Contingency Or

Situational Approach
PREPARED BY:

SHEENA CLAIRE V. DELA PENA

There’s nothing so practical as a good
theory - Dr Kurt Lewin
A future event or circumstance that is
possible but cannot be predicted with
certainty.

A provision for a possible event or

circumstances
 CONTINGENCY THEORY
• Contingency theory is a Leader-Match theory
(Fiedler & Chemers, 1974) – Tries to match
leaders to appropriate situations.
• Northouse (2004) believes that effective leadership is
contingent on matching the leader’s style to the right setting.
• Leader’s effectiveness depends on how well
the leader’s style fits the context
• Behavioral theory which believe that there
is no best way to organize a corporation, to
lead a company or to make a decision.
• There is no one best type of leadership; that is, what is effective for one
person may not be effective for another (Boseman 2008).
 CONTINGENCY THEORY
• Contingency theory states that these actions
are dependent to the internal and external
factors. – no single theory of contingency
management.

• The effectiveness of leadership depends on :

1. Leader
2. Followers
3. Situational Factors
 CONTINGENCY THEORY
• The essential feature of the theory is its behavioral approach that
relates to the optimal fit of organizational structure based on
contingent situations (Bastian & Andreas, 2012). It has no one best
way of organizing, leadership style that proved effective in one
situation may not be most successful in another.
• Donaldson (2001), provides that theory is concerned with leadership
and situations, matching leadership style to situations. The style is
either task motivated or relationship oriented, and situations- leader-
member relations, task structure and position power. The leadership
style is contingent upon both internal and external environment
variables while effective leadership depends on how well the leader’s
style fits the context
 CONTINGENCY THEORY
• The Contingency Theory of Leadership has proven to be one of the
most valid and reliable measures of individual leadership potential
(Waters, 2013).
• Kannan (2008) lists the main features of the contingency theory are
as follows:
1. Management is essentially situational
2. Management should therefore adopt its approach and strategy in
tune to the requirements of each particular situation
3. Since management effectiveness and success are directly related to
its ability to cope up with the environment and to the changes
overtaking therein, it should sharpen its diagnostic skills to be
proactive and to anticipate and comprehend environmental changes
4. In short the successful manager should recognize that there is no
one best way or thumb rule to manage.
 Contingency theory of leadership in
•
the workplace
To lead their team well, managers and supervisors
may need to either adapt their leadership style to the
current situation or delegate some of their leadership
responsibilities to a coworker.

• For example: Consider a project manager named

Doug. Doug finds it much easier to communicate in
writing rather than in person, so he usually
encourages his team by sending them thoughtful
emails at the end of every week. However, there is a
new employee in the office who is not very receptive
to written communication. To connect with this
employee, Doug will need to either make an effort to
change his method and encourage this employee in
person or he will have to assign this task to the
assistant manager.
 Contingency theory of leadership in
•
the workplace
The contingency theory of leadership is impacted by a
range of specific factors in the average workplace,
including:

• Maturity level of the employees

• Relationships between coworkers
• Work pace
• Management style
• Typical work schedule
• Goals and objectives
• Standards for behavior
• Company policies
• Employees’ work styles
• Employees’ morale
 Contingency theory of leadership
• In the research done by Deepak Khazanchi, Bjørn Erik Munkvold
and Aleksandra Lazareva which is,Towards a Contingency Theory
of eLearning (2015)
• Using the contingency theory and its concept of “fit”, they
presented a theoretical model of eLearning that aids in defining
the ideal profile that result from a combination of learner
engagement, learner style, learning task, and the appropriate
leveraging of IT capabilities.
Contingency theory of leadership
 Contingency theory of leadership
• In their study the respondents were taught using both synchronous and
asynchronous technology capabilities. This allowed students with
differing learning styles to stay consistently engaged in the class over its
full period. They provided opportunities for communication, team
process and interaction by and among students with differing learning
styles, bundling together a variety of ITC. Respondents also worked on
the structured and unstructured learning tasks that were required in the
course both individually and in groups by using Huddle to communicate
asynchronously and/or Adobe Connect and Skype to interact
synchronously. The use of this array of information technology
capabilities resulted in greater engagement of all students on an
ongoing basis.
 CONTINGENCY THEORIES

FIEDLER MODEL Hersey and Blanchard’s

Situational Theory

Leader-
(PATH-GOAL) CONTINUUM &
Participation
NORMATIVE
Model
DECISION MODEL
 FIEDLER’S THEORY
Fred Edward Fiedler (1922)
• leading experts on the study of leadership and
organizational performance
• social organizational and industrial psychology.
• started his research into changing the way that people think
of
leadership.
• 1954, development of the Least Preferred Co-worker scale.
• 1967, lead to the publishing of his famous book, ‘A Theory of
Leadership Effectiveness.”
• This book proposed his contingency model of leadership,
the first leadership theory to measure member- leader
relationships.
 FIEDLER’S THEORY
• In Fiedler's Contingency Model, we'll look at how it can
highlight the most effective leadership style to use in different
situations

• The theory is based on determining the situational elements and

the leader orientation.

• The leader orientation was found to be most effective as

the situation changed from low to moderate to high
control

• House & Aditya (1997) say that this theory is one of the
very first leadership theories that specifies how the
situational variables interact with the leader personality
and behavior
 FIEDLER’S THEORY
• Fiedler explain group performance
based on two factor :

1. Leadership Style
2. Situational Favorableness
 FIEDLER’S THEORY
Leadership Style

1. Relationship-oriented leader:
 who recognizes the importance of developing strong and
positive emotional ties with followers.
2. Task-oriented leader:
 who doesn’t value relationships and instead focuses only on the task.

Use 3 variables to help determine leadership style:

1. Leader - Member Relationship (acceptance as leader)
2. Task Structure (degree to which job is
3. Leader Position Power routine)
(legitimate/coercive/reward)
 FIEDLER’S THEORY
Leader- Member- Relations
 The relationship between a leader and his or her
followers.
 Situation is favorable for leading when relations are good.

Task Structure
 The extent to which the work to be performed by a
group is clearly defined.
 Situation is favorable for leading when structure is high.

Leader Position Power

 The amount of formal authority a leader has.
 Situation is favorable for leading when power is high.
 Study

KUNDU, SRIJANI and MONDAL, PARIKSHIT

Dr., "Luminance Of Contingency Theory In
Revealing The Leadership Style Of The
Academic Librarians" (2019).
The purpose of their study was to identify the compatibility of
the inborn leadership style of the librarians to their situational
leadership style using Fiedler’s Contingency Theory of
Leadership. The result of the study showed that all the
librarians are identically inherited relationship-oriented
leaders but they are task-oriented leaders in the regular
situations of the library. The evidence of both positive and
negative covariance has been found where power position
seems to be playing the pessimistic role. It can also be found
that the relationship between task structure and leader
member relationship is the strongest whereas that of LPC
scale and position power is lowest.
 Using the Model

• Step 1. Identify your Leadership Style

The first step is to determine your preferred

leadership style using the LPC scale.
• Tuai (2011) ascertained that interpersonal
differentiation can be measured using Fiedler’s
“Least Preferred Co-worker” instrument.
• Profiles of the leaders can also be known through
the LPC scale (Gupta, 2009)
You can use the following table to score yourself on
the LPC scale. Fill in your answers keeping in mind
the one person that you least like to work with.
Least-Preferred Co-Worker Scale
 Using the Model
• Step 1. Identify your Leadership Style

You can now calculate your LPC score by totaling

all the numbers you circled. You can interpret your
score as follows:

73 and above: You are a relationship-oriented

leader.

54 and below: You are a task-oriented leader.

Between 55 and 72: You are a mixture of both and

it’s up to you to determine which style suits you
the best.
.
 Using the Model
• Step 2: Understand your Situation
• To understand the situation you are facing
answer the following questions:

• Is trust with your team high or low (member

relations)?

• Are tasks vague or clear-cut and well understood

(task structure)?

• Is your authority low or high (position power)?

• The easiest way to do this is to score each

answer from 1 to 10, with 10 representing the
highest value.
 Using the Model
• Step 3: Find the Right Leadership Style
 Fiedler’s Contingency Theory
Review of Literature

• There are 3 kinds of situations Very Favourable Situation: when

all three situational elements are high, Intermediate
Favourableness: when some of the situational elements are low
and others are high and Unfavourable Situation: when all three
situational elements are low (Peretomode, 2012;Furnham, 2005).
• Kuhn (2007) ascertained that Fiedler’s model partially works in
public library and it is extremely robust in predicting group
performance. She also asserted that though the Fieldler’s model
talks about primary and secondary goals but most public
librarians do not have serious secondary motivational goals
According to Kuhn, though Fiedler’s model could perhaps be
applied to the daily mechanical workings of a public library, it
does not correlate to the individual humanity of the workers or
the nature of the mission of a library. Position Power is the more
significant dimension in public libraries.
• Profiles of the leaders can also be known through the LPC scale
(Gupta, 2009)
 Advantages of Fiedler’s
Contingency Theory
• Prescriptive
• Expertise and Research
• Leader Identification
• Flexibility
 Advantages of Fiedler’s
Contingency Theory
• The theory is extremely well researched, given
the stated parameters.
• For a "thumb-in-the-wind" approach to
identifying leaders, Fiedler's contingency theory
can assist enormously, leaders with good
personal relations are matched to a poorly
structured task environment.
• For leaders who are impersonal, they are placed
in well task structured environment because this
is a contingency theory, it is inherently more
flexible than a "one takes all" theory
 Disadvantages of Fiedler’s
Contingency Theory
• Least preferred co-worker (LPC) scale is
subjective, and characteristics are relative in
contexts.
• Even according to Fiedler, the LPC score is valid
only for groups that are closely supervised and
does not apply to "open ones" such as teams.
• It is questionable whether Fiedler's contingency
theory is valid in all situations, such as when
neither the task is well defined and no choice of
leaders is to be had, except ones with bad
personalities.
 Implications of Fiedler’s
Contingency Theory
• Relationship-motivated leader (predicts will
be most effective)
Maintain close interpersonal relationship with
subordinates.
• The group will achieve high group performance
(due to the leader’s motivational system and the
degree to which the leader controls and influences
the situation)

• It will be easier for leader to exercise influence in

accomplishing tasks
(due to the degree of confidence, trust, and respect
subordinates have in the leader assesses it)
 Implications of Fiedler’s
Contingency Theory
Task-motivated leader
• The leader has power, informal backing,
relatively structured task.

• The group is ready to be directed and the group

expects to be told what to do.
(Task is well-divided evenly and accordingly)

• Successful in very favorable conditions.

(Subordinates have enough guidelines and
instructions in completing their part of job)
HOUSE PATH GOAL
 • Developed by Robert House,
1971
Definition
 Path-goal theory centers on how leaders motivate
subordinates to accomplish designated goals.
 Dixon and Hart (2010) found a significant positive correlation
between path-goal leadership styles and workgroup
effectiveness
 Emphasizes the relationship between

 the leader’s style

 the characteristics of the subordinates

 the work setting

 This theory explains the relationship between
the leader‘s style of leadership and both the
characteristics of the follower and the situation
(Northouse 1997; Northouse 2004).
 This theory explicates that a leader’s behavior
is motivating or satisfying to the follower if the
behavior increases the attractiveness of the
goals, while simultaneously, increasing the
follower confidence in achieving them (Howell
& Shea 2001).
 Perspective

 Goal - To enhance employee performance and

satisfaction by focusing on employee motivation
 Motivational Principles (based on Expectancy Theory) -
Subordinates will be motivated if they believe:
 they are capable of performing their work

 that their efforts will result in a certain outcome

 that the payoffs for doing their work are worthwhile

 35

Conditions of Leadership Motivation

Leadership generates motivation when:

 It increases the number and kinds of payoffs
subordinates receive from their work
 Makes the path to the goal clear and easy to travel
through with coaching and direction
 Removes obstacles and roadblocks to attaining the goal

 Makes the work itself more personally satisfying

BASIC IDEA BEHIND PATH GOAL
THEORY
MAJOR COMPONENTS OF PATH
GOAL THEORY
LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOURS
 Directive Leadership

 Supportive Leadership

 Participative Leadership

 Achievement- Oriented Leadership

 Note: House assumes leaders are

flexible, can display any behaviors
depending on the situations.
Directive Leadership
 Leader who gives subordinates task
instruction including:
 What is expected of them
 How task is to be done
 Timeline for task completion
 Clear standards of performance
 Clear rules & regulations
Supportive Leadership
Leader who is friendly and approachable:
 Attending to well-being & human needs of
subordinates
 Using supportive behavior to make work
environment pleasant
 Treating subordinates as equals & giving them
respect for their status
Participative Leadership
 Leader who invites subordinates to
share in the decision-making:
 Consults with subordinates

 Seeks their ideas & opinions

 Integrates their input into

group/organizational decisions
Achievement-Oriented Leadership
 Leader who challenges subordinates to
perform work at the highest level possible:
 Establishes a high standard of excellence for
subordinates
 Seeks continuous improvement
 Demonstrates a high degree of confidence in
subordinates’ ability to establish & achieve
challenging goals
Subordinate Characteristics

Strong need for affiliation

 Friendly and concerned leadership is a source of
satisfaction
 Supportive Leadership

Preference for Structure

 Dogmatic & authoritarian

• Leadership provides psychological structure, task

clarity, & greater sense of certainty in work setting
 Directive Leadership
 Subordinate Characteristics

Desire for Control

Internal locus of control
 Leadership that allows subordinates to feel in
charge of their work & makes them an integral part
of the decision-making process
 Participative Leadership
External locus of control
 Leadership that parallels subordinates feelings that
outside forces control their circumstances
 Directive Leadership
Subordinate Characteristics

Perception of their own ability – specific

task

 As perception of ability and competence

goes up, need for highly directive
leadership goes down
 Directive leadership may become
redundant, possibly excessively controlling
 Task Characteristics

Components

 Design of subordinates’ task

 Organization’s formal authority system

 Primary work group of subordinates

 Task Characteristics

Task Situations Requiring Leader Involvement

 Unclear and ambiguous - Leader needs to provide
structure
 Highly repetitive - Leader needs to provide support
to maintain subordinate motivation
 Weak formal authority - If formal authority system
is weak, the leader needs to assist subordinates by
making rules and work requirements clear
 Nonsupportive/weak group norms - Leader needs
to help build cohesiveness and role responsibility
 Task Characteristics
Obstacles
 Anything in the work setting that gets in the way of
subordinates
 They create excessive uncertainties, frustrations, or threats
for subordinates
 Leader’s responsibility is to help subordinates by –
 Removing the obstacles
 Helping subordinates around them

 Assisting with obstacles will increase

 Subordinates’ expectations to complete the task
 Their sense of job satisfaction
Path-Goal Theory Matrix
Study
Dr. Riffat-un-Nisa Awan M.Ed., PhD ” A Study Of Path-
Goal Relations Between Leaders Of College Principals
And Their Subordinates In Pakistan”(2009)
This study was designed to investigate the relationship among leadership behavior
of degree college principals, selected organizational and personal characteristics,
and faculty job satisfaction, acceptance of leader and job expectancies. The
moderators included task structure, role ambiguity, stress, need for autonomy,
need for achievement, perception about ability and locus of control. Correlation
analysis indicated that leadership styles were positively related to job expectancies
and negatively related to acceptance of leader and job satisfaction. Majority was
satisfied with their work on the job, supervision, coworkers and job in general and
were dissatisfied with their pay and the promotion policy. Regression analysis
indicated that only experience and length of service under current principal had
significant affect on acceptance and satisfaction.
All these results clearly indicate that principals of degree colleges needs to
understand and take into account the dynamics of the groups, nature of the work
assignments and personal characteristics of the teaching faculty to be successful
in their organizations and to perform an effective leadership role. Leadership can
not be performed in vacuum. Leaders need to understand the situational factors
that are working behind the seen.
Study
JOHARI MAT,” THE INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP
STYLE ON INTERNAL MARKETING IN RETAILING”
(2008)
The research examined the relationship between leadership style (LS)
of the head of department (HOD), internal marketing (IM), job satisfaction (JS)
and the HOD performance (HP) and to examined which leadership style
(directive, supportive, participative or achievement oriented) has a significant
effect on internal marketing competency.
The results showed that leadership style has a significant effect on the
HOD performance variable. All leadership styles, except supportive style, have
significant effects on HOD performance. The achievement oriented and
participative styles have positive significant effects, but the directive style has a
negative effect on HOD performance.
The overall results show that achievement oriented and participative styles
have positive significant effects directly and are mediated by internal marketing
effects on job satisfaction and HOD performance. But the directive style of
leadership has a significant direct negative effect and is mediated by internal
marketing on HOD performance only and not on job satisfaction
Study
It has been observed that the leadership variable has a direct and significant effect on all
dependent variables. First, the linear regression results show that leadership style has a direct
and significant effect on the internal marketing variable. The results showed that the
achievement oriented and participative styles are positively associated with internal
marketing. The achievement oriented is somewhat a better predictor than participative style
in predicting variability in internal marketing. Conversely, the directive style is negatively
associated with the internal marketing variable. The only leadership style that has no
significant effect on internal marketing is the supportive style.
How Does The Path-Goal
Theory Approach Work?
• Focus of Path – Goal Theory
Approach

• Strengths

• Criticism

• Applications
 How Does The Path-Goal
Theory Approach Work?
 The leader’s job is to help subordinates
reach their goals by directing, guiding, and
coaching them along the way
 Leaders must evaluate task and subordinate
characteristics and adapt leadership style to
these
 The theory suggests which style is most
appropriate for specific characteristics
Path-Goal Theory Approach

Focus Overall Scope

 Path-goal theory is a  Path-goal theory
complex but also provides a set of
pragmatic approach assumptions about how
 Leaders should choose different leadership
a leadership style that styles will interact with
best fits the needs of subordinate
subordinates and their characteristics and the
work work situation to affect
employee motivation
 Northouse, 2004 suggests that the leaders should able
to change their leadership style in order to meet the
needs of the staff.
STRENGTHS
 Useful theoretical framework – Path-goal
theory is a useful theoretical framework for
understanding how various leadership behaviors
affect the satisfaction of subordinates and their
work performance.

 Integrates motivation – Path- goal theory

attempts to integrate the motivation principles of
expectancy theory into a theory of leadership

 Practical model – Path-goal theory provides

practical model that underscores and highlights
the important ways leaders help subordinates.
 Criticisms
 Interpreting the meaning of the theory can be
confusing because it is so complex and
incorporates so many different aspects of
leadership: consequently, it is difficult to implement
 Empirical research studies have demonstrated only
partial support for Path-goal theory.
 It fails to adequately explain the relationship
between leadership behaviour and worker
motivation.
 The path-goal theory approach treats leadership
as aa one-way event in which the leader affects
the subordinate.
Application

 PGT offers valuable insights that can be applied

in ongoing settings to improve one’s leadership.
 Informs leaders about when to be directive,
supportive, participative, or achievement
oriented.
 The principles of PGT can be employed by
leaders at all organizational levels and for all
types of tasks.
 THE ORIGIN
 The theory of Situational Leadership was
developed in the late 1960’s by Paul Hersey and
Ken Blanchard.

 The theory was first introduced as the Life Cycle

Theory of Leadership.

 In the mid of 1970’s this theory was renamed to

Situational Leadership Theory.
Dr. Paul Hersey Dr. Ken Blanchard
 It is a contigency theory which emphasis on the
maturity of the followers.
The use of a different pattern of leadership behaviour depending on
the maturity of an individual follower (Yukl, Kim, & Chavez 1999; Yukl
1998).
 A successful leadership is based on the
selection of the appropriate leadership style.
 This style should be well adopted by the
followers where they can and are able to accept
the responsibilities when carrying out a specific
or assigned task.
Leadership Styles
 The situational leadership theory, developed by Paul Hersey and Kenneth
Blanchard, identifies four basic leadership styles: directing, coaching,
supporting, and delegating, and suggests that those in leadership roles should
consider under what circumstance each style might be effective (Lunenburg &
Ornstein, 2004).
 Telling (S1): In this leadership style, the leader tells people
what to do and how to do it.
 Selling (S2): This style involves more back-and-forth between
leaders and followers. Leaders "sell" their ideas and message
to get group members to buy into the process.
 Participating (S3): In this approach, the leader offers less
direction and allows members of the group to take a more
active role in coming up with ideas and making decisions.
 Delegating (S4): This style is characterized by a less involved,
hands-off approach to leadership. Group members tend to
make most of the decisions and take most of the responsibility
for what happens.
FOUR MATURITY LEVELS OF THE
GROUP:
 M1:Incompetence or unwilling to perform an
assigned
task.
 M2:Inability to complete an assigned task but is
willing try the task out.
 M3:Competent to perform the task but has a
mental
block.
 M4:The group is positive where the members
are willing to perform the assigned task.
Matching Styles and Levels

 Low Maturity (M1)—Telling (S1)

 Medium Maturity (M2)—Selling (S2)
 Medium Maturity (M3)—Participating (S3)
 High Maturity (M4)—Delegating (S4)
 LEVELS OF DEVELOPMENT

 D1- Enthusiastic Beginner

 D2- Disillusioned Learner

 D3- Reluctant Contributor

 D4- Peak Performer

LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT-D1
LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT-D2
LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT-D3
LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT-
D4
The Life
Cycle
Model by
Hersey-
Blanchard
In order to
understand how the
model works in
teaching leadership,
Halima (2006)
enlists the behaviors
of teachers in using
different teaching
styles
STUDY
Contingency theory to study leadership styles of small businesses owner-managers at
Santo Domingo, Ecuador by Gelmar Garcı´a Vidal, Reyner P´erez Campdesun˜er,Alexander Sa
´nchez Rodrı´guez and Rodobaldo Martı´nez Vivar (2017)
To study the leader behavior facing particular situations at
small enterprises of Santo Domingo, Ecuador, using Paul
Hersey and Kenneth H.Blanchard approach.
 The results showed that there was a correspondence
between the results obtained and the principles of the
SLT that states that the behaviors of the quadrants 2 and
3 seem to be more appropriate when people manifest
average maturity. This corresponds with the owner-
managers’ perception of the level of maturity of their
subordinates and the perception of their own style of
leadership. So they are behaving correctly from their
point of view. Following the theory, when working with
people who show maturity above the average, the
greater probability of success appears with behaviors
collected in quadrant 4. In this case, the leader uses the
correct leadership style according to the perception of
the owner-managers’ style of employees, as well as the
perception of their level of maturity. The mismatch is
seen in the employees’ perception of the use of directing
style which is not congruent with the perception of their
level of maturity. This concluded that the style of
leadership is mostly congruent with the perception of
the level of maturity of the employees.
STUDY
Impact of Leadership Style of Teacher
on the Performance of Students: An
Application of Hersey and Blanchard
Situational Model Shaukat Ali Raza
and Asma Sikandar (2017)

The study explored the impact of leadership style of

teacher on the performance of students in the light of
Hersey and Blanchard situational model.
 Data were collected through readiness level scale
and achievement tests from 80 students of 8th grade
in Lahore city using a pretest-posttest experimental
design. Results showed that readiness level of
students can be changed through leadership style of
the teacher which has direct impact on students’
performance. There was a significant difference in
achievement scores of ‘telling’ and ‘selling’
intervention techniques against ‘participating’ and
‘delegating’ styles reflecting a strong positive impact
on the performance of students particularly having
low readiness level. It was suggested that educational
administrators should provide training to teachers to
use situational approach at different learning levels to
improve students’ performance
CONTINGENCY THEORY OF
DECISION MAKING
 Normative Leadership
Vroom, Yetton & Jago
• This model was originally developed by Vroom and Yetton in 1973 to help the
managers decide when and to what extent they should involve the subordinates in
solving a problem.

• Decision theory prescribes that the use of structured (normative) decision-making methods
enables a decision-maker to arrive at a well-reasoned course of action (Hazelrigg, 2012).
Normative decision-making, enables the comparison of multiple variables (Rey, 2004; DCLG,
2009) and is considered particularly helpful in the early stages of a project (Turskis et al.,
2009).

• Yroom-Yetton’s decision making model is useful and effective one and structured very

complicated way: it also introduces a clear statement of what the leader is supposed to

reach the final decision (Lunenburg & Ornstein, 2008).

 Normative Leadership
Vroom, Yetton & Jago
• Vroom, Yettonand Jago (1998 as cited by Lunenburg,
2010) offered the five decision making styleswell-
known as the Yroon- Yetton’s decision making model
to call for all instructorsto participate in decision
making process of the hierarchy of school.
• This model isolates five styles of leadership from
fully autocratic to fully democratic;
A I, A II, C I, C II & G II.
The choice of style depends on the situation.
 Vroom and Yetton defined five different decision
procedures. Two are autocratic (A1 and A2), two are
consultative (C1 and C2) and one is Group based (G2).
• A1: Leader takes known information and then decides
alone.
• A2: Leader gets information from followers, and then
decides alone.
• C1: Leader shares problem with followers individually,
listens to ideas and then decides alone.
• C2: Leader shares problems with followers as a group,
listens to ideas and then decides alone.
• G2: Leader shares problems with followers as a group
and then seeks and accepts consensus agreement.
 Factors of this model

One-
Autocratic
Group
Style
Style
( AI &
(GII)
AII)
Consultative
Style
(CI & CII)
 Understanding the Model:
When you sit down to make a decision, your style, and
the degree of participation you need to get from your
team, are affected by three main factors:
• Decision Quality – how important is it to come up with
the "right" solution? The higher the quality of the
decision needed, the more you should involve other
people in the decision.
• Subordinate Commitment - how important is it that your
team and others buy into the decision? When teammates
need to embrace the decision you should increase the
participation levels.
• Time Constraints – How much time do you have to make
the decision? The more time you have, the more you
have the luxury of including others, and of using the
decision as an opportunity for teambuilding.
 According to Lunrnburg & Ornstein(2008), while in
decision, the leader should consider three kinds of
feasible situations:(1) decision quality- it means the
decision making effectiveness, decision result howor to
what extent the decision having been made is
implemented for problem solutionand which goal the
decision making will lead. (2) decision acceptance- it
meansinstructors’ acceptance of leader’s decision making
that includes the need for theiraccountability, their prior
approval, congruence of their goals with faculty’s goals.
(Lunrnburg & Ornstein, 2008; Newstrom & Davis, 1997).
(3) timeliness- it refers tothe time period the most
possible for decision makers to reach the final decision
action(Lunrnburg & Ornstein, 2008).
The Vroom-Yetton-Jago Decision
Model
Situational factors that influence the method are relatively logical:
•When decision quality is important and followers possess useful
information, then A1 and A2 are not the best method.
•When the leader sees decision quality as important but followers do not,
then G2 is inappropriate.
•When decision quality is important, when the problem is unstructured
and the leader lacks information / skill to make the decision alone, then
G2 is best.
•When decision acceptance is important and followers are unlikely to
accept an autocratic decision, then A1 and A2 are inappropriate.
•When decision acceptance is important but followers are likely to
disagree with one another, then A1, A2 and C1 are not appropriate,
because they do not give opportunity for differences to be resolved.
•When decision quality is not important but decision acceptance is
critical, then G2 is the best method.
•When decision quality is important, all agree with this, and the decision
is not likely to result from an autocratic decision then G2 is best.
• Some research finding showed that in situation that time was also limited, and task
structure was high, autocratic decision-making style might increase efficacy and
decrease anxiety and directly facilitate the group members to accomplish the task
(Jr,2007). Northuse (2010) found that subordinates were low in motivation,
confidence and mastery skills, the autocratic decision-making style was better to
use.
• Owens (2001) also found that consultative (participative) decision making is great
only when time requirement is sufficient and their involvement was optimized
whereas participation of instructors in decision produces some advantages to share
knowledge, express free feeling and offer information. However, this study finding
is consistent with Chance & Chance (2002)’s finding that consultative decision is
less effective when decision falls within leader’s zone of acceptance and there is
no enough time, experience and leading to frustration
• Proff (2008) found that shared (group) decision making style could generate five
domains- communication, collaboration, responsibility and accountability that
place in shared decision making. The effective leader viewed the decision-making
as not isolative activities but result of collaborative effort of teams
• Chance& Chance (2002) suggested, however, that in group decision, time
limitation always meets constraints to call for all members whereas it produces
very effective result, but it requires more time than do individual.
• Northouse (2010) suggested group decision making style might provide the
leaders and members to diagnose and correct the team problem; it provides a
cognitive guide to help leaders design and maintain effective teams and it takes
into account the changing role of leaders and subordinates in organization.
Lunenburg &Ornstein (2008) explained that group decision making style is great
if the group is cohesive, the group became isolated from qualified outsiders and
leaders’ members had their own favored solution.
AI Manager solve the problem or make
decisions himself, using the information
available at that time.

A II Manager obtains necessary information from

the subordinates, then decides on the solution
to the problem himself. They may or may not
tell the subordinates what the problem is when
they request information. The role of the
subordinates is confined to providing useful
information.
CI Manager shares the problem with relevant
subordinates individually, gets their ideas
and suggestions without bring them together
as group. Then, manager makes the
decision which may or may not reflect
subordinates’ influence.
C II Manager shares the problem with the
subordinates as a group, collectively obtains
their ideas and suggestions. Then makes
the decision which may or may not reflect
subordinates’ influence.
G II Manager shares the problem with
subordinates as a group. Manager and
subordinates together generate and
evaluate alternatives and attempt to reach
consensus on a solution. Manager does
not tries to influence the group to adopt
their preferred solution, and they accept &
implement the solution that has the support
of the entire group.
STUDY
A STUDY OF INSTRUCTORS’ DECISION MAKING STYLES INGRADUATE
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION AND GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PSYCHOLOGY AT
ASSUMPTION UNIVERSITY OF THAILAND, Panyacekka(2017)
This study intended to describe the demographic data and decision making styles of instructors
in the Graduate School of Education and the Graduate School lPsychology at Assumption
University of Thailand
.Ten instructors from Graduate School of Education and four instructors fromthe Graduate
School of Psychology were used in this case study. The study was primarily based on three
decision making styles: autocratic style, consultative style and group style.
This study found which decision making style the instructors most practice when they attempted
to make a decision concerning the issues they confronted in faculties. Meanwhile, the Group
(shared) decision making style was found as the most preferred decision making style in the
study.
The present research identified that the instructors in GSoE and GSoP in private Assumption
University most practiced the group decision making style while sometimes they seemed to use
consultative decision making style. This finding is also consistent with the research finding of
Jayasingam & Cheng(2009) that modern workers preferred to use the participative decision
making style because they have enough skills on job and they want to take apart in decision
making process.
THE LEADERSHIP CONTINUUM
MODEL
Use to determine which one of seven styles to select based on one’s
use of boss- centred versus subordinate centred leadership to meet the
situation

Before selecting one of the seven leadership styles, the leader must
consider the following three variables:

• The leader’s preferred style

• The followers’ preferred style for the leader
• The situation
 THE LEADERSHIP CONTINUUM
MODEL
Tannenbaum and Schmidt’s Leadership Continuum (in Oyetunyi, 2006) is one of the
most significant situational approaches to leadership. They suggest that managers
choose a leadership pattern among a range of leadership styles. The choice is made
along a continuum of boss-centered versus employee centered and autocratic-
participative-free-rein leadership. For the leader to choose the most appropriate style,
he/she needs to consider certain forces in the manager, the subordinates and the
situation.
Oyetunyi (2006) quotes Vroom and Jago (1988:1) who assert that this model, like the
path-goal theory, describes how a leader should behave in certain contingencies to
enhance effectiveness. It is based on one aspect of the leader‘s behavior and focuses on
the subordinates’ involvement in decision-making. The authors assume that a leader
may exhibit different leadership styles; this is particularly important when it relates to
the decision-making process
 1. Leader makes decision and announces it to
employees without discussion

2. Leader makes a decision and sells it to

employee questions
AUTOCRATI

3. Leader presents ideas and invites

employee questions
C

4. Leader presents tentative decision

subject
to change
 5. LEADER PRESENTS PROBLEM, GETS
SUGGESTIONS AND MAKES DECISION.

PARTICIPATIVE
6.LEADER DEFINES LIMITS AND ASKS
EMPLOYEES TO MAKE A DECISION

7.LEADER PERMITS EMPLOYEES TO

MAKE
ONGOING DECISIONS WITHIN DEFINED
LIMITS..
STRENGTHS OF LEADERSHIPCONTINUUM
MODEL

1. Lays out a range of potential strategies for a

leader to choose depending upon their
management style.
2. Presents a range of styles that correspond
with a range of different scenarios. It does
not advocate that any approach is best, but
allows space for different strategies for
different situations.
3. Gives managers scope for experimenting
with different styles to see which works
best for them..
 WEAKNESS IN LEADERSHIP CONTINUUM
MODEL
• Factors used to select
leadership style are
subjective

• Choosing which style to use is

difficult use this model.
STUDY
ANALYSIS OF LEADERSHIP STYLES AND SCHOOL PERFORMANCE OF
SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN UGANDA by YUSUF K.K. NSUBUGA (2008)
The study explored to investigate the relationship between leadership styles and school performance
The study established that there is a strong positive relationship between the leadership style and school
performance; The autocratic leadership style of the school’s head teachers has a negative effect on school
performance. There is a strong positive relationship between democratic leadership style and school
performance in secondary schools in Uganda, and that the democratic leadership style is the most used style
in schools
From the study’s findings, the autocratic leadership style of school head teachers was found to have a
negative effect on school performance in secondary schools in Uganda. It was accordingly recommended that
school head teachers avoid the use of the autocratic leadership tyles in the management of schools. Most
recent conceptions of educational leadership indicate that there is a move away from autocratic leadership
styles to a more democratic mode of decision making in schools. This is in a bid to ensure that decision-
making takes place at the lowest possible level.
This study has established that school performance and in particular students’ academic excellence in
secondary schools in Uganda is positively related to the democratic leadership style employed by school head
teachers and that the democratic leadership style is the most used style in secondary schools. It was therefore
recommended that the head teachers of secondary schools in particular be encouraged to use this style of
leadership in the management of secondary schools
STRENGTHS OF CONTINGENCY THEORIES

1. It has brought better understanding to the

study of leadership

2. It helps know what kind of leaders are

needed for various situations

3. Can help organizations in human resource

planning
WEAKNESSES OF CONTINGENCY THEORIES
1. It doesn’t account for the position of the leader

2. Can be too rigid to practice

3. It doesn’t offer opportunities to improve leaders

THANK YOU
FOR
LISTENING