Chapter 7:

Contingency and Situational Leadership

1. Situational influences on effective leadership behavior:
- Contingency approach to leadership = leaders are most effective when they make their
behavior contingent upon situational forces
- Internal and external environment have a significant impact on leader effectiveness
- For example, the quality + the competitiveness of the environment → influence behaviors
+ Manager supervises competent employees → practice consensus
+ Manager faces competitive environment find it easier to align people to pursue a
new vision
- Larger-company CEOs had a significantly better developed subset of interpersonal skills,
scored better on a measure of leadership and group participation.

2. Fiedler’s contingency theory of leadership effectiveness:

a) Measuring leadership style: the least preferred co-worker (LPC) scale:
- Fiedler's theory classifies a manager's leadership style as relationship- motivated or
task-motivated. The intermediate style which receives little mention is labeled socio
independent.
b) Measuring the leadership situation:
The control classifications are determined by rating the situation on its three dimensions, as
follows:
- Leader-member relations measure how well the group and the leader get along
- Task structure measures how clearly the procedures, goals, and evaluation of the job are
defined
- Position power measures the leader's authority to hire, fire, discipline. and grant salary
increases to group members.
c) The leader-match concept and overall findings:
- The major proposition in contingency theory is the leader-match concept: Leadership
effectiveness depends on matching leaders to situations in which they can exercise more
control.
 - Task-motivated leaders perform better in situations that are highly favorable for
exercising control, because they do not have to be concerned with the task.
- In very low-control situations, the task-motivated leader is able to structure and make
sense out of confusion, whereas the relationship-motivated leader wants to give
emotional support to group members or call a meeting.
d) Making the situation more favorable for the leader:
A practical implication of the contingency theory is that leaders should modify situations to best
match their leadership style, thereby enhancing their chances of being effective. To increase
control over the situation, the leader can do one or more of the following:
● Improve leader-member relations through such means as displaying an interest in the
personal welfare of group members, having meals with them, actively listening to their
concerns, telling anecdotes, and in general being a 'nice person'.
● Increase task structure by engaging in behavior related to initiating structure, such as
being more specific about expectations, providing deadlines, showing samples of
acceptable work, and providing written instructions.
● Exercise more position power by requesting more formal authority from higher
management. For example, the leader might let it be known that he or she has the
authority to grant bonuses and make strong recommendations for promotion.
e) Evaluation of Fiedler’s contingency theory:
A major contribution of Fiedler's work is that it has prompted others to con- duct studies about
the contingent nature of leadership. Despite its potential advantages, however, the contingency
theory is too complicated to have much of an impact on most leaders.
3. The path-goal theory of leadership effectiveness:
The path-goal theory of leadership effectiveness specifies what the leader must do to
achieve high productivity and morale in a given situation and clarify the path to a goal for
a group member to help him/her receive personal payoffs while increasing job
satisfaction and performance. This theory has several versions whose key features can be
summarised in figure 7.2 below:
 a) Matching the leadership style to the situation:
The leader should choose among four different leadership styles to reach the aimed results in a
given situation which consists of the type of subordinates and the type of work they perform. The
type of subordinates is determined by the locus of control and by how well they think they can
do the assigned task.
Environmental contigency factors consists of factors that are not controllable by group
members or leader but have a impact on team’s satisfaction and task accomplishment. These
factors can be classified into three category: the working environment, the organisation’s
authority system and the work group.
To use path-goal theory, the leader must know the relevant variables in the environment before
select among the four styles listed below that fits those factors best
- Directive style: This style of leadership focus on formal activities such as planning,
organising, and controlling while improve morale when the task is unclear
- Supportive style: The leader who is supportive create an emotionally supportive climate and
boost morale when group members facing dissatisfying, stressful, or frustrating tasks. This style
fits with group members who are unsure of themselves
- Participative style: The leader with this style cares about members’ opinions before making
decisions. This style is suitable to improve the morale of well-motivated employees who perform
non-repetitive tasks.
 - Achievement-oriented style: This style focus on creating challenging goals, push for work
improvement, and sets high expectations for team members who are expected to assume
responsibility. This style suits with achievement-oriented team members and those who work on
ambiguous and nonrepetitive tasks
b) How the leader influences performance:
The path-goal theory offers suggestions to leaders, beside style recommendations to fit the
situation, which often relate to motivation and satisfaction, including the following:
1. Recognise or activate group members’ needs over which the leader has control
2. Increase the personal payoffs to team members for attaining work goals
3. Make the paths to payoffs (rewards) easier by coaching and providing direction
4. Help group members clarify their expectations of how effort will lead to good
performance, and how performance will lead to a reward.
5. Reduce frustrating barriers to reaching goals.
6. Increase opportunities for personal satisfaction if the group member perform effectively.
The “if” is important because it reflects contingent behaviour on the leader’s part
7. Be careful not to irritate people by giving them instructions on things they already can do
well
8. To obtain high performance and satisfaction, the leader must provide structure if it is
missing, and must also supply rewards contingent upon adequate performance. To
accomplish this, leaders must clarify the desirability of goals for the group members
Leaders can derive specific benefit from path-goal theory by applying these eight methods of
influencing performance. A contribution of path-goal theory is that it highlights the importance
of achievement-oriented leadership, which is becoming more important in high-technology
organisations
4. The Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership model:
What is the Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership model: The Hersey-Blanchard Model is a
leadership model that focuses on the ability and willingness of individual employees. Developed
by Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard, the model is also referred to as the Situational
Leadership Model.
a) Basics of the model:
There's no one-size-fits-all leadership style. Effective leaders adjust their approach based on the
capabilities and willingness (confidence and motivation) of their team members.

1. Directing (S1)
The S1 leadership style focuses primarily on providing direction to employees. At the S1 stage,
followers lack the ability and willingness to complete their tasks, and leaders must clearly define
their responsibilities and ensure they develop the foundational skills to be successful. Typical S1
leadership methods include simple instructions, clear explanations, and careful supervision.

2. Coaching (S2)
The S2 leadership style provides followers with both direction and personal support. In the S2
stage of development, followers are still unable to perform their tasks but are motivated to
succeed. Therefore, leaders should ensure that followers are developing the necessary skills but
still maintaining their self-confidence. Ultimately, this results in followers that can take on
personal responsibility for their tasks.

3. Supporting (S3)
The S3 leadership style focuses on supporting followers and less emphasis on providing
direction. At the S3 stage, the follower has already developed the necessary skills to complete
their tasks. Therefore, the leader should focus on providing feedback and support to motivate the
employee and encourage greater development.

4. Delegating (S4)
The S4 leadership style involves minimal direction and support, as the follower is already
capable of performing their tasks independently. At the S4 level, the leader should provide
support when needed but also provide the follower with autonomy over their responsibilities.
b) Evaluation of the situational model of leadership
Unlike other leadership models, the Hersey-Blanchard model disregards the idea that
corporations require a single approach to leadership. Instead, the model proposes a leadership
style that adapts to the unique circumstances of each workplace.

By evaluating each employee’s ability and experience, leaders can adapt their leadership
methods to encourage professional development in their employees. It results in a progression of
leadership methods that continuously adapt alongside an employee’s professional development.

Analyzing the Hersey-Blanchard Model

The Hersey-Blanchard model uses a diagram to classify employees based on their capacity and
experience. In the model, employees are referred to as “followers,” while managers are referred
to as “leaders.”

The diagram below outlines four distinct groups of followers, each organized by their ability and
willingness to work. Ability refers to a follower’s ability to perform their job successfully with a
combination of skills and experience. Willingness refers to followers who are motivated to take
on a task and have the confidence to carry out their responsibilities.

Based on the Hersey-Blanchard model, the four groups of followers are:

1. Unable and Unwilling (D1)
D1 followers are unable to complete their tasks because they lack the proper skills to succeed.
They are also unmotivated and lack confidence in their abilities.

2. Unable and Willing (D2)

D2 followers are unable to complete their tasks, usually due to a lack of skills and experience.
However, they are still willing to try and attempt the task. It exemplifies new employees that are
motivated to succeed but lack adequate knowledge and ability.

3. Able and Unwilling (D3)

D3 followers have the capacity and experience to complete their tasks but are unwilling to do so.
It can be attributed to a lack of self–confidence in their ability or a lack of motivation to follow
their leader’s guidance.

4. Able and Willing (D4)

D4 followers have the necessary skills and experience, as well as the confidence in their ability
to complete tasks successfully. The employees have the highest level of capacity and can
complete tasks while also taking responsibility for their work.

Leadership under the Hersey-Blanchard Model

Under the Hersey-Blanchard model, a leader must adapt their leadership methods depending on
the ability and willingness of their followers. For example, a follower with a D2 development
level should be led differently than a follower with a D4.
=> - The Hersey-Blanchard Model is a leadership model that focuses on the ability and
willingness of individual employees. It’s also referred to as the Situational Leadership Model.
- The model outlines four leadership styles, each corresponding with a specific level of
employee development.
- Although the model is well-regarded among professionals, there are still difficulties with
its application in the real-world.
5. The normative decision model of Vroom, Yetton and Jago:
The Vroom-Yetton-Jago normative decision model suggests that effective leadership is a matter
of selecting the appropriate style to encourage the right level of group participation in
decision-making. It emphasizes that leaders should adapt their decision-making style based on
the situation, considering factors that affect decision quality and acceptance. The model,
developed by Vroom and Yetton and later refined by Vroom and Jago, provides guidelines for
leaders to determine the most effective approach to making decisions within a team.

a) Decision quality and decision acceptance:

- Decision Quality: This refers to the effectiveness of a decision in terms of its impact on
group or individual performance. High decision quality is achieved when an effective
alternative is chosen. However, decision quality is not critical when the consequences of
different alternatives are similar or unimportant, such as selecting a supplier for
photocopy paper.
- Decision Acceptance: This is the degree to which group members are committed to
implementing a decision. Acceptance is essential when group members are responsible
for carrying out the decision and it aligns with their self-interest, like the adoption of
laptops by sales representatives to increase productivity. Conversely, acceptance is less
critical when few employees are involved in implementation or the decision does not
significantly affect them.
In essence, the normative model suggests that decision quality is enhanced when group members
have relevant information and are cooperative, while decision acceptance is crucial for the
successful implementation of decisions, particularly when they require active participation from
group members.

b) Decision-making styles and the decision tree:

The Vroom-Yetton-Jago model is a decision-making framework that outlines five styles of
decision-making, varying in the level of group involvement:
 1. AI and AII: Autocratic styles where the leader makes decisions with minimal group
input.
2. CI and CII: Consultative styles where the leader includes group members in the
decision-making process to varying degrees.
3. GII: A group-directed style where the leader allows the group to make decisions
collectively.
The model uses decision trees to guide managers through a series of situational variables to
determine the most appropriate decision-making style. These trees are differentiated based on
whether the decision is at the group or individual level and the urgency of the situation.
To navigate the decision tree, the manager assesses the importance of the decision’s technical
quality and the need for subordinate commitment. The answers guide the manager through the
tree to a recommended leadership style.
Due to the model’s complexity, a software tool is available to assist managers in diagnosing
situations and deciding on the degree of group participation needed for decision-making.

c) An illustrative use of the model:

- Quality of Decision (QR node): The quality of the decision is deemed highly important
because a poor decision could lead to substandard claims service.
- Subordinate Commitment (CR node): High importance is placed on subordinate
commitment, as the success of a telecommuting program relies on the dedication of all
staff members.
- Information Sufficiency (LI node): There is an acknowledgment of insufficient
information to make a high-quality decision, indicating the need for further fact-finding.
- Problem Structure (ST node): The problem is not well-structured, with many
complexities involved in establishing a telecommuting program.
- Subordinate Agreement (CP node): It is believed that subordinates would commit to a
decision made independently due to the team’s cohesiveness.
- Action Plan (CII node): The action plan involves sharing the decision with team
members, gathering their input, and building consensus.
This approach ensures that the decision-making process is inclusive, leverages team expertise,
and fosters commitment to the telecommuting program.

d) Evidence and opinion about the model:

6. Other contingency theories and models:

a) Leadership substitution theory:
- Leadership substitution theory, developed by Kerr and Jermier (1978), takes a unique
approach to leadership. Instead of focusing on how leaders can be most effective, it
explores situations where strong leadership might be less important.

- The theory proposes two types of situational variables that can substitute for leadership:
● Substitutes: These are characteristics of the team members, tasks, or organization that
make leadership less necessary. For example, a team with highly skilled and experienced
members who understand their roles clearly might not need as much direction from a
leader.
● Neutralizers: These are characteristics that limit a leader's ability to act or negate the
impact of their actions. Examples include a leader with limited authority or team
members with low motivation.
- While the theory offers an interesting perspective, it has some limitations:

● Limited Research: There's not a lot of research to support the specific effectiveness of
various substitutes or neutralizers.
● Causal Processes Unclear: The theory doesn't fully explain how exactly substitutes or
neutralizers influence the need for leadership.
b) The multiple linkage model:
The Multiple-Linkage Model, developed by Gary Yukl, is a complex theory of
leadership that builds on previous ideas. It focuses on how leader behaviors,
situational factors, and various intervening variables interact to influence the
performance of a work group.
- The model proposes six key intervening variables:
● Ask commitments: Encouraging group members to commit to goals and tasks.
● Ability and role clarity: Ensuring members have the skills and a clear understanding of
their roles.
● Organization of the work: Structuring tasks, roles, and responsibilities effectively.
● Cooperation and mutual trust: Fostering collaboration and trust among group members.
● Resources and support: Providing necessary resources (financial, technical, human) for
the group.
 ● External coordination: Enabling smooth cooperation with other units outside the group.
leaders can improve group performance by influencing these variables through both reactive and
proactive behaviors. While the model is complex and has limitations, it offers a valuable
framework for leaders to consider when aiming to enhance their work unit's effectiveness.
7. Cognitive resource theory: how intelligence, experience and stress influence
leadership:
- Stress plays a key role in determining how a leader’s intelligence is related to group
performance
+ Experienced leaders have a larger variety of behavior to fall back on, leaders with
greater experience but lower intelligence are likely to have higher performing
groups under high stress conditions
+ Highly experienced leaders will often use old solutions to problems when
creativity is necessary → high intelligence more valuable than experienced
leaders when innovation is needed and stress levels are low.
+ Leaders experiencing stress, his or her intellectual abilities will be diverted from
the task at hand
+ The intellectual abilities of directive leaders will correlate more highly with group
performance than will the intellectual abilities of nondirective leaders
+ Will be related to group performance to the degree that the task requires the use of
intellectual ability.
8. Contingency leadership in the executive suite:
An investigation of how top-level executives lead their organizations provides additional insight
into contingency leadership. The approach these leaders take lies on the borderline between
lifestyle and strategy. We include the information here under contingency leadership because
each approach is chosen based on an analysis of the requirements of the situation. A leadership
approach is defined as a coherent, not personal style. However, the style management centers on
leadership behavior.
They interviewed 163 senior executives on six continents to learn how these leaders delivered
consistently extraordinary results. They scrutinized 12000 pages of interview transcripts to reach
their conclusion. Five distinct approaches were revealed by the interview analysis: Strategic,
human assets, expertise, box and change agent. The overriding conclusion from the study is that
successful CEOs assess their companies’ needs, then adapt their leadership style to fit the
particular situation.

The strategic approach is a systematic dispassionate. And structured analysis of a

company’s strengths and weaknesses, and its mission. CEOs using this approach perceive their
major contribution as creating, testing and designing a long-term business strategy. CEOs using
this approach devote about 80% of their time to external factors.
CEOs should use the strategic approach in unstable environments in which the volume
and pace of change are high. The strategic approach is often chosen by CEOs who must
frequently make decisions of enormous consequence
The human assets approach is most frequently used when a company has such far-flung
operations that managers in the individual business units are better equipped to formulate
strategy than people in the corporate group. Consistency in running the geographically remote
businesses is achieved by the CEO’s imparting corporate values to employees worldwide.
Consistency in values is also enhanced when the CEO is involved in hiring key people.
Executives who use the expertise approach believe that the CEO’s key responsibility is
selecting and disseminating throughout the organization an area of expertise that will give the
firm a competitive advantage. A key contingency factor for favoring the expertise approach is
whether a certain expertise can give the firm a significant competitive advantage
A box approach occurs when the corporate group adds value by creating, communicating,
and overseeing an explicit set of controls. The controls can take a variety of forms, including
financial measures, rules, procedures, and values that define boundaries for the performance of
all employees. The purpose of these controls is to ensure uniform and predictable experiences for
employees and customers, and to lower risk.
The key contingency factor favoring the box approach is a regulated environment such as
banking or nuclear power plants in which the government insists on strict controls to protect
employees and customers. The purpose of the control is to strive for consistency.
CEOs who use the change agent approach believe that their most critical role is to create
an environment of continual reinvention, even if such an emphasis on change creates short-term
disturbances such as anxiety, confusion, and poorer financial results. Change agent CEOs meet
regularly with a variety of stakeholders to beat the drum for changes
The change agent approach appears to be triggered when the CEO believes that the status
quo will lead to the company’s undoing.
The five leadership approaches just described are not mutually exclusive, and sometimes
a CEO will emphasize more than one approach.