Your Leadership Challenge

After studying this chapter, you should b e able t o :

Understand h o w l e a d e r s h i p is o f t e n A p p l y Hersey a n d Blanchard's situ­ p a r t i c i p a t i o n in specific d e c i s i o n situ­

contingent o n p e o p l e a n d s i t u a t i o n s . ational t h e o r y o f leader style t o t h e ations.
level o f f o l l o w e r r e a d i n e s s .
Apply Fiedler's c o n t i n g e n c y m o d e l t o K n o w h o w to use t h e p o w e r o f situ­
-key relationships a m o n g l e a d e r s t y l e , Explain t h e p a t h - g o a l t h e o r y o f lead­ ational variables t o s u b s t i t u t e for or
situational favorability, a n d g r o u p ership. neutralize t h e n e e d for leadership.
task performance.
Use t h e V r o o m - J a g o m o d e l t o i d e n ­
tify t h e correct a m o u n t of f o l l o w e r

66 The Contingency Approach 79 Alan Robbins, Plastic Lumber Leadership at Work

Company
68 Fiedler's Contingency Model 92 Task versus Relationship Role
87 ArtWeinstein,Whitlock Play
73 Herseyand Blanchard's
Manufacturing
Situational Theory Leadership Development: Cases for
Leader's Self-Insight Analysis
77 Path-Goal Theory
69 T-P Leadership Questionnaire: 93 Alvis Corporation
82 TheVroom-Jago Contingency
Model An Assessment of Style 94 Finance Department

88 Substitutes for Leadership 76 Are You Ready?

In Тле Lead 90 Measuring Substitutes for

Leadership
72 Mark Hurd, Hewlett-Packard
Leader's Bookshelf
77 Carole McGraw, Detroit Public
Schools 67 Leadership a n d the New Science

S
teven Sinofsky leads a team of M i c r o s o f t software engineers working on
the next generation of W i n d o w s operating system software. Over at Apple,
Bertrand Serlet is leading a team to try to make sure the new M a c i n t o s h
operating system is better. Although they hold the same type of j o b , Sinofsky and
Serlet are widely different in their leadership styles. Sinofsky is a meticulous plan­
ner and likes to run a tight ship. " U n d e r Sinofsky," one engineer said, " y o u plan
and you stick to the plan." Serlet, on the other hand, prefers things to be a little
chaotic. He isn't a stickler for rules and procedures, emphasizing a more flexible,
laid-back style. A programmer who has worked under both leaders compared
Sinofsky's style to that of a martial marching band, while Serlet's was compared
to an improvisational jazz group.'
Two leaders, both considered among the technological elite, both highly suc­
cessful, but with two very different approaches to leading. This difference points
to what researchers of leader traits and behaviors eventually discovered: M a n y
different leadership styles can be effective. W h a t , then, determines the success of
a leadership style?
This chapter explores the relationship between leadership effectiveness and
the situation in which leadership activities occur. Over the years, researchers
have observed that leaders frequently behave situationally—that is, they adjust
their leadership style depending on a variety of factors in the situations they
 66 PART 2: R E S E A R C H P E R S P E C T I V E S ON LEADERSHIP

face. In this chapter, we discuss the elements of leader, followers, and the situa-
tion, and the impact each has upon the others. We examine several theories that
define how leadership styles, follower attributes, and organizational character-
istics fit together to enable successful leadership. T h e important point of this
chapter is that the most effective leadership approach depends on many factors.
Understanding the contingency approaches can help a leader adapt his or her
approach, although it is important to recognize that leaders also develop their
ability to adapt through experience and practice.

The Contingency Approach

T h e failure to find universal leader traits or behaviors that would always deter-
mine effective leadership led researchers in a new direction. Although leader
behavior was still examined, the central focus of the new research was the situa-
tion in which leadership occurred. T h e basic tenet of this focus was that behavior
effective in some circumstances might be ineffective under different conditions.
T h u s , the effectiveness of leader behavior is contingent upon organizational situ-
ations. Aptly called contingency approaches, these theories explain the relation-
ship between leadership styles and effectiveness in specific situations.
T h e universalistic approach as described in Chapter 2 is compared to the
contingency approach used in this chapter in Exhibit 3 . 1 . In the previous chap-
ter, researchers were investigating traits or behaviors that could improve perfor-
mance and satisfaction in any or all situations. They sought universal leadership
traits and behaviors. Contingency means that one thing depends on other things,
and for a leader to be effective there must be an appropriate fit between the
leader's behavior and style and the conditions in the situation. A leadership style
that works in one situation might not w o r k in another situation. There is no one
best way of leadership. Contingency means " i t depends." This chapter's Leader's
Contingency
Bookshelf talks about a new approach to leadership for a new kind of contin-
a theory meaning one thing
depends on other things gency facing organizations today.

Exhibit 3.1 Comparing the Universalistic and Contingency Approaches to Leadership

 Leader^ Bookshelf
Leadership and the New Science
by Margaret J . Wheatley

One lesson learned f r o m t h e Wall S t r e e t are redesigning organizations to sur- • Nurture relationships
meltdown and the recent e c o n o m i c c r i - vive in a quantum world. and the fields between
sis is that being a leader in t o d a y ' s w o r l d people with a clear vision,
Chaos, Relationships, and Fields
means dealing w i t h d r a m a t i c a n d u n e x - statements of values, expressions of
From quantum mechanics and chaos
pected change. Leaders h a v e t o t h i n k caring, the sharing of information, and
theory emerge new understandings of
about the organization in a n e w w a y . freedom from strict rules and controls.
order, disorder, and change. Individual
In searching for a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d - Focus on the whole, not on the
actions, whether by atoms or people,
ing of organizations a n d l e a d e r s h i p , parts in isolation.
cannot be easily predicted and con-
Margaret Wheatley l o o k e d t o s c i e n c e • Reduce boundaries between
trolled. Here's why:
for answers. In the w o r l d o f N e w t o n i a n departments and organizations to
physics, every a t o m m o v e s in a u n i q u e Nothing exists except in relationship allow new patterns of relationships.
predictable trajectory d e t e r m i n e d b y to everything else. It is not things, • Become comfortable with uncer-
the forces exerted o n it. P r e d i c t i o n a n d but the relationships among them, tainty and recognize that any solu-
control are accomplished b y r e d u c i n g that are the key determinants of a tions are only temporary, specific to
wholes into discrete p a r t s a n d c a r e - well-ordered system we perceive. the immediate context, and devel-
fully regulating t h e forces t h a t a c t o n Order emerges through a web of oped through the relationship of
those parts. Applied t o o r g a n i z a t i o n s , relationships that make up the people and circumstances.
this view of the w o r l d led t o r i g i d v e r t i - whole, not as a result of controls on • Recognize that healthy growth of
cal hierarchies, division o f labor, t a s k individual parts. people and organizations is found in
description, and strict o p e r a t i n g p r o c e - • The empty space between things is disequilibrium, not in stability.
dures designed t o o b t a i n p r e d i c t a b l e , filled with r7e/ds, invisible material
controlled results. Wheatley believes leaders can learn
that connects elements together. In
from the new sciences how to lead in
i Just as Newton's law b r o k e d o w n as organizations, the fields that bind
today's fast-paced, chaotic world, sug-
physics explored ever-smaller e l e m e n t s people include vision, shared values,
gesting that "we can forgo the despair
of matter and ever-wider e x p a n s e s o f culture, and information.
created by such common organization
the universe, rigid, c o n t r o l - o r i e n t e d • Organizations, like all open systems,
events as change, chaos, information
leadership doesn't w o r k w e l l in a w o r l d grow and change in reaction to dis-
overload, and cyclical behaviors if we
of instant information, c o n s t a n t c h a n g e , equilibrium, and disorder can be a
recognize that organizations are con-
global competition, a n d f a r - r e a c h i n g source of new order.
scious entities, possessing many of the
[Link] physical sciences r e s p o n d e d
to the failure of N e w t o n i a n p h y s i c s
Implications for Leadership properties of living systems."
These new understandings provide a
with a new paradigm called q u a n t u m Leadership and the New Science, by M a r g a r e t
new way to see, understand, and lead
mechanics. In Leadership and the New J . W h e a t l e y , is published by Berrett-Koehler
today's organizations. The new sciences Publishers.
Science, Wheatley explores h o w l e a d e r s
can influence leaders to:

The contingencies most important to leadership as shown in Exhibit 3.1 are

the situation and followers. Research implies that situational variables such as
task, structure, context, and environment are important to leadership style. T h e
nature of followers has also been identified as a key contingency. T h u s , the needs,
maturity, and cohesiveness of followers make a significant difference to the best
style of leadership.
Several models of situational leadership have been developed. T h e contin-
gency model developed by Fiedler and his associates, the situational theory of
 68 P A R T 2: R E S E A R C H P E R S P E C T I V E S ON L E A D E R S H I P

Exhibit 3.2 Meta-Categories of Leader Behavior and Four Leader Styles

HI High Task-Low Relationship High Task-High Relationship

I • Authoritative style • Coaching toward achievement style
I • Plan short-term activities • Combine task and relationship
I • Clarify t a s k s , objectives, and behaviors
expectations
Bsf • Monitor operations and performance

HSF>1 Low Task-Low Relationship Low Task-High Relationship

^njjt • Delegating style • Participative or supportive style
• Low concern for both t a s k s and • Provide support and encouragement
relationships • Develop followers' skill and confidence
• Consult followers when making
decisions and solving problems

Source: Based on Gary Yukl, Angela Gordon, and Tom Taber, "A Hierarchical Taxonomy of Leadership Behavior: integrating a Half Century
Research," Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies 9, no. 1 (2002), pp. 15-32.

Hersey and Blanchard, path-goal theory, the V r o o m - J a g o model of decision par-

ticipation, and the substitutes for leadership concept will all be described in this
chapter. These contingency approaches seek to delineate the characteristics of situ-
ations and followers and examine the leadership styles that can be used effectively.
Assuming that a leader can properly diagnose a situation and muster the flexibility
to behave according to the appropriate style, successful outcomes are highly likely.
T w o basic leadership behaviors that can be adjusted to address various con-
tingencies are task behavior and relationship behavior, introduced in the previous
chapter. Research has identified these t w o meta-categories, or broadly defined
behavior categories, as applicable to leadership in a variety of situations and
time periods. A leader can adapt his or her style to be high or low on both
2

task and relationship behavior. Exhibit 3 . 2 illustrates the four possible behav-
ior a p p r o a c h e s — h i g h t a s k - l o w relationship, high t a s k - h i g h relationship, low
t a s k - h i g h relationship, and low t a s k - l o w relationship. T h e exhibit describes
typical task and relationship behaviors. High task behav-
ActlOn Memo iors include planning short-term activities, clarifying tasks,
Complete the questionnaire in objectives, and role expectations, and monitoring operations
Leader's Self-Insight 3.1 to assess your a n d
performance. High relationship behaviors include pro-
relative emphasis on two important 8 PP
v i d i n s u
recognition, developing followers' skills
o r t a n d

categories of leadership behavior. a n

confidence, and consulting and empowering followers
d

when making decisions and solving problems.

B o t h Fiedler's c o n t i n g e n c y m o d e l and H e r s e y and
Blanchard's situational theory, discussed in the following sec-
tions, use these meta-categories of leadership behavior but apply
them based on different sets of contingencies.

Loniinuency approaches
approaches that seek to
Fiedler's Contingency Model
delineate the characteristics of An early extensive effort to link leadership style with o r g a n i z a t i o n a l situa-
situations and followers and
examine the leadership styles tion was m a d e by Fiedler and his a s s o c i a t e s . T h e basic idea is simple: M a t c h
5

that can be used effectively the leader's style with the s i t u a t i o n m o s t f a v o r a b l e for his or her success.
 Leaders Self-Insight 3.1
T-P Leadership Questionnaire: An Assessment of Style

The following items describe aspects of leadership behav- Scoring and Interpretation
ior. Assume you are under great pressure for performance The T-P Leadership Questionnaire is scored as follows:
improvements as the leader of a manufacturing work group Your'T" score is the number of Mostly True answers for
of six machine operators. Respond to each item according to questions 1-5. Your "P" score is the number of Mostly True
the way you would most likely act in this pressure situation. answers for questions 6 - 1 0 . A score of 4 or 5 would be
Indicate whether each item below is Mostly False or Mostly considered high for either T or P.
True for you as a work-group leader. Some leaders deal with people needs, leaving task
details to followers. Other leaders focus on specific details
Mostly Mostly
False True with the expectation that followers will carry out orders.

1. I would take charge of what Depending on the situation, both approaches may be
should be done and when to effective. The important issue is the ability to identify rel-
doit. evant dimensions of the situation and behave accordingly.
2. I would stress getting ahead of Through this questionnaire, you can identify your relative
competing groups. emphasis on two dimensions of leadership: task orienta-
3. I would ask the members to tion (T) and people orientation (P). These are not opposite
work harder.
approaches, and an individual can rate high or low on
4. I would speak for the group if
either or both.
there were visitors present.
5. I would keep the work moving What is your leadership orientation? Compare your
at a rapid pace. results from this assignment to your result from the quiz
6. I would permit members to use in Leader's Self-Insight 2.2 in the previous chapter. What
their own judgment in solving
would you consider an ideal leader situation for your style?
problems.
I 7 . I would ask for group feedback Source: B a s e d o n t h e T-P Leadership Questionnaire as published in
" T o w a r d a Particularistic A p p r o a c h to Leadership Style: S o m e Findings,"
on my ideas.
b y T . J . S e r g i o v a n n i , R. Metzcus, a n d L. B u r d e n , American Educational
X 8 . I would let members do their Research Journal 6, no. 1 (1969), pp. 62-79.
work the way they think best.
; 9. I would turn the members loose
on a job and let them go for it.
jj 1 0 . I would permit the group to set
its own pace.

6
T P

Fiedler's contingency m o d e l w a s designed t o e n a b l e leaders t o d i a g n o s e both

leadership style and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s i t u a t i o n .

Leadership Style
The cornerstone of Fiedler's theory is the e x t e n t to which the leader's style is
relationship-oriented or task-oriented. A relationship-oriented leader is concerned
with people. As with the consideration style described in Chapter 2 , a relationship-
oriented leader establishes mutual trust and respect and listens t o e m p l o y e e s '
Fiedler's contingency
needs. A task-oriented leader is primarily motivated by task accomplishment. model
Similar to the initiating structure style described earlier, a task-oriented leader a model designed to diagnose
whether a leader is task-oriented
provides clear directions and sets performance standards.
or relationship-oriented and
Leadership style was measured with a questionnaire k n o w n as the least pre- match leader style to the
ferred coworker (LPC) scale. T h e L P C scale has a set o f 16 bipolar adjectives situation
 P A R T 2: R E S E A R C H P E R S P E C T I V E S ON L E A D E R S H I P

along an eight-point scale. Examples o f the bipolar adjectives used by Fiedler on

xW \.VC. sca\e ioWovc.

open guarded
quarrefsome harmonious
efficient inefficient
self-assured hesitant
gloomy cheerful

If the leader describes the least preferred coworker using positive concepts,
he or she is considered relationship-oriented, that is, a leader w h o cares about
and is sensitive to other people's feelings. Conversely, if a leader uses negative
concepts to describe the least preferred coworker, he or she is considered task-
oriented, that is, a leader w h o sees other people in negative terms and places
greater value on task activities than on people.

Situation
Fiedler's model presents the leadership situation in terms of three key elements
that can be either favorable or unfavorable to a leader: the quality of leader-
member relations, task structure, and position power.
Leader-member relations refers to group atmosphere and members' attitudes
toward and acceptance of the leader. When subordinates trust, respect, and have
confidence in the leader, l e a d e r - m e m b e r relations are considered good. When
subordinates distrust, do not respect, and have little confidence in the leader,
leader-member relations are poor.
Task structure refers to the extent to which tasks performed by the group
are defined, involve specific procedures, and have clear, explicit goals. Routine,
well-defined tasks, such as those of assembly-line workers, have a high degree
of structure. Creative, ill-defined tasks, such as research and development or
strategic planning, have a low degree of task structure. W h e n task structure is
high, the situation is considered favorable to the leader; when low, the situation
is less favorable.
Position power is the extent to which the leader has formal authority over
subordinates. Position power is high when the leader has the power to plan
and direct the w o r k of subordinates, evaluate it, and reward or punish them.
Position power is low when the leader has little authority over subordinates
and c a n n o t evaluate their w o r k or reward them. W h e n position power is high,
the situation is considered favorable for the leader; when low, the situation is
unfavorable.
Combining the three situational characteristics yields a list of eight leadership
situations, which are illustrated in Exhibit 3 . 3 . Situation I is most favorable to
the leader because l e a d e r - m e m b e r relations are good, task structure is high, and
leader position power is strong. Situation VIII is most unfavorable to the leader
because leader-member relations are poor, task structure is low, and leader posi-
tion power is weak. Other octants represent intermediate degrees of favorable-
ness for the leader.

Contingency Theory
W h e n Fiedler e x a m i n e d the relationships a m o n g leadership style, situational
favorability, and group task performance, he found the pattern shown at the
top of Exhibit 3 . 3 . Task-oriented leaders are more effective when the situation is
 iPTER 3: CONTINGENCY A P P R O A C H E S TO L E A D E R S H I P 71

Exhibit 3.3 Fiedler's Classification: How Leader Style Fits the Situation

High
Task-oriented
leader

i Low
р о с Relationship-
oriented
leader

I Very Favorable | Intermediate | Very Unfavorable

Leader-Member Relations I |
ШШШ ЩШШ ШШШ ШШЯ
Task Structure I
L__ I 8 I

Leader Position Power j

Situations
•Durce: Based on Fred E. Fiedler, I
"The Effects of Leadership II
Training III
a n d Experience: IV
A Contingency V Interpretation,"/4dm/nrsfrar/Ve
Model VI VIIScience Quarterly
VIII
• (1972), p. 455

either highly favorable or highly unfavorable. Relationship-oriented leaders are

more effective in situations o f moderate favorability.
The task-oriented leader excels in the favorable situation because everyone
gets along, the task is clear, and the leader has power; all that is needed is for
s o m e o n e to take charge and provide direction. Similarly, if the situation is highly
unfavorable to the leader, a great deal of structure and task direction is needed. A
strong leader defines task structure and can establish authority over subordinates.
Because leader-member relations are p o o r anyway, a strong task orientation will
m a k e no difference to the leader's popularity. Researchers at the University o f
Chicago looked at CEOs of companies in turnaround situations—where c o m p a ­
nies typically have high debt loads and a need to improve results in a hurry—and
found that tough-minded, task-focused characteristics such as analytical skills, a
focus on efficiency, and setting high standards were more valuable leader quali­
ties t h a n were relationship skills such as good c o m m u n i c a t i o n , listening, and
teamwork. 4

T h e relationship-oriented leader p e r f o r m s better in situations o f i n t e r m e ­

diate favorability because human relations skills are i m p o r t a n t in achieving
high group performance. In these s i t u a t i o n s , the leader may be m o d e r a t e l y
well liked, have some power, and supervise j o b s t h a t c o n t a i n s o m e ambiguity.
A l e a d e r with good interpersonal skills can create a positive g r o u p a t m o s p h e r e
that will improve relationships, clarify task s t r u c t u r e , and establish p o s i t i o n
power.
A leader, then, needs to know two things in order to use Fiedler's contingency
theory. First, the leader should k n o w whether he or she has a relationship- or
task-oriented style. Second, the leader should diagnose the situation and deter­
m i n e whether leader-member relations, task structure, and position power are
f a v o r a b l e or unfavorable. Consider h o w M a r k Hurd's leadership style fit the
s i t u a t i o n he found at Hewlett-Packard.
72 P A R T 2: R E S E A R C H P E R S P E C T I V E S ON L E A D E R S H I P

Mark Hurd, Hewlett-Packard

In a spring 2 0 0 9 article, Fortune magazine said Mark Hurd was the kind of guy you
wanted running your company during the economic downturn. Since taking over as
CEO of Hewlett-Packard (HP) in 2005, Hurd has shown himself to be a leader who thrives
in unfavorable circumstances. All computer companies have struggled in recent years
due to the changing environment and global competition, but when Hurd b e c a m e
CEO of HP, the company was the "computer industry doormat." Four years later, it was
the world's biggest technology company and ranked number 30 on Fortune's list of the
world's most admired companies.
Hurd, known as a "peerless control freak" who keeps a spreadsheet to track and
analyze his daily tasks, brought a strong task-oriented style to the struggling HP. One of
his first moves was to slash 10 percent of the workforce and institute rigorous standards
for operational efficiency. He admits he'd rather talk in numbers than words, and his
leadership style reflects that he'd rather deal with reports and analysis than with people.
"Mark's a rack-and-stack guy, and I am, too," says A. G. Lafley, CEO of Procter &
Gamble. "When we meet, there's no chitchat or warm-up. It's right to business." Hurd
uses the same approach with managers and staffers at HP, where he stresses discipline
and accountability and openly complains if he is unhappy with someone's performance.
He sets tough goals and standards for managers, but also gives them the autonomy to
solve problems and meet targets their own way.
When Hurd was appointed as CEO, s o m e observers were questioning whether
anyone could restore HP to glory, much less the unknown and unproven Hurd. Yet by
2009, the company was o n e of the best performers in the industry, and Hurd was being
called one of the best managers in corporate America. Although HP and its employees
have felt s o m e pain due to the recession, the moves Hurd made early in his tenure put
the company in a position to weather the crisis better than most. 5

M a r k Hurd might be characterized as using a task-oriented style in an unfa-

vorable situation. T h e morale of HP employees was at an all-time low, contribut-
ing to poor leader-member relations, and the nature of many tasks in the industry
is unstructured. Hurd had strong position power, but employees had little faith
in his ability to make things better. Overall, HP's circumstances created a very
unfavorable situation, as illustrated in Exhibit 3 . 3 , making
Hurd's task-oriented style just right.
Action Memo An important contribution of Fiedler's research is that
As a leader, you can effectively use a task- it goes beyond the notion of leadership styles to try to show
oriented style when the organizational h o w styles fit the situation. M a n y studies have been con-
situation is either highly unfavorable ducted to test Fiedler's model, and the research in general
or highly favorable to you as a leader. provides some support for the m o d e l . However, Fiedler's
6

Use a relationship-oriented style in model has also been criticized. Using the L P C score as a mea-
7

situations of intermediate favorability sure of relationship- or task-oriented behavior seems simplistic

because human relations skills can to some researchers, and the weights used to determine situa-
create a positive atmosphere. tion favorability seem to have been determined in an arbitrary
manner. In addition, some observers argue that the empirical
support for the model is weak because it is based on correlational
results that fail to achieve statistical significance in the majority
of cases. T h e model also isn't clear about h o w the model works over time. For
instance, if a task-oriented leader such as M a r k Hurd is matched with an unfavor-
able situation and is successful, the organizational situation is likely to improve,
as it did at Hewlett-Packard, thus becoming a situation more appropriate for a
CHAPTER 3: CONTINGENCY A P P R O A C H E S TO L E A D E R S H I P 73

relationship-oriented leader. Will Hurd's task-oriented style continue to be effec-

tive since he contributed to the more favorable circumstances? Can or should he
try to shift to a more relationship-oriented leader style? Fiedler's model doesn't
a d d r e s s this issue.
Finally, Fiedler's model and much of the subsequent research fail to consider
medium LPC leaders, who some studies indicate are more effective than either
high or low LPC leaders in a majority of situations. Leaders w h o score in the
8

mid-range on the LPC scale presumably balance the concern for relationships
with a concern for task achievement more effectively than high or low L P C lead-
ers, making them more adaptable to a variety of situations.
N e w research has continued to improve Fiedler's m o d e l , and it is still consid-
4

ered an important contribution to leadership studies. However, its m a j o r impact

may have been to stir other researchers to consider situational factors more seri-
ously. A number of other situational theories have been developed in the years
since Fiedler's original research.

Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Theory

The situational theory developed by Hersey and Blanchard is an interesting exten-
sion of the leadership grid outlined in Chapter 2 . This approach focuses on the
characteristics of followers as the most important element of the situation, and
consequently of determining effective leader behavior. T h e point of Hersey and
Blanchard's theory is that subordinates vary in readiness level. People low in
task readiness, because of little ability or training, or insecurity, need a different
leadership style than those who are high in readiness and have good ability, skills,
confidence, and willingness to w o r k . 10

leader Style
A c c o r d i n g to the situational theory, a leader can adopt one of four leadership
Styles, based on a combination of relationship (concern for people) and task
(concern for production) behavior. T h e appropriate style depends on the readi-
ness level of followers.
Exhibit 3.4 summarizes the relationship between leader style and follower
readiness. The upper part of the exhibit indicates the four leader styles: telling,
selling, participating, and delegating. T h e telling style reflects a high concern for
tasks and a low concern for people and relationships. This is a very directive style.
The leader gives explicit directions about h o w tasks should be accomplished. T h e
selling style is based on a high concern for both relationships and tasks. With this
approach, the leader explains decisions and gives followers a chance to ask ques-
tions and gain clarity about work tasks. T h e participating style is characterized
by high relationship and low task behavior. T h e leader shares ideas with follow-
ers, encourages participation, and facilitates decision making. T h e fourth style,
the delegating style, reflects a low concern for both tasks and relationships. This
leader provides little direction or support because responsibility for decisions and
their implementation is turned over to followers.
Situational theory
Hersey and Blanchard's
extension of the Leadership Grid
Follower Readiness focusing on the characteristics
offollowersasthe important
The bell-shaped curve in Exhibit 3 . 4 is called a prescriptive curve because it indi-
element of the situation, and
cates when each leader style should be used. T h e readiness level of followers is consequently, of determining
indicated in the lower part of the exhibit. R l is low readiness and R 4 represents effective leader behavior
74 P A R T 2: R E S E A R C H P E R S P E C T I V E S ON LEADERSHIP

Exhibit 3.4 Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Theory of Leadership

FOLLOWER READINESS
HIGH MODERATE LOW
R4 R3 R2 Rl
Able and Able but Unable but Unable and
Willing Unwilling Willing Unwilling
or or or or
Confident Insecure Confident Insecure

FOLLOWER LEADER
DIRECTED DIRECTED

Source: Paul Hersey, Kenneth Blanchard, and D e w e y Johnson, Management of Organizational Behavior. Utilizing Human
Resources, 7th ed. (Upper Saddle River, N J : Prentice Hall, 1996), p. 200. Used with permission.

very high readiness. T h e essence of Hersey and Blanchard's situational theory is

for the leader to diagnose a follower's readiness and select a style that is appropri-
ate for the readiness level, such as the follower's degree of education and skills,
experience, self-confidence, and w o r k attitudes.

Low Readiness Level W h e n one or m o r e followers exhibit very low levels of

readiness, the leader has to be very specific, " t e l l i n g " followers exactly what to
do, h o w to do it, and when. For example, Phil Hagans owns two M c D o n a l d ' s
franchises in northeast H o u s t o n and gives many young workers their first j o b .
He uses a telling style regarding everything from h o w to dress to the correct way
to clean the grill, giving young workers the strong direction they need to develop
to higher levels of skill and self-confidence."
CHAPTER 3: CONTINGENCY A P P R O A C H E S TO L E A D E R S H I P

Moderate Readiness Level A selling leadership style w o r k s well Action Memo

when followers lack some education and e x p e r i e n c e for the j o b As a leader, you can tell followers how to
but demonstrate c o n f i d e n c e , ability, interest, and willingness perform their tasks if they have few skills,
to learn. With a selling style, the leader gives some direction little experience, or low self-confidence. If
but also seeks input from and clarifies t a s k s f o r f o l l o w e r s followers have a moderate degree of skill
rather than merely instructing h o w tasks should be p e r f o r m e d . and show enthusiasm and willingness to
Sheryl Sandberg uses a selling style in her new j o b as chief learn, provide direction but seek followers'
operating officer at F a c e b o o k . M a n y F a c e b o o k employees input and explain your decisions.
are fresh out of college with little e x p e r i e n c e , but they are
energetic, enthusiastic, and c o m m i t t e d . S a n d b e r g ' s style
combines decisive leadership with persuasion and consensus building. She uses
logic and data to explain her decisions, but she also seeks input and f e e d b a c k
from employees. She describes herself as a leader w h o tends to " m e n t o r and
demand at the same t i m e . " 1 2

High Readiness Level A participating style can be effective when followers have
the necessary education, skills, and experience, but they might be insecure in
their abilities and need some direction from the leader. T h e leader can guide
followers' development and act as a resource for advice and assistance. An
example of the participating style is Eric Brevig, a visual-effects supervisor with
Industrial Light and M a g i c , w h o maximizes the creativity o f artists and a n i m a -
tors by encouraging participation. R a t h e r than telling people h o w to do their
jobs, Brevig presents them with a challenge and w o r k s with them to figure out
the best way to meet i t . "

Very High Readiness Level T h e delegating style of leadership can be effectively

used when followers have very high levels of education, experience, and readi-
ness to accept responsibility for their own task behavior. T h e leader provides a
general goal and sufficient authority to do the tasks as followers see fit. Highly
educated professionals such as lawyers, college professors, and social workers
would typically fall into this category. There are followers in almost every orga-
nization who demonstrate high readiness. F o r e x a m p l e , many fast-food outlets
have had great success hiring retirees for part-time j o b s . These older employees
often have high levels of readiness because of their vast expe-
rience and positive attitudes, and leaders can effectively use a Action Memo ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
delegating style. Asa leader, you can act as a resource
In summary, the telling style w o r k s best f o r followers w h o to provide advice and assistance when
demonstrate very low levels of readiness t o t a k e responsibil- followers have a high level of skill,
ity for their own task behavior, the selling and participating experience, and responsibility. Delegate
Ityles are effective for followers with m o d e r a t e - t o - h i g h readi- responsibility for decisions and their
ness, and the delegating style is a p p r o p r i a t e for employees implementation to followers who have very
with very high readiness. In today's multigenerational w o r k - high levels of skill and positive attitudes.
place, with people of widely different ages and readiness lev-
els working side-by-side, many leaders find that they have
to use multiple styles. Aaron B r o w n supervises a team at I B M that includes
e m p l o y e e s who span four decades in age, have w o r k e x p e r i e n c e o f between
three and 30 years, and have varied attitudes, e x p e c t a t i o n s , and ways o f w o r k -
ing. For Brown, getting the best p e r f o r m a n c e out of employees w h o differ
14

so w i d e l y is as challenging—and as e n e r g i z i n g — a s c o p i n g with today's faster,

more competitive business landscape.
H e r s e y and Blanchard's c o n t i n g e n c y model is easier t o understand than
Fiedler's model because it focuses only on the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f f o l l o w e r s ,
 Leaders Self-Insight 3.2
Are You Ready?

A leader's style can be contingent upon the readiness level Scoring and Interpretation
of followers. Think of yourself working in your current or In the Situational Theory of Leadership, the higher the fol-
former job. Answer the questions below based on how you lower's readiness, the more participative and delegating
are on that job. Please answer whether each item is Mostly the leader can be. Give yourself one point for each Mostly
False or Mostly True for you in that job. False answer to items 1 - 3 and one point for each Mostly
True answer to items 4 - 9 . A score of 8 - 9 points would
Mostly Mostly
False True suggest a "very high" readiness level. A score of 7 - 8 points
1. I typically do the exact work would indicate a "high" readiness level. A score of 4 - 6
required of me, nothing more or points would suggest "moderate" readiness, and 0 - 3 points
less. would indicate "low" readiness. What is the appropriate
2. I am often bored and uninter- leadership style for your readiness level? What leadership
ested in the tasks I have to per-
form. style did your supervisor use with you? What do you think
accounted for your supervisor's style? Discuss your results
3. I take extended breaks when-
ever I can. with other students to explore which leadership styles are
4. I have great interest and enthu- actually used with subordinates who are at different readi-
siasm for the job. ness levels.
5. I am recognized as an expert by
colleagues and coworkers.
6. I have a need to perform to the
best of my ability.
7. I have a great deal of relevant
education and experience for
this type of work.
8. I am involved in "extra-work"
activities such as committees.
9. I prioritize my work and manage
my time well.

Action Memo not those of the larger situation. The leader should
evaluate subordinates and adopt whichever style is
Answer the questions in Leader's Self-
n e e d e d . T h e l e a d e r ' s style c a n be t a i l o r e d t o individual
Insight 3.2 to determine your own readiness
s u b o r d i n a t e s similar t o the l e a d e r - m e m b e r e x c h a n g e t h e o r y
level and the style of leadership that would
d e s c r i b e d in C h a p t e r 2 . If o n e f o l l o w e r is at a l o w level o f
be most appropriate for you as a follower.
r e a d i n e s s , the leader m u s t be very specific, telling e x a c t l y w h a t
t o d o , h o w t o d o it, a n d w h e n . F o r a f o l l o w e r high in readiness,
the leader provides a general g o a l and sufficient a u t h o r i t y t o do
the task as the f o l l o w e r sees fit. L e a d e r s c a n carefully d i a g n o s e the readiness
level o f f o l l o w e r s and then tell, sell, p a r t i c i p a t e , o r delegate.
C l a s s r o o m teachers face one o f the toughest leadership challenges around
because they usually deal with students w h o are at widely different levels of
readiness. Consider h o w C a r o l e M c G r a w of the D e t r o i t , Michigan, school system
met the challenge.
 PTER 3: CONTINGENCY A P P R O A C H E S TO L E A D E R S H I P 77

Carole McGraw, Detroit Public Schools

Carole McGraw describes what she sees when she walks into a classroom for t h e first
time: "A ubiquitous sea of easily recognizable faces. There's Jamie, whose eyes glow with
enthusiasm for learning. And Terrell, who just c a m e from t h e crib after having no break-
fast, no supervision of his inadequate homework, and a chip on his shoulder because
he needed to flip hamburgers 'til 10 o'clock at n i g h t . . . . And Matt, w h o slumps over
his desk, fast asleep from the Ritalin he took for a learning disorder that was probably
misdiagnosed to correct a behavior p r o b l e m . . . ."And on and on.
McGraw diagnosed what teenagers have in c o m m o n to find the best way to help
students of such varying degrees of readiness learn. She realized that teenagers are
exposed to countless hours of social networking Web sites, television programs, iPods
and disc jockeys. They spend a lot of time playing sports, eating junk food, text messag-
ing, talking on the phone, playing computer games, going to t h e movies, reading pop
magazines, hanging out with peers, and avoiding adults. After considering this, McGraw
developed her teaching method focused on three concepts: painless, interesting, and
enjoyable. Students in McGraw's biology class now do almost all of their work in labs or
teamwork sessions. During the labs, a captain is selected to act as team leader. In teams,
students select a viable problem to investigate and then split up t h e work and conduct
research in books, on the Internet, and in laboratory experiments. Teams also spend a
lot of time engaged in dialogue and brainstorming. McGraw will throw out an idea and
let the students take off with it.

McGraw's teaching method combines telling and participating. Students are pro-
vided with direction about certain concepts, vocabulary words, and so forth that they
must master, along with guidelines for doing so. This provides the structure and disci-
pline some of her low-readiness level students need to succeed. However, most of her
leadership focuses on supporting students as they learn and grow on their own. Does
McGraw's innovative approach work? Sixty percent of the students get a grade o f A and
all score fairly well on objective tests McGraw gives after the teamwork is complete.
Students from her classes score great on standardized tests like t h e SAT because they
not only accumulate a lot of knowledge but also gain self-confidence and learn how to
think on their feet. "All the stress my kids lived with for years disappears," McGraw says.
"My classroom buzzes with new ideas and individual approaches." 15

Path-Goal Theory
A n o t h e r contingency approach to leadership is called the p a t h - g o a l theory. 16

According to the path-goal theory, the leader's responsibility is t o increase subor-

d i n a t e s ' motivation to attain personal and organizational goals. As illustrated in
E x h i b i t 3.5, the leader increases follower motivation by either ( 1 ) clarifying the
f o l l o w e r ' s path to the rewards that are available or (2) increasing the rewards that
the f o l l o w e r values and desires. Path clarification means that the leader w o r k s
with subordinates to help them identify and learn the behaviors that will lead t o
successful task accomplishment and organizational rewards. Increasing rewards Path-goal theory
a contingency approach
means that the leader talks with subordinates to learn which rewards are impor- to leadership in which the
t a n t t o t h e m — t h a t is, whether they desire intrinsic rewards from the w o r k itself leader's responsibility is
or e x t r i n s i c rewards such as raises or p r o m o t i o n s . T h e leader's j o b is to increase to increase subordinates'
motivation by clarifying the
personal payoffs to subordinates for goal attainment and t o m a k e the paths t o behaviors necessary for task
these payoffs clear and easy to t r a v e l . " accomplishment and rewards
78 P A R T 2: R E S E A R C H P E R S P E C T I V E S ON L E A D E R S H I P

Exhibit 3.5 Leader Roles In the Path-Goal Model

Clarify Path Increase Rewards

Leader defines what follower Leader learns follower's needs
must do to attain work outcomes

Leader clarifies follower's Leader matches follower's needs

work role to rewards if work outcomes are
accomplished

Organizational work out-

comes are accomplished

Source: Based o n and reprinted from Bernard M. Bass, "Leadership: G o o d , Better, Best," Organizational Dynamics 13 (Winter
1985), pp. 26-40. Copyright 1985, with permission from Elsevier.

This model is called a contingency theory because it consists of three sets

of contingencies—leader style, followers and situation, and the rewards to meet
followers' n e e d s . W h e r e a s the Fiedler theory made the
18

Action Memo assumption that new leaders could take over as situations
As a leader, you can Increase follower change, in the p a t h - g o a l theory, leaders change their behav-
motivation, satisfaction, and performance iors to match the situation.
by adopting a leadership behavior
that will clarify the follower's path to
Leader Behavior
receiving available rewards or increase the T h e p a t h - g o a l theory suggests a fourfold classification of
availability of rewards the follower desires. leader b e h a v i o r s . These classifications are the types of behav-
14

ior the leader can a d o p t and include supportive, directive,

achievement-oriented, and participative styles.
Supportive leadership shows concern for subordinates' well-
being and personal needs. Leadership behavior is open, friendly,
and approachable, and the leader creates a team climate and treats
subordinates as equals. Supportive leadership is similar to the consideration or
people-oriented leadership described earlier.
Directive leadership tells subordinates exactly w h a t they are supposed to
do. Leader behavior includes planning, making schedules, setting performance
goals and behavior standards, and stressing adherence to rules and regulations.
Directive leadership behavior is similar to the initiating structure or task-oriented
leadership style described earlier.
CHAPTER 3: C O N T I N G E N C Y A P P R O A C H E S TO L E A D E R S H I P 79

Participative leadership consults with subordinates about decisions. Leader

behavior includes asking for opinions and suggestions, encouraging participation
in decision making, and meeting with subordinates in their workplaces. T h e par-
ticipative leader encourages group discussion and written suggestions, similar to
the selling or participating style in the Hersey and Blanchard model.
Achievement-oriented leadership sets clear and challenging goals for sub-
ordinates. Leader behavior stresses high-quality performance and improvement
over current performance. Achievement-oriented leaders also show confidence in
subordinates and assist them in learning h o w to achieve high goals.
To illustrate achievement-oriented leadership, consider the training of army
officers in the Reserve Officers' Training Corps ( R O T C ) . This training goes far
beyond h o w to c o m m a n d a p l a t o o n . It involves the concepts of m o t i v a t i o n ,
responsibility, and the creation of a team in which decision making is expected
of everyone. Fundamentally, this training will enable officers to respond to any
situation, not just those outlined in the manual. T h u s achievement-oriented lead-
ership is demonstrated: T h e set goals are challenging, require improvement, and
demonstrate confidence in the abilities of s u b o r d i n a t e s . 20

The four types of leader behavior are not considered ingrained personal-
ity traits as in the earlier trait theories; rather, they reflect types of behavior
that every leader is able to adopt, depending on the situation. Here's how Alan
Robbins, founder of Plastic Lumber Company, shifted from a participative to a
directive style and got better results from his employees.

IN THE LEAD
Alan Robbins, Plastic Lumber Company

Alan Robbins started Plastic Lumber Company because he saw a way to both help the
planet and make money by converting plastic milk and soda bottles into fake lumber.
He also had definite ideas about how to run a company. Robbins wanted to be both
a boss and a friend to his employees. His leadership style stressed teamwork and par-
ticipation, and Robbins spent a lot of time running ideas by workers on the factory
floor. However, he soon learned that most of his low-skilled workers didn't really want a
chance to participate; they just wanted clear direction and consistent standards so that
people knew what was expected of them.
The degree of freedom Robbins allowed with his participative style actually led to
some serious problems. S o m e workers were frequently absent or late without calling,
showed up under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and started fights on the factory
floor. Letting employees participate in decision making weakened Robbins's authority
in many employees' eyes. Those who genuinely wanted to do a good j o b were frus-
trated by the lack of order and the fact that s o m e employees seemed to get away with
anything.
Even though Robbins had a natural tendency to be a participative leader, he shifted
to a directive leadership style to try to restore some order. With a comprehensive rules
and policy manual, drug testing for all workers, and clear standards of behavior, the work
'. environment and employee performance at Plastic Lumber improved significantly. ' 2

Alan Robbins had believed his participative style would be appreciated by

employees. However, employee satisfaction increased when he began using a
directive style and specifying what was expected and w h a t behaviors would not
be tolerated. This style enabled people to focus on meeting performance stan-
dards by following clear procedures and guidelines. T h u s , although R o b b i n s
80 P A R T 2: R E S E A R C H P E R S P E C T I V E S ON LEADERSHIP

would prefer to be participative, he realized it was not the best approach for
the situation. T h e Consider This b o x provides an interesting perspective on the
disadvantages of persisting in a behavior style despite the processes of change.

The phrase "too much of a good thing" is relevant in leadership. Behavior that becomes
overbearing can be a disadvantage by ultimately resulting in the opposite of what the indi-
vidual is hoping to achieve.

Polarities
All behavior consists of opposites or polarities. If I do anything more and more, over and
over, its polarity will appear. For example, striving to be beautiful makes a person ugly, and
trying too hard to be kind is a form of selfishness.
Any over-determined behavior produces its opposite:

• An obsession with living suggests worry about dying.

• True simplicity is not easy.
Is it a long time or a short time since we last met?
The braggart probably feels small and insecure.
Who would be first ends up last.

Knowing how polarities work, the wise leader does not push to make things happen,
but allows process to unfold on its own.

Source: John Heider, The Tao of Leadership: Leadership Strategies for a New Age (New York: Bantam Books, 1986),
p. 3. Copyright 1985 Humanic Ltd., Atlanta, GA. Used with permission.

Situational Contingencies
T h e t w o important situational contingencies in the path-goal theory are (1) the
personal characteristics of group members and (2) the work environment. Personal
characteristics of followers are similar to Hersey and Blanchard's readiness level
and include such factors as ability, skills, needs, and motivations. For example,
if an employee has a low level of ability or skill, the leader may need to provide
additional training or coaching in order for the worker to improve performance.
If a subordinate is self-centered, the leader may use monetary rewards to motivate
him or her. Subordinates who want or need clear direction and authority require
a directive leader to tell them exactly what to do. Craft workers and profession-
als, however, may w a n t more freedom and autonomy and work best under a
participative leadership style.
T h e work environment contingencies include the degree of task structure,
the nature of the formal authority system, and the work group itself. T h e task
structure is similar to the same concept described in Fiedler's contingency theory;
it includes the extent to which tasks are defined and have explicit job descriptions
and work procedures. T h e formal authority system includes the amount of legiti-
mate power used by leaders and the extent to which policies and rules constrain
employees' behavior. Work-group characteristics consist of the educational level
of subordinates and the quality of relationships among them.
CHAPTER 3: CONTINGENCY A P P R O A C H E S TO L E A D E R S H I P 81

Use of Rewards
Recall that the leader's responsibility is to clarify the path to rewards for fol-
lowers or to increase the amount of rewards to enhance satisfaction and j o b
performance. In some situations, the leader works with subordinates to help them
acquire the skills and confidence needed to perform tasks and achieve rewards
already available. In others, the leader may develop new rewards to meet the
specific needs of subordinates.
Exhibit 3.6 illustrates four examples of h o w leadership behavior is tailored
to the situation. In the first situation, the subordinate lacks confidence; thus, the
supportive leadership style provides the social support with which to encourage
the subordinate to undertake the behavior needed to do the w o r k and receive
the rewards. In the second situation, the j o b is ambiguous, and the employee is
not performing effectively. Directive leadership behavior is used to give instruc-
tions and clarify the task so that the follower will k n o w h o w to accomplish it
and receive rewards. In the third situation, the subordinate is unchallenged by
the task; thus, an achievement-oriented behavior is used to set higher goals. This
clarifies the path to rewards for the employee. In the fourth situation, an incorrect
reward is given to a subordinate, and the participative leadership style is used to
change this. By discussing the subordinate's needs, the leader is able to identify
the correct reward for task accomplishment. In all four cases, the o u t c o m e of fit-
ting the leadership behavior to the situation produces greater employee effort by
either clarifying how subordinates can receive rewards or changing the rewards
to fit their needs.
Path-goal theorizing can be c o m p l e x , but much of the research on it has
been encouraging.- Using the model to specify precise relationships and make
2

exact predictions about employee outcomes may be difficult, but the four types of

Exhibit 3.6 Path-Goal Situations and Preferred Leader Behaviors

Situation Leader Behavior Impact on Follower Outcome

 82 P A R T 2: R E S E A R C H P E R S P E C T I V E S ON LEADERSHIP

leader behavior and the ideas for fitting them to situational contingencies provide I
a useful w a y for leaders to think about motivating subordinates.

The Vroom-Jago Contingency Model

T h e V r o o m - J a g o contingency model shares some basic principles with the previous
models, yet it differs in significant ways as well. This model focuses specifically
on varying degrees o f participative leadership, and h o w each level o f participa-
tion influences quality and accountability o f decisions. A number o f situational
factors shape the likelihood that either a participative or autocratic approach will
produce the best o u t c o m e .
This model starts with the idea that a leader faces a problem that requires
a solution. Decisions to solve the problem might be made by a leader alone, or
through inclusion o f a number o f followers.
T h e V r o o m - J a g o model is very applied, which means that it tells the leader
precisely the correct a m o u n t o f participation by subordinates to use in making a
particular d e c i s i o n . T h e model has three major components: leader participa-
23

tion styles, a set o f diagnostic questions with which to analyze a decision situa-
Vroom-Jago contingency tion, and a series o f decision rules.
model
a contingency model that
focuses on varying degrees of Leader Participation Styles
participative leadership, and T h e model employs five levels o f subordinate participation in decision making,
how each level of participation
influences quality and ranging from highly autocratic (leader decides alone) to highly democratic (leader
accountability of decisions delegates to group), as illustrated in Exhibit 3 . 7 . T h e exhibit shows five decision
2 4

Exhibit 3.7 Five Leader Decision Styles

Area of Freedom for Group

Area of Influence by Leader

Decide Consult Consult Group Facilitate Delegate

Individually
You make the You present the You present the You present the You permit the group
decision alone problem to the problem to the problem to the to make the decision
and either group members group members group in a meeting. within prescribed limits.
announce or individually, get in a meeting, You act a s The group undertakes
"sell" it to the their suggestions, get their facilitator, defining the identification and
group. You may and make the suggestions, the problem to be diagnosis of the
use your decision. and then make solved and the problem, develops
expertise in the decision. boundaries within alternative procedures
collecting which the decision for solving it, and
information that must be made. decides on one or more
you deem Your objective is to alternative solutions.
relevant to the get concurrence While you play no direct
problem from on a decision. role in the group's
the group or Above all, you take deliberations unless
others. care to show that your explicitly asked, your
ideas are not given role is an improtant one
any greater weight than behind the scenes,
those of others simply providing needed
because of your position. resources and
encouragement.

Source: Victor H. Vroom, "Leadership and the Decision-Making Process," Organizational Dynamics 28, no. 4 (Spring 2000),
pp. 82-94. This is Vroom's adaptation ofTannenbaum and Schmidt's Taxonomy.
CHAPTER 3: CONTINGENCY A P P R O A C H E S TO L E A D E R S H I P

styles, starting with the leader making the decision alone (Decide), presenting
the problem to subordinates individually for their suggestions and then making
the decision (Consult Individually), presenting the problem to subordinates as a
group, collectively obtaining their ideas and suggestions, then making the deci-
sion (Consult Group), sharing the problem with subordinates as a group and act-
ing as a facilitator to help the group arrive at a decision (Facilitate), or delegating
the problem and permitting the group to make the decision within prescribed
limits (Delegate). The five styles fall along a continuum, and the leader should
select one depending on the situation.

Diagnostic Questions
How does a leader decide which of the five decision styles to use? T h e appropri-
ate degree of decision participation depends on a number of situational factors,
such as the required level of decision quality, the level of leader or subordinate
expertise, and the importance of having subordinates c o m m i t to the decision.
Leaders can analyze the appropriate degree of participation by answering seven
diagnostic questions.

1. Decision significance: How significant is this decision for the project or

organization? If the decision is highly important and a high-quality deci-
sion is needed for the success of the project or organization, the leader has
to be actively involved.
2. Importance of commitment: How important is subordinate commitment
to carrying out the decision? If implementation requires a high level of
commitment to the decision, leaders should involve subordinates in the
decision process.
3. Leader expertise: What is the level of the leader's expertise in relation to
the problem? If the leader does not have a high a m o u n t o f i n f o r m a t i o n ,
knowledge, or expertise, the leader should involve subordinates to obtain
it.
4. Likelihood of commitment: If the leader were to make the decision alone,
would subordinates have high or low commitment to the decision? If
subordinates typically go along with whatever the leader decides, their
involvement in the decision-making process will be less important.
5. Group support for goals: What is the degree of subordinate support for
the team's or organization's objectives at stake in this decision? If subordi-
nates have low support for the goals of the organization, the leader should
not allow the group to make the decision alone.
6. Goal expertise: What is the level of group members' knowledge and exper-
tise in relation to the problem? If subordinates have a high level of exper-
tise in relation to the problem, more responsibility for the decision can be
delegated to them.
7. Team competence: How skilled and committed are group members to
working together as a team to solve problems? W h e n subordinates have
high skills and high desire to w o r k together cooperatively to solve prob-
lems, more responsibility for the decision making can be delegated to
them.

These questions seem detailed, but considering these seven situational fac-
tors can quickly narrow the options and point to the appropriate level of group
participation in decision making.
84 P A R T 2: R E S E A R C H P E R S P E C T I V E S ON LEADERSHIP

Selecting a Decision Style

Further development of the V r o o m - J a g o model added concern for time con-
straints and concern for follower development as explicit criteria for determin-
ing the level of participation. T h a t is, a leader considers the relative importance
o f time versus follower development in selecting a decision style. This led to
the development of t w o decision matrixes, a time-based model, to be used if
time is critical, for example, if the organization is facing
Action Memo ' ' ^ decision 3
be made immediately, and a
c r s s a n ( a m u s t

development-based model, to be used if time and efficiency

As a leader, you can use the Vroom-Jago l important criteria than the opportunity to develop
a r e e s s

model to determine the appropriate t n e thinking and decision-making skills of followers.

amount of follower participation to use Consider the example of a small auto parts manufacturer,
in making a decision. You can follow the which owns only one machine for performing welds on muf-
time-based guidelines when time is of f l . [f machine has broken down and production has
e r s t n e

the essence, but use development-based c o m standstill, a decision concerning the purchase of a
e t o a

guidelines when cultivating followers' n e machine is critical and has to be made immediately to get
w

decision-making skills is also important. t n e production line moving again. In this case, a leader would
follow the time-based model for selecting the decision style.
However, if the machine is scheduled for routine replacement in
three months, time is not a critical factor. T h e leader is then free to
consider the importance of involving production workers in the decision making
to develop their skills. T h u s , the leader may follow the development-based model
because time is not a critical concern.
Exhibits 3.8 and 3 . 9 illustrate the t w o decision matrixes—a timesaving-hased
model and an employee development-based model—that enable leaders to adopt
a participation style by answering the diagnostic questions in sequence. Returning
to the example of the welding machine, if the machine has broken down and
must be replaced immediately, the leader would follow the timesaving-based
model in Exhibit 3 . 8 . T h e leader enters the matrix at the left side, at Problem
Statement. T h e matrix acts as a funnel as you move left to right, responding to
the situational questions across the top, answering high (H) or low (L) to each
one and avoiding crossing any horizontal lines.
T h e first question (decision significance) would be: How significant is this
decision for the project or organization? If the answer is High, the leader pro-
ceeds to importance of c o m m i t m e n t : How important is subordinate commitment
to carrying out the decision? If the answer is High, the next question pertains
to leader expertise: What is the level of the leader's expertise in relation to the
problem? If the leader's knowledge and expertise is High, the leader next con-
siders likelihood of c o m m i t m e n t : If the leader were to make the decision alone,
how likely is it that subordinates would be committed to the decision? If there
is a high likelihood that subordinates would be committed, the decision matrix
leads directly to the Decide style of decision making, in which the leader makes
the decision alone and presents it to the group.
As noted earlier, this matrix assumes that time and efficiency are the most
important criteria. However, consider how the selection of a decision style would
differ if the leader had several months to replace the welding machine and consid-
ered follower development of high importance and time of little concern. In this
case, the leader would follow the employee development-driven decision matrix
in Exhibit 3 . 9 . Beginning again at the left side of the matrix: How significant is
this decision for the project or organization? If the answer is High, proceed to
importance of c o m m i t m e n t : How important is subordinate commitment? If high,
the next question concerns likelihood of c o m m i t m e n t (leader expertise is not
CHAPTER 3: C O N T I N G E N C Y A P P R O A C H E S TO L E A D E R S H I P 85

Exhibit 3.8 Timesaving-Based Model for Determining an Appropriate Decision-Making Style—Group Problems

Source: Victor H. Vroom, "Leadership and the Decision-Making Process," Organizational Dynamics 28, no. 4 (Spring 2000),
Ip. 82-94

considered because the development model is focused on involving subordinates,

even if the leader has knowledge and expertise): If the leader were to make the
decision alone, how likely is it that subordinates would be committed to the deci-
mal If there is a high likelihood, the leader next considers group support: What
is the degree of subordinate support for the team's or organization's objectives at
stake in this decision? If the degree of support for goals is low, the leader would
proceed directly to the Group Consult decision style. However, if the degree of
support for goals is high, the leader would then ask: What is the level of group
members' knowledge and expertise in relation to the problem? An answer of
86 P A R T 2: R E S E A R C H P E R S P E C T I V E S O N L E A D E R S H I P

Source: Victor [Link], "Leadership and the Decision-Making Process," Organizational Dynamics 28, no. 4 (Spring 2000),
pp. 82-94.

High would take the leader to the question: How skilled and committed are
group members to working together as a team to solve problems? An answer o f
High would lead t o the Delegate style, in which the leader allows the group to
make the decision within certain limits.
N o t e that the timesaving-driven model takes the leader to the first deci-
sion style that preserves decision quality and follower acceptance, whereas the
employee development-driven model takes other considerations into account.
It takes less time t o m a k e an autocratic decision (Decide) than to involve sub-
ordinates by using a Facilitate or Delegate style. However, in many cases, time
and efficiency are less important than the opportunity to further subordinate
development. In many o f today's organizations, where knowledge sharing and
widespread participation are considered critical to organizational success, leaders
are placing greater emphasis on follower development when time is n o t a critical
issue.
CHAPTER 3: C O N T I N G E N C Y A P P R O A C H E S TO L E A D E R S H I P

Leaders can quickly learn to use the model t o adapt their styles t o fit the
situation. However, researchers have also developed a computer-based program
that allows for greater complexity and precision in the V r o o m - J a g o model and
incorporates the value o f time and value o f follower development as situational
factors rather than portraying them in separate decision m a t r i x e s .
T h e V r o o m - J a g o model has been criticized as being less than p e r f e c t , ' but 2

it is useful to decision m a k e r s , and the model is supported by r e s e a r c h . 26

Leaders
can learn to use the model to m a k e timely, high-quality decisions. Let's try apply-
ing the model to the following p r o b l e m .

IN THE LEAD
Art Weinstein, Whitlock Manufacturing

When Whitlock Manufacturing won a contract from a large auto manufacturer to pro-
duce an engine to power its flagship sports car, Art Weinstein was thrilled t o b e selected
as project manager. The engine, of Japanese design and extremely complex, has gotten
rave reviews in the automotive [Link] project has dramatically enhanced the repu-
tation of Whitlock Manufacturing, which was previously known primarily as a producer
of outboard engines for marine use.
Weinstein and his team of engineers have taken great pride in their work on the
project, but their excitement was dashed by a recent report of serious engine prob-
lems in cars delivered to customers. Fourteen owners of cars produced during the first
month had experienced engine seizures. Taking quick action, the auto manufacturer
suspended sales of the sports car, halted current production, and notified owners of
the current model not to drive t h e car. Everyone involved knows this is a disaster. Unless
the engine problem is solved quickly, Whitlock Manufacturing could b e exposed to
extended litigation. In addition, Whitlock's valued relationship with o n e of t h e world's
largest auto manufacturers would probably be lost forever.
As the person most knowledgeable a b o u t t h e engine, Weinstein has spent
two weeks in the field inspecting the seized engines and the auto plant where they
were installed. In addition, he has carefully examined the operations and practices in
Whitlock's plant where the engine is manufactured. Based on this extensive research,
Weinstein is convinced that he knows what the problem is and t h e best way to solve
it. However, his natural inclination is to involve other team members as much as pos-
sible in making decisions and solving problems. He not only values their input, but
he also thinks that by encouraging greater participation he strengthens the thinking
skills of team members, helping them grow and contribute more to the team and the
organization. Therefore, Weinstein chooses to consult with his team before making his
final decision.

The group meets for several hours that afternoon, discussing the problem in detail
and sharing their varied perspectives, including the information Weinstein has gathered
during his research. Following t h e group session, Weinstein makes his decision. He will
present the decision at the team meeting the following morning, after which testing
and correction of the engine problem will begin. 27

In the Whitlock M a n u f a c t u r i n g case, either a timesaving-based or an employee

development-based model can be used t o select a decision style. Although time is
of importance, the leader's desire t o involve subordinates can be considered equally
important. Do you think Weinstein used the c o r r e c t leader decision style? Let's
examine the problem using the employee development-based decision tree, since
Weinstein is concerned a b o u t involving other team m e m b e r s . M o v i n g from left
to right in Exhibit 3 . 9 , the questions and answers are as follows: How significant
 P A R T 2: R E S E A R C H P E R S P E C T I V E S ON LEADERSHIP
8 8

is this decision for the organization? Definitely high. Quality of the decision is
of critical importance. T h e company's future may be at stake. How important
is subordinate commitment to carrying out the decision? Also high. T h e team
members must support and implement Weinstein's solution. Question #3 (leader
expertise) is not considered in the employee development-driven model, as shown
in E x h i b i t 3 . 9 . T h e next question would be If Weinstein makes the decision on
his own, will team members have high or low commitment to it? T h e answer to
this question is probably also high. Team members respect Weinstein, and they
are likely to accept his analysis of the problem. This leads to the question What
is the degree of subordinate support for the team's or organization's objectives at
stake in this decision? T h e answer, definitely high, leads to the question, What is
the level of group members' knowledge and expertise in relation to the problem?
T h e answer to this question is probably Low, which leads to the Consult Group
decision style. T h u s , Weinstein used the style that would be recommended by the
V r o o m - J a g o model.
N o w , assume that Weinstein chose to place more emphasis on efficient use
of time than on employee involvement and development. Using the timesaving-
based decision matrix in Exhibit 3 . 8 , answer the questions across the top of the
matrix based on the information just provided (rate Weinstein's level of expertise
in Question 3 as high). R e m e m b e r to avoid crossing any horizontal lines. What
decision style is recommended? Is it the same or different from that recommended
by the employee development-based tree?

Substitutes for Leadership

T h e contingency leadership approaches considered so far have focused on the
leader's style, the follower's nature, and the situation's characteristics. T h e final
contingency approach suggests that situational variables can be so powerful that
they actually substitute for or neutralize the need for leadership. * This approach 21

outlines those organizational settings in which task-oriented and people-oriented

Substitute leadership styles are unimportant or unnecessary.
a situational variable that makes
leadership unnecessary or E x h i b i t 3 . 1 0 shows the situational variables that tend to substitute for
redundant or neutralize leadership characteristics. A substitute for leadership makes the

Exhibit 3.10 Substitutes and Neutralizers for Leadership

Organizational G r o u p cohesiveness S u b s t i t u t e s for S u b s t i t u t e s for

variables Formalization S u b s t i t u t e s for N o effect o n
Inflexibility Neutralizes N o effect o n
Low position power Neutralizes Neutralizes

Task H i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d task S u b s t i t u t e s for N o effect o n

characteristics Automatic feedback S u b s t i t u t e s for N o effect o n
Intrinsic satisfaction N o effect o n Substitutes for

Follower Professionalism S u b s t i t u t e s for S u b s t i t u t e s for

characteristics Training/experience S u b s t i t u t e s for N o effect o n
Low value of rewards Neutralizes Neutralizes
CHAPTER 3: C O N T I N G E N C Y A P P R O A C H E S TO L E A D E R S H I P 89

leadership style unnecessary or redundant. For example, highly educated, profes-

sional subordinates w h o k n o w h o w to do their tasks do not need a leader w h o
initiates structure for them and tells them w h a t to do. In addition, long-term
education often develops a u t o n o m o u s , self-motivated individuals. T h u s , task-
oriented and people-oriented leadership is substituted by professional education
and socialization. 29

A neutralizer counteracts the leadership style and prevents the leader from
displaying certain behaviors. For example, if a leader is physically removed from
subordinates, the leader's ability to give directions to subordinates is greatly
reduced. Kinko's, a nationwide copy center, provides an example. With numerous
locations widely scattered across regions, regional managers have very limited
personal interaction with store managers and employees. T h u s , their ability to
both support and direct is neutralized.
Situational variables in E x h i b i t 3 . 1 0 include characteris- Action Memo
tics of the followers, the task, and the organization itself. For
As a leader, you can avoid leadership
example, when subordinates are highly professional, such as
overkill. Adopt a style that is
research scientists in companies like M e r c k or M o n s a n t o , both
complementary to the organizational
leadership styles are less important. T h e employees do not need
situation to ensure that both task
either direction or support. With respect to task characteristics,
needs and people needs are met.
highly structured tasks substitute for a task-oriented style, and
a satisfying task substitutes for a people-oriented style.
When a task is highly structured and routine, like audit-
ing cash, the leader should provide personal consideration and support that is
not provided by the task. Satisfied people don't need as much consideration.
Likewise, with respect to the organization itself, group cohesiveness substitutes
for both leader styles. For example, the relationship that develops
among air traffic controllers and jet fighter pilots is character- Action Memo
ized by high-stress interactions and continuous peer training. This
Measure how the task characteristics of your
cohesiveness provides support and direction that substitute for
job or a job you've held in the past might act
formal leadership. Formalized rules and procedures substitute
30

as substitutes for leadership by answering

for leader task orientation because the rules tell people what to
the questions in Leader's Self-Insight 3.3.
do. Physical separation of leader and subordinate neutralizes
both leadership styles.
The value of the situations described in E x h i b i t 3 . 1 0 is that they help
leaders avoid leadership overkill. Leaders should adopt a style with which to
complement the organizational situation. For e x a m p l e , the w o r k situation for
bank tellers provides a high level of formalization, little flexibility,
and a highly structured task. T h e head teller should not adopt Action Memo
a task-oriented style because the organization already provides
As a leader, you can use a people-oriented
structure and direction. T h e head teller should concentrate on
style when tasks are highly structured
a people-oriented style. In other organizations, if group cohe-
and followers are bound by formal rules
siveness or previous training meets employee social needs, the
and procedures. You can adopt a task-
leader is free to concentrate on task-oriented behaviors. T h e
oriented style if group cohesiveness and
leader can adopt a style complementary to the organizational
situation to ensure that both task needs and people needs of followers' intrinsic job satisfaction meet

followers are met. their social and emotional needs.

Recent studies have examined h o w substitutes (the situa-

tion) can be designed to have more impact than leader behav-
iors on outcomes such as subordinate s a t i s f a c t i o n . T h e impetus behind this
31
Neutralizer
research is the idea that substitutes for leadership can be designed into organiza- a situational characteristic that
counteracts the leadership style
tions in ways to complement existing leadership, act in the absence of leader-
and prevents the leader from
ship, and otherwise provide more comprehensive leadership alternatives. F o r displaying certain behaviors
 Leader^ Self-Insight зз
Measuring Substitutes for Leadership

Think about your current job, or a j o b you have held in the Scoring and Interpretation
past. Please answer whether each item below is Mostly For your task structure score, give yourself one point
False or Mostly True for you in that job. for Mostly True answers to items 1, 2, and 4, and for a

Mostly Mostly Mostly False answer to item 3. This is your score for Task
False True Structure:
1. Because of the nature of the For your task feedback score, give yourself one point
tasks I perform, there is little for Mostly True answers to items 5 and 7, and for a Mostly
doubt about the best way to do
them. False answer to item 6. This is your score for Task Feedback:

2. My job duties are so simple that

almost anyone could perform For your intrinsic satisfaction score, score one point for
them well after a little instruc­ Mostly True answers to items 8 and 10, and for a Mostly
tion.
False answer to item 9. This is your score for Intrinsic
3. It is difficult to figure out the
Satisfaction:
best way to do many of my tasks
and activities. A high score (3 or 4) for Task Structure or Task Feedback

4. There is really only one correct indicates a high potential for those elements to act as a
way to perform most of the substitute for task-oriented leadership. A high score (3) for
tasks I do.
Intrinsic Satisfaction indicates the potential to be a substi­
5. After I've completed a task, I can
tute for people-oriented leadership. Does your leader adopt
tell right away from the results I
get whether I have performed it a style that is complementary to the task situation, or is the
correctly. leader guilty of leadership overkill? How can you apply this
6. My job is the kind where you understanding to your own actions as a leader?
can finish a task and not know if
you've made a mistake or error. Source: Based on "Questionnaire Items for the Measurement of
Substitutes for Leadership,"Table 2 in Steven Kerr and John M. Jermier,
7. Because of the nature of the "Substitutes for Leadership: Their Meaning and Measurement,"
tasks I do, it is easy for me to see Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 22 (1978), pp.
when I have done something 375-403.
exceptionally well.
8. I get lots of satisfaction from the
work I do.
9. It is hard to imagine that anyone
could enjoy performing the
tasks I have performed on my
job.
10. My j o b satisfaction depends pri­
marily on the nature of the tasks
and activities I perform.

e x a m p l e , Paul Reeves, a f o r e m a n at H a r m o n Auto Parts,

Action Memo
shared half-days with his subordinates during which they
As a leader, you can provide minimal
helped him perform his leader tasks. After Reeves' p r o m o ­
task direction and personal support to
tion to middle m a n a g e m e n t , his group no longer required a
highly-trained employees; followers'
f o r e m a n . F o l l o w e r s were trained t o act on their o w n . ' 2
Thus,
professionalism and intrinsic a situation in which follower ability and training were highly
satisfaction substitute for both task- developed created a substitute for leadership.
and people-oriented leadership.
T h e ability to use substitutes to fill leadership " g a p s " is often
advantageous to organizations. Indeed, the fundamental assump­
tion of substitutes-for-leadership researchers is that effective leader­
ship is the ability to recognize and provide the support and direction
not already provided by task, group, and organization.
C H A P T E R 3: C O N T I N G E N C Y A P P R O A C H E S TO L E A D E R S H I P

Leadership Essentials
• T h e most important point in this chapter is that situational variables affect
leadership outcomes. T h e contingency approaches were developed to system-
atically address the relationship between a leader and the organization. T h e
contingency approaches focus on how the c o m p o n e n t s of leadership style,
subordinate characteristics, and situational elements impact one another.
Fiedler's contingency model, Hersey and Blanchard's situational theory, the
path-goal theory, the V r o o m - J a g o model, and the substitutes-for-leadership
concept each e x a m i n e how different situations call for different styles of
leadership behavior.

• According to Fiedler, leaders can determine whether their leadership style

is suitable for the situation. Task-oriented leaders tend to do better in very
favorable or very unfavorable situations, whereas relationship-oriented lead-
ers do best in situations of intermediate favorability. Hersey and Blanchard
contend that leaders can adjust their task or relationship style to a c c o m m o -
date the readiness level of their subordinates. T h e p a t h - g o a l theory states that
leaders can use a style that appropriately clarifies the path to desired rewards.
The V r o o m - J a g o model indicates that leaders can choose a participative deci-
sion style based on contingencies such as quality requirement, commitment
requirement, or the leader's knowledge and expertise. In addition, concern
for time (the need for a fast decision) versus concern for follower develop-
ment is taken into a c c o u n t . Finally, the substitutes-for-leadership concept
recommends that leaders adjust their style to provide resources not otherwise
provided in the organizational situation.
I By discerning the characteristics of tasks, subordinates, and organizations,
leaders can determine the style that increases the likelihood of successful
leadership outcomes. Therefore, effective leadership depends partly on devel-
oping diagnostic skills and being flexible in your leadership behavior.

Discussion Questions
1. Consider Fiedler's theory as illustrated in E x h i b i t 3 . 3 . H o w often do you think very
favorable, intermediate, or very unfavorable situations o c c u r to leaders in real life?
Discuss.
2. Do you think leadership style is fixed and u n c h a n g e a b l e o r can leaders be flexible
and adaptable with respect to style? W h y ?
3. Consider the leadership position o f the managing partner in a law firm. W h a t task,
subordinate, and organizational factors might serve as substitutes for leadership in
this situation?
4. Compare Fiedler's contingency model with the p a t h - g o a l theory. W h a t are the simi-
larities and differences? W h i c h do you prefer?
5. If you were a first-level supervisor o f a team o f t e l e m a r k e t e r s , h o w would you go
about assessing the readiness level o f your subordinates? D o you think most leaders
are able to easily shift their leadership style to suit the readiness level o f followers?
6. Think back to teachers you have h a d , and identify o n e each w h o fits a supportive
style, directive style, participative style, and achievement-oriented style a c c o r d i n g to
the path-goal theory. W h i c h style did you find m o s t effective? W h y ?
92 P A R T 2: R E S E A R C H P E R S P E C T I V E S ON LEADERSHIP

7. D o you think leaders should decide on a participative style based on the most effi-
cient way to reach the decision? Should leaders sometimes let people participate for
other reasons?

8. C o n s i d e r the situational characteristics o f group cohesiveness, organizational formal-

ization, and physical separation. H o w might each o f these substitute for o r neutralize
task-oriented o r people-oriented leadership? E x p l a i n .

Leadership at Work
TASK VERSUS RELATIONSHIP ROLE PLAY
Y o u are the new distribution m a n a g e r for French Grains Bakery. Five drivers w h o deliver
French G r a i n s baked goods to grocery stores in the m e t r o p o l i t a n area report to you. The
drivers are expected to c o m p l e t e the Delivery R e p o r t to keep track o f actual deliveries and
a n y changes that occur. T h e Delivery R e p o r t is a key element in inventory control and
provides the data for French G r a i n s invoicing o f grocery stores. Errors b e c o m e excessive
when drivers fail to c o m p l e t e the report each day, especially when store managers request
different inventory when the driver arrives. As a result, French G r a i n s may not be paid for
several loaves o f bread a day for each m i s t a k e in the Delivery R e p o r t . T h e result is lost
revenue and p o o r inventory c o n t r o l .
O n e o f the drivers a c c o u n t s for a b o u t 6 0 percent o f the errors in the Delivery Reports.
T h i s driver is a nice person and generally reliable, although he is occasionally late for work.
His m a j o r p r o b l e m is that he falls behind in his p a p e r w o r k . A second driver accounts for
a b o u t 3 0 percent o f the errors, and a third driver for a b o u t 1 0 percent o f the errors. The
other t w o drivers turn in virtually error-free Delivery R e p o r t s .
You are a high t a s k - o r i e n t e d (and l o w relationship-oriented) leader, and have decided
to talk to the drivers a b o u t doing a m o r e c o m p l e t e and a c c u r a t e j o b with the Delivery
R e p o r t s . W r i t e b e l o w e x a c t l y h o w you will go a b o u t c o r r e c t i n g this p r o b l e m as a task-
oriented leader. Will you m e e t with drivers individually or in a group? W h e n and where
will y o u meet with t h e m ? E x a c t l y w h a t will you say and h o w will you get them to listen?

N o w a d o p t the role o f a high relationship-oriented (and low task-oriented) leader.

W r i t e b e l o w e x a c t l y w h a t you will do and say as a relationship-oriented distribution
manager. Will you meet with the drivers individually or in a group? W h a t will you say and
h o w will you get them to listen?

In Class: T h e i n s t r u c t o r c a n ask students t o v o l u n t e e r t o play the role o f the

D i s t r i b u t i o n M a n a g e r and the drivers. A few students can take turns role-playing the
Distribution M a n a g e r in front o f the class to s h o w h o w they would handle the drivers as
task- and relationship-oriented leaders. T h e instructor can ask other students for feedback
on the leader's effectiveness and on which a p p r o a c h seems more effective for this situa-
tion, and why.

Source: Based on K. J . Keleman, J . E. Garcia, and K. J . Lovelace, Management Incidents: Role Plays for Management
Development (Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt Publishing Company, 1990), pp. 6 9 - 7 2 .
CHAPTER 3: C O N T I N G E N C Y A P P R O A C H E S TO L E A D E R S H I P 93

Leadership Development: Cases for Analysis

ALVIS CORPORATION
Kevin M c C a r t h y is the manager of a production department in Alvis Corporation, a firm that
manufactures office equipment. After reading an article that stressed the benefits of participa-
tive management, Kevin believes that these benefits could be realized in his department if the
workers are allowed to participate in making some decisions that affect them. T h e workers are
not unionized. Kevin selected two decisions for his experiment in participative management.
T h e first decision involved vacation schedules. E a c h summer the w o r k e r s are given
two weeks' vacation, but n o m o r e than t w o w o r k e r s can go on vacation at the same time.
In prior years, Kevin made this decision himself. H e w o u l d first ask the w o r k e r s to indicate
their preferred dates, and he considered h o w the w o r k w o u l d be affected if different people
were out at the same time. It was i m p o r t a n t to plan a vacation schedule that would ensure
adequate staffing for all o f the essential o p e r a t i o n s performed by the department. W h e n
more than t w o w o r k e r s w a n t e d the same time period, and they had similar skills, he usu-
ally gave preference to the w o r k e r s with the highest productivity.
The second decision involved p r o d u c t i o n standards. Sales had been increasing steadily
over the past few years, and the c o m p a n y recently installed s o m e n e w e q u i p m e n t t o
increase productivity. T h e new e q u i p m e n t would a l l o w Kevin's department to produce
more with the same n u m b e r of w o r k e r s . T h e c o m p a n y had a pay incentive system in which
workers received a piece rate for each unit p r o d u c e d a b o v e a standard a m o u n t . Separate
standards existed for each type o f product, based on an industrial engineering study c o n -
ducted a few years earlier. Top m a n a g e m e n t w a n t e d to readjust the production standards
to reflect the fact that the new equipment m a d e it possible for the w o r k e r s t o earn m o r e
without working any harder. T h e savings f r o m higher productivity were needed to help
pay for the new equipment.
Kevin called a meeting o f his 1 5 w o r k e r s an h o u r before the end o f the w o r k d a y .
He explained that he wanted them to discuss the t w o issues and m a k e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s .
Kevin figured that the w o r k e r s might be inhibited a b o u t participating in the discussion if
he were present, so he left them alone to discuss the issues. Besides, Kevin had an a p p o i n t -
ment to meet with the quality c o n t r o l manager. Quality p r o b l e m s had increased after the
new equipment was installed, and the industrial engineers were studying the p r o b l e m in
an attempt to determine why quality had gotten worse rather than better.
When Kevin returned to his d e p a r t m e n t just at quitting time, he w a s surprised to
learn that the workers r e c o m m e n d e d keeping the standards the same. H e had assumed
they knew the pay incentives were n o longer fair and would set a higher s t a n d a r d . T h e
spokesman for the group explained that their base pay had not kept up with inflation and
the higher incentive pay restored their real i n c o m e to its prior level.
On the vacation issue, the g r o u p was deadlocked. Several o f the w o r k e r s w a n t e d to
take rheir vacations during the s a m e t w o - w e e k period and could not agree on w h o should
go. Some workers argued that they should have priority because they had m o r e seniority,
whereas others argued that priority should be based on productivity, as in the past. Since
it was quitting time, the group concluded that Kevin would have to resolve the dispute
himself. After all, wasn't that w h a t he was being paid f o r ? "

QUESTIONS
1. Analyze this situation using the H e r s e y - B l a n c h a r d m o d e l and the V r o o m - J a g o
model. W h a t do these models suggest as the appropriate leadership or decision style?
Explain.

2. Evaluate Kevin M c C a r t h y ' s leadership style before and during his e x p e r i m e n t in par-
ticipative management.
3. If you were Kevin M c C a r t h y , w h a t w o u l d you d o n o w ? W h y ?
 P A R T 2: R E S E A R C H P E R S P E C T I V E S ON LEADERSHIP

FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Ken O s b o r n e stared out the w i n d o w , wondering w h a t he could do to get things back on
t r a c k . W h e n he b e c a m e head o f the finance d e p a r t m e n t o f a state government agency,
O s b o r n e inherited a g r o u p o f highly trained professionals w h o pursued their jobs with
energy and enthusiasm. Everyone seemed to genuinely love c o m i n g to w o r k every day. The
tasks were sometimes m u n d a n e , but most employees liked the structured, routine nature
o f the w o r k . In addition, the lively c a m a r a d e r i e o f the group provided an element of fun
and e x c i t e m e n t that the w o r k itself sometimes lacked.
K e n k n e w h e ' d h a d an easy t i m e o f t h i n g s o v e r t h e last c o u p l e o f y e a r s — h e had
b e e n a b l e t o f o c u s his e n e r g i e s on m a i n t a i n i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h o t h e r departments
a n d a g e n c i e s a n d c o m p l e t i n g t h e c o m p l e x r e p o r t s he had to turn in e a c h m o n t h . The
d e p a r t m e n t h a d p r a c t i c a l l y run itself. U n t i l n o w . T h e p r o b l e m w a s L a r r y Gibson,
o n e o f t h e d e p a r t m e n t ' s b e s t e m p l o y e e s . W e l l - l i k e d by e v e r y o n e in t h e d e p a r t m e n t ,
G i b s o n had been a key c o n t r i b u t o r to d e v e l o p i n g a n e w o n l i n e a c c o u n t i n g system,
a n d K e n w a s c o u n t i n g o n h i m t o help w i t h the i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . B u t e v e r y t h i n g had
c h a n g e d a f t e r G i b s o n a t t e n d e d a p r o f e s s i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t s e m i n a r a t a prestigious
u n i v e r s i t y . K e n had e x p e c t e d him t o c o m e b a c k even m o r e fired up a b o u t w o r k , but
lately L a r r y w a s s p e n d i n g m o r e t i m e o n his o u t s i d e p r o f e s s i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s t h a n he
w a s o n his j o b . " I f o n l y I'd paid m o r e a t t e n t i o n w h e n all this b e g a n , " K e n thought,
as he r e c a l l e d the d a y L a r r y a s k e d h i m t o sign his revised i n d i v i d u a l d e v e l o p m e n t
p l a n . As h e ' d d o n e in t h e p a s t , Ken h a d s i m p l y c h a t t e d w i t h L a r r y f o r a few minutes,
g l a n c e d at t h e c h a n g e s , a n d i n i t i a l e d t h e m o d i f i c a t i o n . L a r r y ' s revised plan included
t a k i n g a m o r e a c t i v e r o l e in t h e s t a t e a c c o u n t a n t s ' s o c i e t y , w h i c h he a r g u e d would
e n h a n c e his value to the a g e n c y as w e l l as i m p r o v e his o w n skills a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l
contacts.
W i t h i n a m o n t h , Ken n o t i c e d t h a t m o s t o f G i b s o n ' s energy and e n t h u s i a s m seemed
t o be f o c u s e d on the society r a t h e r than the f i n a n c e d e p a r t m e n t . O n " f i r s t T h u r s d a y , "
the s o c i e t y ' s l u n c h e o n m e e t i n g day, L a r r y spent m o s t o f the m o r n i n g on the phone
n o t i f y i n g p e o p l e a b o u t the m o n t h l y m e e t i n g and finalizing details with the speaker.
H e left a r o u n d 11 A . M . to m a k e sure things were set up for the meeting and usually
didn't return until c l o s e t o q u i t t i n g t i m e . K e n c o u l d live with the loss o f G i b s o n for
o n e day a m o n t h , but the p r e o c c u p a t i o n with society business seemed t o be turning his
f o r m e r star e m p l o y e e i n t o a p a r t - t i m e w o r k e r . L a r r y s h o w s up late for m e e t i n g s , usually
d o e s n ' t p a r t i c i p a t e very m u c h , and seems t o h a v e little interest in w h a t is going on in
the d e p a r t m e n t . T h e n e w a c c o u n t i n g system is f l o u n d e r i n g b e c a u s e L a r r y isn't spending
the t i m e to train people in its effective use, so K e n is starting t o get c o m p l a i n t s from
o t h e r d e p a r t m e n t s . M o r e o v e r , his previously h a r m o n i o u s g r o u p o f e m p l o y e e s is starting
t o w h i n e and b i c k e r over m i n o r issues and d e c i s i o n s . K e n has also n o t i c e d t h a t people
w h o used t o be h a r d at w o r k w h e n he arrived in the m o r n i n g s seem to be c o m i n g in
later and later every day.
" E v e r y t h i n g ' s g o n e h a y w i r e since L a r r y a t t e n d e d t h a t s e m i n a r , " Ken b r o o d e d . " I
t h o u g h t I was one o f the best department heads in the agency. N o w , I realize I haven't had
to provide m u c h leadership until now. M a y b e I've had things t o o e a s y . " 34

QUESTIONS
1. W h y had Ken O s b o r n e ' s d e p a r t m e n t been so successful even though he has provided
little leadership over the past t w o years?
2. H o w would you describe O s b o r n e ' s current leadership style? Based on the p a t h - g o a l
theory, which style do you think he might most effectively use to turn things around
with Larry G i b s o n ?

3. If you were in O s b o r n e ' s position, describe h o w you would evaluate the situation
and handle the p r o b l e m .
CHAPTER 3: C O N T I N G E N C Y A P P R O A C H E S TO L E A D E R S H I P 95

References
1 John Markoff, "Competing as Software Goes to Web," The New York N. W. Jones, "A Path-Goal Approach to Productivity," Journal of
Times (June 5 , 2 0 0 7 ) , pp. C I , C5. Applied Psychology 41 ( 1 9 5 7 ) , pp. 345-353.
2 Gary Yukl, Angela Gordon, and Tom Taber, "A Hierarchical 17 Robert J . House, "A Path-Goal Theory of Leadership Effectiveness,"
Taxonomy of Leadership Behavior: Integrating a Half Century of Administrative Science Quarterly 16 (1971), pp. 3 2 1 - 3 3 8 .
Behavior Research," Journal of Leadership and Organization Studies 18 M. G. Evans, "Leadership," in S. Kerr, ed.. Organizational Behavior
9, no. 1 (2002), pp. 1 5 - 3 2 . (Columbus, O H : Grid, 1 9 7 4 ) , pp. 2 3 0 - 2 3 3 .
3 Fred E. Fiedler, "Assumed Similarity Measures as Predictors of Team 19 Robert J . House and Terrence R. Mitchell, "Path-Goal Theory of
Effectiveness," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 4 9 ( 1 9 5 4 ) , Leadership," Journal of Contemporary Business (Autumn 1 9 7 4 ) ,
pp. 3 8 1 - 3 8 8 ; F. E. Fiedler, Leader Attitudes and Group Effectiveness pp. 8 1 - 9 7 .
(Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1 9 5 8 ) ; and F. E. Fiedler, Л 2 0 Dyan Machan, "We're Not Authoritarian Goons," Forbes (October
Theory of Leadership Effectiveness (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1 9 6 7 ) . 2 4 , 1994), pp. 2 6 4 - 2 6 8 .
4 Reported in George Anders, "Theory &C Practice: Tough CEOs Often 21 Timothy Aeppel, "Personnel Disorders Sap a Factory Owner of His
Most Successful, a Study Finds," The Wall Street Journal (November Early Idealism," The Wall Street Journal (January 14, 1998),
19, 2 0 0 7 ) , p. B3. pp. A 1 - A 1 4 .
5 Adam Lashinsky, "Mark Hurd's Moment," Fortune (March 16, 22 Charles Greene, "Questions of Causation in the Path-Goal Theory
2009), pp. 9 0 - 1 0 0 ; Jon Fortt, " M a r k Hurd, Superstar," Fortune (June of Leadership," Academy of Management Journal 22 (March 1 9 7 9 ) ,
9 , 2 0 0 8 ) , pp. 3 5 - 4 0 ; and " M e m o To: Mark Hurd," BusinessWeek pp. 2 2 ^ 1 1 ; and C. A. Schnesheim and Mary Ann von Glinow, " T h e
(April 1 1 , 2 0 0 5 ) , p. 3 8 . Path-Goal Theory of Leadership: A Theoretical and Empirical
6 M. J. Strube and J . E. Garcia, "A Meta-Analytic Investigation Analysis," Academy of Management Journal 20 ( 1 9 7 7 ) ,
of Fiedler's Contingency Model of Leadership Effectiveness," pp. 3 9 8 ^ 1 0 5 .
Psychological Bulletin 90 ( 1 9 8 1 ) , pp. 3 0 7 - 3 2 1 ; and L. H. Peters, 23 V. H. Vroom and Arthur G. Jago, The New Leadership: Managing
D. D. Hartke, and J . T. Pohlmann, "Fiedler's Contingency Theory Participation in Organizations (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall,
of Leadership: An Application of the Meta-Analysis Procedures of 1988).
Schmidt and Hunter," Psychological Bulletin 97 (1985), pp. 2 7 4 - 2 8 5 . 2 4 The following discussion is based heavily on Victor H. Vroom,
7 R. Singh, "Leadership Style and Reward Allocation: Does Least "Leadership and the Decision-Making Process," Organizational
Preferred Coworker Scale Measure Tasks and Relation Orientation?" Dynamics 2 8 , no. 4 (Spring 2 0 0 0 ) , pp. 8 2 - 9 4 .
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 27 (1983), pp. 25 R. H. G. Field, "A Test of the Vroom-Yetton Normative Model
178-197; D. Hosking, "A Critical Evaluation of Fiedler's Contingency of Leadership," Journal of Applied Psychology (October 1 9 8 2 ) ,
Hypotheses," Progress in Applied Psychology 1 ( 1 9 8 1 ) , pp. 1 0 3 - 1 5 4 ; pp. 5 2 3 - 5 3 2 ; and R. H. G. Field, "A Critique of the Vroom-
Gary Yukl, "Leader LPC Scores: Attitude Dimensions and Behavioral Yetton Contingency Model of Leadership Behavior," Academy of
Correlates," Journal of Social Psychology 80 ( 1 9 7 0 ) , pp. 2 0 7 - 2 1 2 ; G. Management Review 4 (1979), pp. 2 4 9 - 2 5 1 .
Graen, К. M. Alvares, J . B. Orris, and J . A. Martella, "Contingency 2 6 Vroom, "Leadership and the Decision-Making Process"; Jennifer
Model of Leadership Effectiveness: Antecedent and Evidential T. Ettling and Arthur G . J a g o , "Participation Under Conditions
Results," Psychological Bulletin 74 ( 1 9 7 0 ) , pp. 2 8 5 - 2 9 6 ; and R. of Conflict: More on the Validity of the Vroom-Yetton M o d e l , "
R Vecchio, "Assessing the Validity of Fiedler's Contingency Model Journal of Management Studies 25 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , pp. 7 3 - 8 3 ; Madeline
of Leadership Effectiveness: A Closer Look at Strube and Garcia," E. Heilman, Harvey A. Hornstein, Jack H. Cage, and Judith K.
Psychological Bulletin 93 (1983), pp. 4 0 4 ^ 1 0 8 . Herschlag, "Reactions to Prescribed Leader Behavior as a Function
8 J. k. Kennedy, jr., "Middle LPC Leaders and the Contingency of Role Perspective: The Case of the Vroom-Yetton M o d e l , "
Model of Leadership Effectiveness," Organizational Behavior and Journal of Applied Psychology (February 1 9 8 4 ) , pp. 5 0 - 6 0 ; and
Human Performance 30 (1982), pp. 1 - 1 4 ; and S. C. Shiflett, "The Arthur G. J a g o and Victor H. Vroom, "Some Differences in the
Contingency Model of Leadership Effectiveness: Some Implications of Incidence and Evaluation of Participative Leader Behavior,"
Its Statistical and Methodological Properties," Behavioral Science 18, journal of Applied Psychology (December 1 9 8 2 ) ,
no. 6(1973), pp. 4 2 9 ^ 4 0 . pp. 7 7 6 - 7 8 3 .
• 9 Roya Ayman, M. M. Chemers, and F. Fiedler, "The Contingency 2 7 Based on a decision problem presented in Victor H. Vroom,
Model of Leadership Effectiveness: Its Levels of Analysis," Leadership "Leadership and the Decision-Making Process," Organizational
Quarterly 6, no. 2 (1995), pp. 1 4 7 - 1 6 7 . Dynamics 2 8 , no. 4 (Spring, 2 0 0 0 ) , pp. 8 2 - 9 4 .
10 Paul Hersey and Kenneth H. Blanchard, Management of 28 S. Kerr and J . M. Jermier, "Substitutes for Leadership: Their
Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources, 4th ed. (Upper Meaning and Measurement," Organizational Behavior and Human
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1 9 8 2 ) . Performance 22 (1978), pp. 3 7 5 - 4 0 3 ; and Jon P. Howell and Peter
11 Jonarhan Kaufman, "A McDonald's Owner Becomes a Role Model W. Dorfman, "Leadership and Substitutes for Leadership Among
for Black Teenagers," The Wall Street Journal (August 2 3 , 1 9 9 5 ) , Professional and Nonprofessional Workers," Journal of Applied
[ [Link],A6. Behavioral Science 22 (1986), pp. 29^6.
I 12 Carol Hymowitz, "New Face at Facebook Hopes to Map Out a Road 29 J . P. Howell, D. E. Bowen, P. W Doreman, S. Kerr, and P. M. Podsakoff,
to Growth," The Wall Street Journal (April 14, 2 0 0 8 ) , p. B l . "Substitutes for Leadership: Effective Alternatives to Ineffective
13 Cheryl Dahle, "Xtreme Teams," Fast Company (November 1 9 9 9 ) , Leadership," Organizational Dynamics (Summer 1990), pp. 2 1 - 3 8 .
I pp. 310-326. 3 0 Ibid.
14 Carol 1 lymowitz, "Managers Find Ways to Get Generations to Close 31 P. M. Podsakoff, S. B. MacKenzie, and W. H. Bommer,
Culture Gap" (In the Lead column), The Wall Street Journal (July 9, "Transformational Leader Behaviors and Substitutes for Leadership
I 2007), p. B l . as Determinants of Employee Satisfaction, Commitment, Trust, and
Щ 15 Carole McGraw, "Teaching Teenagers? Think, Do, Learn," Education Organizational Behaviors," Journal of Management 2 2 , no. 2 (1996),
Digest (February 1998), pp. 44^17. pp. 2 5 9 - 2 9 8 .
I 16 M. G. Evans, "The Effects of Supervisory Behavior on the Path-Goal 32 Howell et al., "Substitutes for Leadership."
Relationship," Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 33 Reprinted with permission from Gary Yukl, Leadership in Organizations,
5 (1970), pp. 2 7 7 - 2 9 8 ; M. G. Evans, "Leadership and Motivation: 7th ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2 0 1 0 ) , pp. 1 1 9 - 1 2 0 .
A Core Concept," Academy of Management Journal 13 (1970), pp. 34 Based on David Hornestay, "Double Vision," Government Executive
91-102; and B. S. Georgopoulos, G. M. Mahoney, and (April 2 0 0 0 ) , pp. 4 1 - 4 4 .