Contingency Theories
of Leadership
Wofford & Liska (1993)
Graeff (1997)
Howell et al. (1990)
Peters et al. (1985)
Agenda – July 5, 2005



Reminders
Questions, Comments, and Concerns
Contingency Theories of Leadership







Path-Goal Theory
Situational Leadership Theory
Substitutes for Leadership
Fiedler’s Contingency Theory
Break
TRP 7
Thursday
Reminder
Your Final SAP and TRP are Due
Thursday…the Last Class
In Honor of Your Final
Class…
Pizza and Beverages Will Be
Provided
Turn in SAP 7
Please Pass to the Aisle and then
Pass Forward
Thanks
Questions, Comments,
or Concerns?
The Presence of What Two
Factors Cause Decision Making
Quality to Plummet? Why Is LMX
Referred to as a “Dyadic”
Theory?
Contingency Theories of
Leadership





The “Interaction” Perspective of Leadership
Path-Goal Theory
Situational Leadership Theory
Substitutes for Leadership
Fiedler’s Contingency Theory
Path-Goal Theory


Leaders Influence
Satisfaction and
Performance
Increase Subordinate
Outcomes By:






Clarifying Path to Goals
Reducing Roadblocks to
Goals
Increase JS on the Way
Inclusion of Task
Characteristics and
Subordinate
Characteristics
4 Types of Leaders




Links to VIE

Supportive (Boring)
Directive (Unstructured)
Participative (Complex)
Achievement-Oriented
(High nACH Employees)
Mixed Results
Causal Model for Supportive
Leader on Subordinate Effort
Reduce boredom
Make more tolerable
Increase intrinsic
Value of work
Increase
effort
Supportive
leadership
Increase confidence
And lower anxiety
Increase
effort-performance
expectation
*Yukl (1998). Leadership in organizations (4th Edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Causal Model for Directive
Leadership on Subordinate Effort
Directive
leadership
Reduce
role
ambiguity
Increase
effort-perform
expectation
Increase
incentives
Increase
valence for
task success
Strengthen
reward
contingencies
Increase
perform-reward
expectation
*Yukl (1998). Leadership in organizations (4th Edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Increased
effort
Situational Leadership


Hersey & Blanchard (1977)
Leadership Depends of “Maturity” of
Followers





Job Maturity (KSAs)
Psychological Maturity (Self-Efficacy)
Minimal to Moderate Maturity = Supportive
Moderate to Maximum Maturity = Directive
Developmental Interventions

Simple vs. Contingency Contracting
Amount of
Behavior
Much
Hersey & Blanchard’s Model
Little
Directive
Supportive
M1
M2
M3
M4
Follower Maturity
*Yukl (1998). Leadership in organizations (4th Edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Substitutes for Leadership


Kerr & Jermier (1978)
Identify Aspects of Situation that Minimize
Need for Leaders




Substitutes (Task, Organization, Roles,
Subordinate Characteristics)
Neutralizers (Reward, Authority, External)
Substitutes Make Leaders Redundant
Strong Support for Substitutes and
Neutralizers
Summary of Substitutes Model
Substitute or Neutralizer
Supportive Leadership
Instrumental (Directive) Leadership
A.
Subordinate Characteristics
1.
Experience, ability, training
2.
Professional orientation
Substitute
Substitute
3.
Indifference toward reward
Neutralizer
Neutralizer
Substitute
B. Task Characteristics
1.
Structured, routine
2.
Feedback provided by task
3.
Intrinsically satisfying
Substitute
Substitute
Substitute
C. Organization Characteristics
1.
Cohesive workgroup
Substitute
Substitute
2.
Low position power
Neutralizer
Neutralizer
3.
Formalization
Substitute
4.
Inflexibility
Neutralizer
5.
Dispersed worksites
Kerr & Jermier (1978)
Neutralizer
Neutralizer
Fiedler’s Contingency Theory



Fiedler (1964, 1967)
Situation Moderates Leader Effectiveness and
Subordinate Traits
Based on “Least Preferred Coworker” (LPC)




Indicates Leader’s Motive Hierarchy (nAFF)
High LPC is Considerate
Low LPC is Directive
Based on Situational Favorability

Leader-Member Relations, Position Power, Task Structure
Fiedler’s LPC Model
Leader’s LPC
Group performance
Leader-member relations
Leader position power
Task structure
*Yukl (1998). Leadership in organizations (4th Edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Break
20 Minute Break
TRP 7
Thursday




Last Class
Pizza Party!
SAP and TRP 8 Due
Transformational, Transactional, and
Charismatic Leadership



Conger & Kanungo (1987)
Kuhnert & Lewis (1987)
Judge & Piccolo (2004)