Читать реферат по английскому: "Theoretical Reflections Essay Research Paper Theoretical Reflections" Страница 1

(Назад) (Cкачать работу)

Theoretical Reflections Essay, Research Paper

Theoretical Reflections – Contingency Theory

Research Notes

(Considerations for Technology Driven Reform)

Contingency theory suggests that appropriate behavior in a given situation

depends on a wide variety of variables and that each situation is different.

What might work in one organization, set of issues, or employee group might not

work in a different organization with its own set of issues and employees.

Effectiveness of schools, for example, is contingent upon the leadership style

of the principal and the favorableness of the situation (Hendricks, 1997). This

methodology acknowledges that no one best way exists to manage in a given

situation and those situational variables, from both the internal and external

environments impact on leadership practice.

Leadership styles cannot be fully explained by behavioral models. The

situation in which the group is operating also determines the style of

leadership that is adopted. Several models exist which attempt to understand the

relationship between style and situation; the four major theories comprising my

contingency category are Fiedler’s Contingency Model, Situational Theory,

Path-Goal Theory, and the Vroom-Yetton Leadership Model.

Fiedler’s Contingency Model

Fiedler’s model assumes that group performance depends on:

Leadership style, described in terms of task motivation and relationship

motivation.

Situational contingencies, determined by three factors:

1. Leader-member relations – Degree to which a leader is accepted and

supported by the group members.

2. Task structure – Extent to which the task is structured and defined, with

clear goals and procedures.

3. Position power – The ability of a leader to control subordinates through

reward and punishment.

High levels of these three factors give the most favorable situation, low

levels, the least favorable. Relationship-motivated leaders are most effective

in moderately favorable situations. Task-motivated leaders are most effective at

either end of the scale. Fiedler suggests that it may be easier for leaders to

change their situation to achieve effectiveness, rather than change their

leadership style.

Fielder, F. (1967). A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York: McGraw.

This theory defines factors that determine how the leader’s personality and

styles of interacting with others affects the group performance and

organization. The appropriateness of the leadership style for maximizing group

performance is contingent upon the favorableness of the group-task situation.

Group performance is related to both the leadership style and the degree to

which the situation provides the leader with the opportunity to exert influence.

Fiedler (1967) defines the group, leader, and leader effectiveness:

The Group: A set of individuals who share a common fate and are

interdependent in the sense that an event that affects one member will affect

them all.

Leader: The individual in the group given the task of directing and

coordinating task-relevant group activities or who in the absence of a

designated leader, carries the primary responsibility for performing these

functions in the group.

Leader Effectiveness: "…Defined in terms of the group’s output, it’s

morale, and the satisfactions of its members.

Feidler also classifies groups according to the work relations among the

members:

Interacting groups: Require close coordination of several team members on the

performance of the primary task. Many tasks also require the close and

simultaneous coordination of two of more people.

Co-acting groups: Members work together on a common task, but each member

does their job relatively independently of other team members.

Counteracting groups: Individuals work together for the purpose of

negotiating and reconciling conflicting opinions and purposes. Each member works

toward achieving his or her own ends at the expense of the other, to an extent.

Situational Theory (Paul Hersey & Kenneth Blanchard)

This theory suggests that leadership style should be matched to the maturity

of the subordinates. Maturity is assessed in relation to a specific task and has

two parts:

Psychological maturity – Their self-confidence and ability and readiness to

accept responsibility.

Job maturity – Their relevant skills and technical knowledge.

As the subordinate maturity increases, leadership should be more

relationship-motivated than task-motivated. For four degrees of subordinate

maturity, from highly mature to highly immature, leadership can consist of:

Delegating to subordinates.

Participating with subordinates.

Selling ideas to subordinates.

Telling subordinates what to do

Lord, Robert G. and Maher Karen J. (1991) Leadership and Information

Processing: Linking Perceptions and Performance. Massachusetts: Unwin Hyman,

Inc.

Situational Model of Hersey and Blanchard. – emphasize the importance for the

leader to consider the stage of organizational development of each of their

followers and to adapt their type of leadership to the followers developmental

level. Hersey and Blanchard talk about the leader and emphasize the influence of

their actions on the organization, through their followers. The leader can

Похожие работы