Fiedler's Contingency Model
The Fiedler contingency model is a
leadership theory of industrial and organizational psychology developed
by Fred Fiedler (born
1922), one of the leading scientists who helped his field move from the
research of traits and personal characteristics of leaders to leadership
styles and behaviours.
Two Factors of Fiedler's Contingecy
Model
Many scholars assumed that there was one best style of
leadership. Fiedler�s contingency model postulates that the leader�s
effectiveness is based on �situational contingency� which is a result of
interaction of two factors: leadership style and situational
favourableness (later called situational control). More than 400 studies
have since investigated this relationship.
Least preferred co-worker (LPC)
The leadership style of the leader, thus, fixed and measured by what he
calls the least preferred co-worker (LPC) scale, an instrument for
measuring an individual�s leadership orientation. The LPC scale asks a
leader to think of all the people with whom they have ever worked and
then describe the person with whom they have worked least well, using a
series of bipolar scales of 1 to 8, such as the following:
Unfriendly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Friendly
Uncooperative 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Cooperative
Hostile 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Supportive
.... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ....
Guarded 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Open
The responses to these scales (usually 18-25 in total) are summed and
averaged: a high LPC score suggests that the leader has a human
relations orientation, while a low LPC score indicates a task
orientation. Fiedler assumes that everybody's least preferred coworker
in fact is on average about equally unpleasant. But people who are
indeed relationship motivated, tend to describe their least preferred
coworkers in a more positive manner, e.g., more pleasant and more
efficient. Therefore, they receive higher LPC scores. People who are
task motivated, on the other hand, tend to rate their least preferred
coworkers in a more negative manner. Therefore, they receive lower LPC
scores. So, the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) scale is actually not
about the least preferred worker at all, instead, it is about the person
who takes the test; it is about that person's motivation type. This is
so, because, individuals who rate their least preferred coworker in
relatively favorable light on these scales derive satisfaction out of
interpersonal relationship, and those who rate the coworker in a
relatively unfavorable light get satisfaction out of successful task
performance. This method reveals an individual's emotional reaction to
people with whom he or she cannot work. Critics point out that this is
not always an accurate measurement of leadership effectiveness.
Situational favourableness
According to
Fiedler, there is no ideal leader. Both low-LPC
(task-oriented) and high-LPC (relationship-oriented) leaders can be
effective if their leadership orientation fits the situation. The
contingency theory allows for predicting the characteristics of the
appropriate situations for effectiveness. Three situational components
determine the favourableness or situational control:
1. Leader-Member Relations, referring to the degree of mutual trust,
respect and confidence between the leader and the subordinates.
2. Task Structure, referring to the extent to which group tasks are
clear and structured.
3. Leader Position Power, referring to the power inherent in the
leader's position itself.
When there is a good leader-member relation, a highly structured task,
and high leader position power, the situation is considered a "favorable
situation." Fiedler found that low-LPC leaders are more effective in
extremely favourable or unfavourable situations, whereas high-LPC
leaders perform best in situations with intermediate favourability.
Leader-Situation Match and Mismatch
Since personality is relatively stable, the contingency model suggests
that improving effectiveness requires changing the situation to fit the
leader. This is called "job engineering." The organization or the leader
may increase or decrease task structure and position power, also
training and group development may improve leader-member relations. In
his 1976 book Improving Leadership Effectiveness: The Leader Match
Concept Fiedler (with Martin Chemers and Linda Mahar) offers a self
paced leadership training programme designed to help leaders alter the
favourableness of the situation, or situational control.
Examples of Fiedler's Contingecy Model
* Task-oriented leadership would be advisable in natural disaster, like
a flood or fire. In an uncertain situation the leader-member relations
are usually poor, the task is unstructured, and the position power is
weak. The one who emerges as a leader to direct the group's activity
usually does not know any of his or her subordinates personally. The
task-oriented leader who gets things accomplished proves to be the most
successful. If the leader is considerate (relationship-oriented), he or
she may waste so much time in the disaster, which may lead things to get
out of control and lives might get lost.
* Blue-collar workers generally want to know exactly what they are
supposed to do. Therefore, their work environment is usually highly
structured. The leader's position power is strong if management backs
his or her decision. Finally, even though the leader may not be
relationship-oriented, leader-member relations may be extremely strong
if he or she is able to gain promotions and salary increases for
subordinates. Under these situations is the task-oriented style of
leadership is preferred over the (considerate) relationship-oriented
style.
* The considerate (relationship-oriented) style of leadership can be
appropriate in an environment where the situation is moderately
favorable or certain. For example, when (1) leader-member relations are
good, (2) the task is unstructured, and (3) position power is weak.
Situations like this exists with research scientists, who do not like
superiors to structure the task for them. They prefer to follow their
own creative leads in order to solve problems. In a situation like this
a considerate style of leadership is preferred over the task-oriented
Opposing views of Fiedler's Contingecy
Model
* Researchers often find that Fiedler's contingency theory falls short
on flexibility.
* They also noticed that LPC scores can fail to reflect the personality
traits they are supposed to reflect.
* Fiedler�s contingency theory has drawn criticism because it implies
that the only alternative for an unalterable mismatch leader orientation
and an unfavorable situation is changing the leader.
* The model�s validity has also been disputed, despite many supportive
tests (Bass 1990).
* Other criticisms concern the methodology of measuring leadership style
through the LPC inventory and the nature of the supporting evidence
(Ashour 1973; Schriesheim and Kerr 1977a, 1977b; Vecchio 1977, 1983).
Fiedler and his associates have provided decades of research to support
and refine the contingency theory.
* Cognitive Resource Theory (CRT) modifies
Fiedler�s basic contingency
model by adding traits of the leader (Fiedler and Garcia 1987). CRT
tries to identify the conditions under which leaders and group members
will use their intellectual resources, skills and knowledge effectively.
While it has been generally assumed that more intelligent and more
experienced leaders will perform better than those with less
intelligence and experience, this assumption is not supported by
Fiedler�s research.
Summary of Fiedler's Contingecy Model
To
Fiedler, stress is a key determinant of leader effectiveness (Fiedler
and Garcia 1987; Fiedler et al. 1994), and a distinction is made between
stress related to the leader�s superior, and stress related to
subordinates or the situation itself. In stressful situations, leaders
dwell on the stressful relations with others and cannot focus their
intellectual abilities on the job. Thus, intelligence is more effective
and used more often in stress-free situations. Fiedler has found that
experience impairs performance in low-stress conditions but contributes
to performance under high-stress conditions. As with other situational
factors, for stressful situations Fiedler recommends altering or
engineering the leadership situation to capitalize on the leader�s
strengths. Despite all the criticism, Fiedler's contingency theory is an
important theory because it established a brand new perspective for the
study of leadership. Many approaches after Fiedler's theory have adopted
the contingency perspective.
Fred Fiedler�s situational contingency theory holds that group
effectiveness depends on an appropriate match between a leader�s style
(essentially a trait measure) and the demands of the situation. Fiedler
considers situational control the extent to which a leader can determine
what his or her group is going to do to be the primary contingency
factor in determining the effectiveness of leader behavior.
References
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiedler_contingency_model
|
