 What is ‘Contingency Theory’?

 Leadership Styles
 Situational Variables
 Research Findings of Leader Style
Effectiveness
 How Does the Contingency Theory
Approach Work?
 Contingency theory is a leader-match
theory (Fiedler & Chemers, 1974)
› Attempts to match leaders to appropriate
situations
 Called ‘contingency’ because the leader’s
effectiveness ‘depends on’ how well the
leader’s ‘style’ fits the ‘situation’
 Fiedler’s generalizations about which styles
of leadership are best and worst are based
on empirically grounded generalizations
 Effective leadership is contingent on
matching a leader’s style to the right
situation

 Hence, assessment based on:

› Leadership Styles
› Situational Variables
 To measure leadership style, a ‘personality-like’
measure called the Least Preferred Co-Worker
(LPC) scale, developed by Fiedler, is used
 Task-motivated (Low LPCs)
› Leaders are concerned primarily with reaching a
goal
 Relationship-motivated (High LPCs)
› Leaders are concerned with developing close
interpersonal relationships
 Socio- independent (middle LPCs)
› Not overly concerned with the task or how others
view them.
1. Leader-Member Relations
Refers to the group atmosphere and the degree of
confidence, loyalty, and attraction that followers
feel for their leader
Good relations – high degree of subordinate
trust, liking, positive group atmosphere
Poor relations –friction exists within the group,
unfriendly atmosphere
2. Task Structure
The degree to which requirements of a task are
clear and spelled out
 High Structure task
 requirements/rules - clearly stated and
known by members
 path to accomplish - has few alternatives
 task completion - can be clearly
demonstrated
 Correct solutions- a limited number exists
(and vice versa in the case of a ‘low
structured’ task)
3. Position Power
The amount of authority a leader has to reward
or punish followers
 Strong Power
 authority to hire or fire, give raises in rank or
pay
 Weak Power
 no right to hire or fire, give raises in rank or
pay
 Together the 3 ‘situational’ factors determine the
favorableness of various situations in organisations.

 Most favorable situations

-good relations
-defined task structure
-strong power

 Least favorable situations

-poor relations
-unstructured tasks
-weak power

 Moderately favorable situations

-Fall between the two extremes
  Certain styles are effective in certain
situations
Favorableness
LPC Score of Situation Definition

Low Very Favorable Situations going very smoothly

Very Unfavorable Situations out of control

High Moderately Situations with some degree

Favorable of certainty; not completely
in or out of leader’s control
 Not clear why people with
high/low/moderate LPC scores are
effective in the particular situations. Even
though it is grounded in research,
researchers are still unclear regarding the
inner workings of the theory.
 Fiedler (1995) reasoning for, why leaders
who are working in a ‘mismatched’
situation are ineffective.
a) LPC style does not match a particular
situation; stress and anxiety result
b) Under stress, the leader reverts to a less
mature coping style learned in earlier
development
c) Leader’s less mature coping style results
in poor decision making and
consequently negative work outcomes
 By assessing the 3 situational variables, any organizational
context can be placed in one of the 8 categories
represented in the Contingency Model. For example (refer to
fig 1), a situation that has good leader-member relations, a
structured task and strong position power would fall in
category 1 (and so on).
 After the nature of a situation is determined, the fit between
leader’s style and the situation can be evaluated.
Low LPCs are effective in 1,2,3,8
High LPCs are effective in 4,5,6,7
Middle LPC are effective in 1,2,3

THE CONTINGENCY THEORY STRESSES THAT YOUR STYLE SHOULD

BE A GOOD MATCH FOR THE SITUATION in order to be an
EFFECTIVE leader.
 Example:
Situation
 Leader–Member Relation – Good
 Task Structure – High
 Position Power – High
 Category – 1
Low LPC – (Individual who is task-oriented will
be effective)
 Your final LPC score is the sum of the
numbers you circled on the 18 sclaes.
 57 or below: low LPC (task motivated)
 58-63: middle LPC (independent)
 64 or above: high LPC (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.
 A high LPC sees positive qualities, even in
the co-worker she or he least prefers,
even though, you (the high LPC) do not
work well with that person.
In an organisation, the high LPC tends to
tasks but only after he or she is certain
that the relationships between people
are in good shape.
 Empirical support: Backed by a large amount of research, found
to be a valid and reliable approach to explaining how effective
leadership can be achieved.
 Broadened the scope of leadership understanding from a
focus on a single, best type of leadership (e.g. trait
approach) to emphasizing the importance of a leader’s style
and the demands of different situations.
 Predictive power as it is possible to determine the probability
of success for a given person in a given situation.
 Does not require that people be effective in all situations.
 Provides data (LPC score) on leader’s styles that could be
useful to organisations in developing leadership profiles to
determine how and where they would best serve an
organisation.
 Does not adequately explain the link
between styles and situations
 The LPC scale has been questioned for its
face validity (lack of clear directions on
whom to choose as a least preferred co-
worker)
 Cumbersome to use in real world settings
 Fails to adequately explain what should
be done about a leader/situation
mismatch in the workplace
 Situational and Contingency approach
 Duration of quiz= 10 minutes
 Weightage= 2%

DO NOT FORGET, YOU ALSO HAVE TO

SUBMIT THE ASSIGNMENT ON MONDAY
(IN CLASS) AS WELL.