Topic 12

Contingency Theories
& Situational
Leadership
The Contingency Approach
The essence of the contingency approach to
leadership is that leaders are most effective
when they make their behavior contingent upon
situational forces, including group member
characteristics.
Leadership effectiveness is maximized when
leaders correctly make their behaviors
contingent on certain situational and follower
characteristics.
The Contingency Approach (cont.)
The effects of leadership vary from situation to
situation. Aspects of the situation that enhance
or nullify the effects of a leaders traits or
behavior are called situational moderator
variables.

The Contingency Approach (cont.)
Normative Decision Model
(Vroom, Yetton / Vroom,Yetton, and Jago)

The Situational Leadership Theory
(Hershey and Blanchard)

Fiedlers Contingency Theory

The Path-Goal Theory
(House, et.al.)
Contigency Approach (cont)
The four theories share several similarities:
They are theories rather than someones personal opinions.
They 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.
Normative Decision Model
The Normative Decision Model views leadership
as a decision-making process. It specifies what a
leader ought to do in a given situation. It is
solely directed at determining the amount of
subordinate input in the decision-making
process. Normative refers to the idea that the
leader should follow certain prescriptions
indicated in the model.
Two key factors in the model are decision quality
and decision acceptance.
Normative Decision Model (cont.)
Decision quality refers to the objective aspects of
a decision that affect group or individual
performance. When an effective alternative is
chosen, decision quality is said to be high.

Decision quality is not important when the
consequences of choosing various alternatives
are about the same, or when the consequences of
the decision are unimportant.
Normative Decision Model (cont.)
Decision acceptance refers to how committed
group members are to implementing a decision
effectively. If group members are responsible
for implementing a decision, acceptance is
crucial. At times decision acceptance is not an
issue because very few employees are involved in
implementation.
Normative Decision Model (cont.)
The model identifies 5 levels of leader-
subordinate (follower) participation:
AI- leader decides completely alone
AII- leader obtains information from subordinates,
leader decides
CI- Leader shares problem individually with
subordinates, obtains opinions, leader decides.
CII- leader shares problem collectively with
subordinates, obtains opinions, leader decides.
GII- leader shares problem with group, group decides.

Normative Decision Model (cont.)
A decision tree is required to implement the
model. The leader diagnoses situational
variables by considering key questions.

Normative Decision Model (cont.)
The Decision Tree- provides a branching set of
questions to be answered either yes or no
which lead to a set of decision processes that will
protect quality and acceptance. Time and
subordinate development may be factored in if
of importance AFTER ensuring quality and
acceptance by using the decision tree.

The Decision Tree
Evaluation of the Model:
Pro:
Supported by numerous empirical studies
Prompts leaders to ask themselves intelligent,
perceptive, focused questions
Following step-by-step procedures increases
decision-making effectiveness
Evaluation of the Model (cont.) :
Con:
Decision processes are treated as a single, discrete
episode that occur at one point in time
Being a good decision-maker is not enough to be a
good leader
Excludes trial-balloon approaches to decision-
making (leader floating tentative decisions)
More about management than about leadership, and
therefore has little to do with inspiring and influencing
others and bringing about important changes
Situational Leadership Theory
The Situational Leadership Theory explains how
to match leadership style with follower
readiness.
The key contingency factors are group member
characteristics.
Situational Leadership Theory (cont.)
The theory has its roots in the Ohio State Studies
on Leader Behavior.
That study identified 2 distinct leader behavior
categories:
Initiating structure (task behavior)
Consideration (relationship behavior)
Basics of the Model
Task behavior is the extent to which the leader
spells out the duties and responsibilities of an
individual or group.
Relationship behavior is the extent to which
the leader engages in two-way or multi-way
communication.
The Situational Leadership Theory
developed by Hershey and Blanchard,
answers the following questions:

Is there an optimum way for leaders to adjust
their behavior with different followers and
thereby increase their likelihood of success?

If so, then what factors should the leader base
his behavior on?
The Answer:
Answer is that leaders adapt their style or
behavior based on he maturity of their followers.
The most effective style depends on the
readiness level of group members.
Readiness is the extent to which a follower is
able and willing to accomplish a specific task.
Components of Follower Maturity
Job maturity- the amount of task-relevant
knowledge, experience, skill, and ability that the
follower possesses. (i.e. ability, KSAs)

Psychological maturity- the followers self
confidence, commitment, motivation, and self-
respect relative to the task at hand (i.e.
willingness)
Four Levels of Readiness
Style 1- High task and low relationship. The telling style is
directive.

Style 2- High task and high relationship. The selling style
is also directive, but in a more persuasive, guiding, manner.

Style3- High relationship and low task. In the
participating leadership style there is less direction and
more collaboration between leader and group members.

Style 4- Low relationship and low task. In the delegating
style, the leader delegates and is kept informed of progress.
TM 13-6
SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP THEORY
3 2
4 1
High Rel.
Low task
Low Rel.
Low task
High Task
High Rel.
High Task
Low Rel.
(LOW) (HIGH)
TASK BEHAVIOR
(
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
v
e

B
e
h
a
v
i
o
r
)

R
E
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
H
I
P

B
E
H
A
V
I
O
R

(
H
I
G
H
)

R4 R3 R2 R1
FOLLOWER READINESS
MODERATE
HIGH
LO
W
Hersey and Blanchards Situational
Leadership Model
The Situational Leadership Model
Caveat
Any given follower could be low on
readiness to perform one task but
high on readiness to perform a
different task.
Evaluation of the Theory:
Best used with new hires
Can be valuable in training and development
Based on fundamental truth about leadership:
Competent people require the least specific
direction
Gives false impression that all situations are
clear-cut
Popular because of its commonsense approach
but not a lot of empirical research to support its
validity
Evaluation (cont)
Situational Leadership is a 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.
The Contingency Model
Fiedlers contingency theory of leadership states
that best leadership style is determined by the
situation in which the leader works.
It recognizes natural behavioral tendencies of
leaders and suggests certain situations where
these behaviors may be more or less effective.
Probably the earliest and certainly the most well-
known contingency theory.
Some leaders may be generally more supportive and
relationship-oriented, whereas others may be more
concerned with task or goal accomplishment.
The contingency model suggests that leader
effectiveness is primarily determined by selecting the
right kind of leader for a certain situation or
changing the situation to fit the particular leaders
style.
To understand the contingency theory one must look
first at the critical characteristics of the leader
and then at the critical aspects of the situation.
Least Preferred Coworker Scale
To measure leadership style the theory uses an
instrument called the Least-Preferred-Coworker
Scale (LPC)
LPC Handout
LPC Scale
The scale instructs a leader to think of the
single individual with whom he has had the
greatest difficulty working and then to
describe that individual in terms of a series of
bipolar activities.
Based on their LPC scores, leaders are
categorized into two groups:
Low-LPC leaders (primarily motivated by task)
High-LPC leaders (primarily motivated by
relationships)
Scale Interpretation
One who describes the least preferred coworker
in favorable terms is relationship-motivated. In
contrast, a person who describes his or her least
preferred coworker unfavorably tends to be task-
motivated.
Motivational Hierarchies For Low- and
High-LPC Leaders
Task
People
Low-LPC leader motivational
hierarchy
People
Task
High-LPC leader motivational
hierarchy
Situation Dimensions:
The situation is assessed to determine the degree
of situational control, or favorability, for the leader
using three dimensions:
1. Leader-member relations measures how well the group
and the leader get along.
2. Task structure measures how clearly the procedures,
goals, and evaluation of the job are defined.
3. Position power measures how much authority the
leader possesses.
Leader-member relations contribute as much to
the favorability of the leadership situation as do
task structure and position power combined.
Contingency Model Octant Structure For
Determining Situational Favorability
Good Poor
Structured Unstructured Structured Unstructured
High Low High Low High Low High Low
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Leader-member
relations
Task structure
Position power
Octant
Overall situation favorability
High Low
Fiedlers Contingency Model
GOOD POOR
HIGH LO W HIGH LOW
S W S W S W S W
Leader-
Member
Relations
Task
Structure
Position
Power
Kinds of
Leadership
Situations
Very
Favorable
Very
Unfavorable
I II III IV V VI VII VIII 1
Relationship-oriented managers most effective in IV, V, VI, VII.
Task-oriented managers most effective in I, II, III or VIII.
Prescriptions of the Model
The major proposition in contingency theory is
the leader-match concept-leadership
effectiveness depends on matching leaders to
situations where they can exercise more control.
Fiedlers research suggests that low LPC leaders
will perform better in either low favorability
situations or in very high favorability situations.
High LPC leaders will perform best in moderate
favorability situations.
Path-Goal Theory
The path-goal theory of leadership effectiveness
specifies what the leader must do to achieve high
productivity and morale in a given situation.

Path-goal theory, in its most basic form, is based
upon expectancy theory. The effective leader
will ensure valued rewards are available to the
followers (the goal) and will help them find ways
of getting to these goals (the path).
The Path-Goal Theory
The underlying mechanism of the path-goal
theory deals with expectancy, a cognitive
approach to understanding motivation where
people calculate:
Effort-to-performance probabilities
Performance-to-outcome probabilities
Assigned valences or values to outcome
Path-goal theory uses the same basic
assumptions as expectancy theory (to be
discussed in topic 19Motivation)

Leader Behaviors
Leader behaviors- unlike contingency theory,
path-goal theory suggests that leaders may use
varying styles with different subordinates or
even with the same subordinates in differing
situations.
The Four Leader Behaviors of the
Path-Goal Theory
Directive leadership
Supportive leadership
Participative leadership
Achievement-oriented
leadership
Leaders / Path-Goal
Directive leaders give specific directions.
Supportive leaders strive to create a positive
climate.
Participative leaders consult with subordinates
taking their suggestions into account.
Achievement-oriented leaders push goal setting,
higher standards, and show strong confidence in
their followers.
The Followers
Path-goal theory contains follower variables of overall
satisfaction,locus of control,and perceived ability.

Followers will actively support a leader as long as they view the
leaders actions as a means for increasing their own level of
satisfaction.

Followers who believe they are capable of performing a task are not
as motivated by, or willing to accept, a directive leader as they would
a leader with participative behavior.
Evaluation of Theory
Path-Goal Theory is so complicated and has so
many nuances it is primarily studied by
researchers and scholars in the field of
leadership it has little value or at best
questionable value for practicing leaders.