8. Fiedler’s Contingency Model

Developed back in the 1960’s by Fred Fiedler, Fiedler’s Contingency Model is an interesting look at leadership styles, and how different approaches can lead to very different results depending on the circumstances. As the term ‘contingency’ would indicate, this model is based on the idea that rather than having a single leadership style for all circumstances, the best approach is to be able to vary the leadership that is provided based on the group and task at hand.



Fielder argues in this model that a specific leader is only able to lead in one fashion, meaning that another person will need to be tasked with the job if a different leadership style is required.

Right away, there are some elements of this model that make sense when you think about how they will be applied. Most people would agree that a ‘one size fits all’ approach is not going to be effective when it comes to leadership – rather, it will take a variety of styles and techniques to achieve success in the long run. However, the idea that an individual leader is unable to change their ways based on the needs of their team, is one that will likely be argued by many. Regardless of where you stand on this topic, the model is certainly worth taking a closer look at for its many interesting insights.

Starting with the idea of a leader who is unable to change his or her ways, referred to as a ‘Static Leader’. Fiedler uses a scale to determine what kind of leader an individual will be (or already is). The scale used is the ‘Least-Preferred Co-Worker’ scale, and is the subject of much debate as to its practicality. Basically, this scale asks a series of questions that the leader is supposed to answer while thinking about their ‘least favorite’ person that they have worked with over the years.

In order to arrive at a result, the leader is supposed to rank that person on a scale of 1-8 on a variety of personality traits such as Unfriendly to Friendly, and Hostile to Supportive. There are 16 of these rankings to complete, after which the leader will be left with a score that they can use to identify where they fall within the leadership spectrum.

  • Low scores show a leader is more focused on tasks as opposed to relationships.

  • High scores represent a leader that is more focused on building relationships with their teams.

The idea that these numbers are ‘set in stone’ is something that many people will disagree with. It seems logical that leaders will develop and evolve over time, potentially changing the score that they would receive on this scale. Also, depending on the person in question whom they were thinking about while answering the questions, the results could be skewed based on one strongly negative memory.


Making up the other half of this leadership model is the idea of ‘Situational Favorableness’. Each of its three factors has a say in how a certain type of leader will fare in a given situation.

Leader’s Position Power.

  • How much power is the leader being given in a situation? Is their word final when disputes arise, or does the next level of management dictate decisions down to the leader? The model classifies these rankings into two categories: ο Strong leader: one who has a high level of power within the organization. ο Weak leader: someone controlled from above to a greater degree.

Task Structure.

There are two kinds of tasks according to this model:

  • Structured tasks are detailed and clear as to what they expect from each of the team members.

  • Unstructured tasks may be open ended or undefined in terms of the goals and missions for the team.

Leader-Member Relations.

Judges how good the relationship is between the team members and the leader? The type of project that is being undertaken, and the ranking on the other two points of the Situational Favorableness scale, will determine what kind of leader it takes to match up with the job. While most of the time a stronger relationship between leader and team is going to be preferred, that will not always be the case.

While Fiedler’s Contingency Model is an interesting look at leadership styles and their effectiveness in certain situations, the limitations are pretty evident right from the start. Basing a person’s leadership style on their interactions with one single co-worker, could potentially lead to a misleading outcome. Each of the three factors probably aren’t as black and white as they are required to be in order to use this model. However, using this model to get an idea of what kind of leadership style you use, and what circumstances will be best-suited for you to manage, is an opportunity to gain insight and perspective. The Contingency Model can help you think about how you manage, and why you might be more successful in some situations than in others.

Key Points

  • Fiedler’s Contingency Model is based on the idea that rather than having a single leadership style for all circumstances, the best approach is to be able to vary the leadership that is provided based on the group and task at hand.

  • Starting with the idea of a leader who is unable to change his or her ways, we see that Fiedler uses a scale to determine what kind of leader an individual will be.

  • Making up the other half of this leadership model is the idea of ‘Situational Favorableness’, which has three components: Leader’s Position Power, Task Structure, and Leader-Member Relations.

  • Leader’s Position Power refers to how much power the leader is being given in a situation. A strong leader is one who has a high level of power within the organization, while a weak leader is controlled from above to a greater degree.

  • Task Structure – structured tasks are detailed and clear as to what is expected from each of the team members, whereas unstructured tasks may be open ended or undefined in terms of the goals and missions for the team.

  • Leader-Member Relations refers to the relationship between the team members and the leader.

  • Fiedler’s Contingency Model can give you some insight into the leadership styles available to you, provided that you are aware of its limitations.

References

  • Newton Paul (2016). Leadership Theories Leaderships Skills. Published 2016 by Bookboon .

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

3. Hersey-Blanchard's Situational Leadership Theory

Image
Right in the name of this leadership theory, you can get a great indication of what it is all about. The term ‘situational’ indicates that: Leaders should vary their approach based on the people they are leading, and the circumstances that surround the task at hand. Indeed, the Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory is one that is based around variable leadership, depending on a variety of circumstances. When a leader is able to adapt to the situation as quickly as possible, everyone will benefit in the end.  Specifically, this theory has to do with the maturity of those who are being led. To those who have worked as leaders in the past, it is no surprise that maturity should be considered when working on finding the right leadership style. For example, Someone who is inexperienced in their field, will likely lack the skills or confidence to take on tasks that would be comfortable for a more experienced employee. Only when a leader is able to mold their approach...
Read more

1. Dunham & Pierce’s Leadership Process Model

Image
The Dunham and Pierce Leadership Process Model doesn’t necessarily seek to define leadership, but it does the job indirectly. This model addresses all of the key elements that play a role in leadership, and helps the manager to understand how each part affects the other parts of the equation.  Leadership will never be simple, but using this model is a good way to ‘get your head around’ the various moving parts and hopefully bring it into better focus in your mind. According to Dunham and Pierce, there are four factors that play a role in the leadership process. Leader – the person in charge of a project or team, regardless of what their title may be. That person may be referred to as an owner, a manager, a V.P., or any other title that confers power and responsibility. The important thing is that they are the person who a group of others answer to, and it is their performance that we are worried about with this model. Followers – the people who are being led. Generally, these w...
Read more

5. Lewin’s Leadership Styles Framework

Image
Not only can leadership strategies vary from person to person, but the same person can often use different strategies in different situations in order to achieve maximum results. The leader who is stuck in only one way of thinking and never responds to the changes going on around them, is one who is unlikely to be a leader for long. The Lewin’s Leadership Styles Framework dates back many years – to the 1930’s, in fact – but it is still relevant today because it divides leadership styles up into three easy to remember groups. While these groups might not necessarily capture all of the subtlety that is contained within a given leader or manager, they do a good job of highlighting the overall approach.  Based on the situation, any of these three styles could be the perfect one for the job. At the same time, any of these three could be the wrong one for the job if used under incorrect circumstances. Pairing the right leadership style with the right situation is a task that every lea...
Read more