According to Northouse (2007), Contingency theory studies how effective leaders are based on both their style and the leadership situation. The thinking is that matching style to situation makes the best leader (Northouse, 2007). The three leadership styles used in Contingency Theory are 1. Task Motivated Leaders – who are motivated by goal accomplishment, 2. Socio-Independent Leaders – who are more self-directed and less concerned with either tasks or relationships, and 3. Relationship Motivated Leaders – who are more interested in their relationship with their followers (Northouse, 2007).
The three situational factors used in Contingency Theory are 1. Leader-Member Relations – which is how loyal employees are to their leaders and how much confidence leaders instill in their employees, 2. Task Structure – which is how delineated and clearly understood the requirements for completing a task are, and 3. Position Power – which is whether the leader has the authority to hire, fire, discipline or reward employees (Northouse, 2007).
Northouse (2007) states that these factors are measured using the Least Preferred Coworker scale (LPC). You evaluate the person who is your least preferred coworker on the 18-item survey and then total your responses. Your total score indicates your preferred leadership style, with up to 57 indicating low LPC or task motivated leaders, 58 – 63 indicating middle LPC or socio-independent leaders, and 64 and above indicating high LPC or relationship motivated leaders (Northouse, 2007).
A new leadership position just opened in the registration department at the hospital where I work. The position is for a FT Supervisor for the 3p-11p shift. All our Managers work dayshift, so this would be more of a “team lead” position. They are looking to promote someone that currently works at the hospital in the registration department.
Looking at the situational factors, this position would have Good Leader-Member Relations because the candidate would be someone that all the managers and department employees already and have a good working rapport with them.
This position would have High Task Structure because the job is very straightforward. It requires employees to speak to every patient that enters the hospital in a pleasant manner, to maintain confidentiality while gathering demographic information to fill out two electronic forms, and to collect a co-payment if indicated.
However, the position would have Weak Position Power because while the Supervisor is responsible for being available during shifts to make immediate decisions about work processes or computer issues, they will not have the power to hire or fire, discipline or reward employees. The Manager position handles those duties, and a Supervisor will only report any issues or recommendations to them. On the Contingency Model these findings indicate that this situation would be a level 2 and the best leader style would be either a Low LPC or a Middle LPC (Northouse, 2006).
I decided to take the LPC Measure to see if it says I would be a good fit for the Supervisor position. The directions were a bit unclear, asking you to “Think of the person with whom you can work least well” and “describe the person as he or she appears to you” (Northouse, 2007). I am not sure if this means observations of them as they work? Or how you feel about them when working with them. When I take the test based on my observations, I get a score of 21, which means I am Low LPC. This is because what I see when this person interacts with others is a very negative overall air about them. When I take the test based on how I feel when working with this person, I get a score of 60, which means I am Middle LPC. That’s because even though this person has a negative air, it doesn’t affect how I do my job. I am motivated by doing the best job I can do, not by being the #1 employee or by being best friends with my coworkers.
The Contingency Model states that either Low or Middle LPC would be a good style for a level 2 situation (Northouse, 2007). Either way, whether I would be listed as Low LPC or Middle LPC, my leadership style would work well with the Supervisor position situation.
References
Northouse, P. (2007). Contingency Theory. Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. pp 113-126. Retrieved from https://reserve-libraries-psu-edu.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/psy/532/53201.pdf