 2003, p. 33)? This can be a question difficult to answer due to the fact that it is probably something we don’t think about. As the results are calculated, the assessment offers three possible reasons why we choose to step into a leadership role. These include power, achievement, and affiliation. Based on the results, I am achievement orientated, I totally agree with ...
According Carpenter, Bauer, Erdogan, (2009), “an effective leader was defined as someone with the ability to influence and motivate others not only to perform work tasks but also to support the organization’s values and meet the organization’s goals” (p.70).
Leadership has been described as a “complex process having multiple dimensions” (Northouse, 2013). Over the past 60 years, scholars and practitioners have introduced a vast amount of leadership models and theories to explain this complex field and examine its many perspectives. Numerous leadership theories and models have attempted to define what makes a leader effective. From the early 1900s, the trait paradigm dominated leadership literature, focusing on inherited traits of leaders and suggesting that “leaders are born, not made”. However, during the 1950s, the trait approach lost enthusiasm as focus shifted to the behavior of leaders. Similar to the trait theory, the behavioral paradigm was based on general effective leadership behaviors
In the contingency leadership theories both the task and the follower’s characteristics are used to determine which behavior is better suited for effective leadership. Within the contingency approach are several factors to consider: the quality of relationships, tasks and activities to be performed, perceptions of the leader based on history, the motivation of both the leader and the follower, and personal characteristics influencing the situation (Leadership Theories and Studies, 2009). The first contingency leadership theories studies were conducted by Fred Fiedler, a leadership researcher and the earliest pioneer in the field of contingency leadership, who focused on how situational variables interact with leader personality and behavior (Contingency Approach to Management, 2009); from these studies he developed the contingency leadership model. The contingency leadership model is used to determine whether a person’s leadership style is task– or relationship-oriented, and if the situation (leader-member relationships, task structure and position power) matches the leader’s style to maximize performance (Lussier & Achua, 2010). Fielder discovered that leadership effectiveness was dependent on the factors of the leader–follower relationship, task structure, and leader position.
What does it take to be an effective leader? This is something that has been asked many times over the course of human history. Some might say that having a strong personality and a commanding presence is needed in order to be a strong leader. Others might say that someone who stays on top of everything and keeps order is more effective as a leader. Everyone has their own opinion on this subject and in many regards, they are not wrong. Good quality leadership is something that is hard to possess and is not something everyone can do. Leadership is something that has been studied and analyzed many times, and from these studies, many theories have emerged from them. Each of these theories of leadership has their own benefits and can be useful
Fiedler’s Theory is stated in the power point presentation as the association between leadership orientation and group effectiveness is contingent on how favorable the situation is for exerting influence. If there is some catastrophe which will befall a group or set of individuals if a task is not complete, then that group will be more effective as they are motivated to complete that task to avert that particular catastrophe.