Think about the different leaders you have come across or even the ones you look up to. What makes their leadership effective in certain situations? Have you ever seen a leader be ineffective in a situation? It is a combination of their leadership style and compliance with the specific situation. Fred Fielder, an Austrian psychologists coined the contingency theory in the 1960’s. After studying the different characteristics and personalities of leader’s, Fielder concluded effective leadership is “contingent on matching the leaders style to the right setting (Uță, 2021).” After all, while your middle school lacrosse coach may have been a great leader on the field, they may have been a horrible neurosurgeon.
Fielder combined his results of several studies into a formula indicating leadership performance is composed of the form of leadership and compliance with the situation (Fielder’s Contingency Theory, 2021). Some leaders are more effective in certain situations while others are less effective. To determine a leaders style, Fielder developed the least preferred-coworker scale (LPC). If you score a low LPC, you are task-oriented. An example of a task-oriented leader is Bill Gates. The skillful billionaire was determined to accomplish all of his goals. He wanted everything done efficiently and effectively as possible. One of Bill Gates goals was to put “a computer on every desk, in every home, running Microsoft software” (Gates 1981). These types of leaders are motivated by the accomplishments of tasks. Scoring a high LPC means you are relationship-oriented. These types of leaders are motivated by relationships. Does a good relationship influence ones control over another individual?
The amount of control a leader has over their followers is know as situational stability. Under situational stability there are three areas of importance; leadership-member relations, task structure, and position power. Trust levels need to be high between the leader and the members to effectively impact the members. In situations with high task structures, all defining rules are very clear and defined. Position power refers to the leaders overall authority. Specific leadership behavior can lead to either high performance or low performance.
To recap, Fiedler’s contingency model is used to predict if a leader will be effective or not in a situation. This can be done by measuring the leadership-member relations, task structure, position power, and LPC score (PSU WC, L6, p. 5). The contingency theory has allowed for a broadened understanding of leadership by explaining how situations impact leaders and their ability to be effective in those specific situations.
References
Uță, L.-C. (2021). Fiedler’s contingency model of Leadership explained. BRAND MINDS. Retrieved February 18, 2022, from https://brandminds.live/fiedlers-contingency-model-of-leadership-explained/
Leadershipahoy. (2021). Fiedler’s contingency theory of leadership – youtube.com. Retrieved February 18, 2022, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubGRWYpXxUM
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2022). PSYCH 485 Lesson 6: Contingency and Path-Goal Theories. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2177519/modules/items/33991709
Gates, B. (1980). A computer on every desk, and in every home, running microsoft software. Microsoft Advertisement. Retrieved from https://www.quora.com/Did-Bill-Gates-really-say-he-wanted-a-computer-in-every-home-and-when-did-he-say-that
I liked this topic idea. This is something I think about ALL the time. Your statement of a coach being a great leader at that sport might be a horrible neurosurgeon is a concept that always keeps me grounded whenever I feel like I am not doing something so great. I always think that a leader is only a leader because they started somewhere before. Although leaders should have certain characteristics, anyone with those certain characteristics can be a leader. The contingency theory is basically stating the amount of power a leader has over their followers and the way I look at it is, that leader is that specific leader for that specific group. However, every other group will have a specific leader. Meaning, just because someone is a leader for example, a camp counselor is a leader of a group of campers but would not be a leader or manager of a hospital because of the difference of power in their leadership.
The fiedler’s contingency model is a good way to predict a leader capabilities for jobs like those that hold a power in leadership.
I really like your blog post and the way you formatted it. It’s easy to read and follow along. To add to your point about Fielder’s studies, Fiedler developed contingency theory by studying the styles of various different leaders who worked in different contexts. According to Northouse (2007), Fiedler primarily studied military organizations. He assessed leaders’ styles, the situations in which they worked, and whether they were effective (Northouse, 2007). As you pointed out, contingency theory is cornered with styles and situations.
Furthermore, to add to your post, contingency theory shares similarities and differences with situational leadership theory. According to the PSU WC lesson commentary (2022), contingency theory recommends putting the right leader in the right situation, whereas situational leadership recommends that the leader adapts to the situation. Within the framework of contingency theory, leadership styles are task motivated or relationship motivated. Task-motivated leaders are concerned primarily with reaching a goal, whereas relationship motivated leaders are concerned with developing close interpersonal relationships (Northouse, 2007). Furthermore, contingency theory suggests that situations can be characterized in terms of three factors: leader-member relations, task structure, and position power (Northouse, 2007). Leader-member relations
consist of the groups’ atmosphere and the degree of confidence, loyalty, and attraction that followers feel for their leader (Northouse, 2007). Task structure is the degree to which the requirements are clear (Northouse, 2007). Lastly, position power is the amount of authority a leader has to reward or punish followers (Northouse, 2007).
A great example of contingency theory that applies to task-motivated leadership is my sorority’s
THON chairs. For those that don’t know what THON is, THON is a student-run philanthropy whose mission is to provide emotional and financial support, spread awareness, and ensure funding for cancer research. My sorority’s THON chairs are in charge of our fundraising efforts and making sure people show up for their shifts at THON. Our THON chairs’ goal was to raise 50,000 dollars for THON this year. They instructed us to attend our fundraiser events, create a donor drive link, donate money ourselves, and sign up for shifts at THON. During THON, the leader-member relations were strong. People showed up to their shifts on time and some people even stayed longer to support the cause. Everyone was standing up, dancing, and cheering. We kept our section filled the entire 46-hour dance marathon. In regard to position power, our THON chairs had the power to fine us or make us be sober sisters at formal if we didn’t show up for our shifts. Can you think about a time in your life when a leadership situation applied to contingency theory? Were you the leader or the follower?
References
Northouse, Peter Guy. Contingency Theory. Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks. SAGE. 2007. 1452203407. pp. 113-126.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2022). PSYCH 485 Lesson 6: Contingency & Path-Goal Theories. Retrieved from
https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2177519/modules