Essays on Contingency Theories of Leadership Case Study

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper 'Contingency Theories of Leadership' is a great example of a Management Case Study. Different leadership theories have different uses for the organization which includes contingency and the trait theories of leadership. Trait theories advocate that leaders are born, and this is the main reason as to why some leaders succeed while others do not. On the other hand, the contingency leadership models advocate that the organization's leadership should change depending on the change in situations (Bolden, 2011). One of the main strengths of the contingency leadership style within the organization is that it equips the leaders with the ability to handle different situations better given that they are equipped to respond to changes in the external environment.

Furthermore, those leaders that rely on this type of leadership mainly evaluates the external environment before coming up with the best [possible solution on how to handle various tasks that face an organization in general. On the other hand, one of the weaknesses of the contingency theory of the leadership is that it suggests that leaders have optimal situations and therefore in some cases, they may not possess the knowledge that is capable of handling the certain situation which is detrimental to the company progress in the long run (Avolio, Walumba, and Weber, 2009).

However, this type of leadership helps in human resource planning given that it gives the organization a broader picture of what is required to handle given the situation efficiently. On the other hand, the traits leadership focuses on the character traits that leaders possess and what makes them exceptional in the organization. This study evaluates the contingency and trait theories of leadership and proposes that contingency leadership theories are more useful for the leaders of the organization. Contingency theories Contingency theories suggest that the leadership of the organization depends on the external as well as external forces and therefore there is no better way to make decisions, lead an organization as well as organizing the affairs of a given organization (Daft, and Marcic, 2014).

Therefore, for a leader to be successful, it is important to analyze a given situation and apply a leadership style that meets the identified situation. Therefore, contingent leadership uses for the application of the leadership style depending on the situation at hand.

Besides, the contingency theory of leadership emphasizes the importation of the incorporation of both the situation as well as the leading personalities which are important for an organization to succeed (Northouse, 2016). For instance, due to changes in technology and competition, it is important to scan the external environment to identify the opportunities available as well as the emerging threats in the market. However, for an organization to be successful, various situations must be approached differently especially in cases where they are different from the ones that had been confronted in the past (Day, and Antonakis, 2012). The contingency theory advocates for the task motivated types of leaders.

The task motivated types of leaders to focus on the responsibilities at hand while the relationship-motivated leaders mainly concentrate on the connection between the employees and other stakeholders in a given institution (Raš ković, 2014). The leaders who concentrate more on the relationship are more interested in making sure that the interpersonal relationship between various stakeholders is maintained which is important in the organization's progress and in factoring in the company development in the market (Kellerman, 2007).

However, one of the major measurement scales that has been in use in the past has been the use of the Least Preferred Co-Worker scale (LPC scale. ) which helps in determining whether the leaders are relationship motivated or are either task motivated (Hsiung, Tsai, and Chen, 2011). Those with high LPC scores are considered to be relationship motivated while others with lower LPC scores are tasks motivated. Relationship-motivated help in making sure that various stakeholders in the company have a positive relationship between them which is instrumental given that it is the origin of teamwork which is significant for an organization's success in the long run.

For organization activities to be carried out, it is important to ensure that various stakeholders have established relationship given that this helps in contributing to the improved customer service in the long run (Higgs, and Rowland, 2011). Furthermore, the relationship-oriented leaders focus on the relationship with other employees given that the environment in which the employee thrive is essential for long-term survival for any organization.

It helps in building confidence within the organization as well as the element of loyalty and trusts which assist in reducing the employees' turnover. On the other hand, the tasks related leaders focus on making sure that the tasks set out are achieved and are less concerned with the various relationship within the organization. The task structure is set out to ensure that the allocated responsibilities are accomplished at a given point in time (Daft, 2011).

References

Avolio, B.J., Walumba, f.O. and Weber, T.J. (2009). ‘Leadership: Current Theories, Research, and Future Directions', Annual review of Psychology, 60, pp. 421-449.

Bennis, W. (2007). 'The Challenges of Leadership in the Modern World', American Psychologist, 62(1), pp. 2-5.

Boies, K., Fiset, J. and Gill. (2015). ‘Communication and trust are key: Unlocking the relationship between leadership and team performance and creativity', The Leadership Quarterly. Dec. 26(6) pp. 1080-1094

Bolden, R. (2011). ‘Distributed Leadership in Organisations: A Review of Theory and Research', International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(3), pp.251–269.

Caldwell, R. (2003). ‘Change leaders and change managers: different or complementary?' Leadership and Organisation Development Journal. 24(5), pp 285-293

Caproni, P.J. (2012). Management Skills for Everyday Life. 3rd edn. New Jersey: Pearson Education.

Certo, S.C. and Trevis Certo, S. (2014). Modern Management: Concepts and Skills. 13th edn. International Edition. Harlow: Pearson.

Conger, J. A. (2004). 'Developing Leadership Capability: what's inside the black box?' Academy of Management Executive, 18 (3), pp. 136-139.

Daft R. L. (2011). Leadership. 5th edn. – International Edition, London: South-Western Cengage Learning

Daft, R.L. and Marcic, D. (2014). Building Management Skills. International Edition. London: South-Western Cengage Learning.

Day, D. V. and Antonakis, J. (Eds.) (2012). The Nature of Leadership. 2nd edn. London: Sage

Higgs, M. and Rowland, D. (2011). ‘What does it Take to Implement Change Successfully? A Study of the Behaviours of Successful Change Leaders', Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47(3), pp. 309-335.

Hsiung, H.H., Tsai, N.T. and Chen, C.C., 2011. Dissenters' images on supervisors and colleagues: The contingency perspective. In Northeast Decision Sciences Institute Annual Meeting, Montreal, Canada.

Kellerman, B. (2007). 'What Every Leader Needs to Know About Followers', Harvard Business Review, December, pp. 84-91.

Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership theory and practice. 7th edn. London: Sage

Rašković, M., 2014. Measuring Culture Effect size Differences in Slovenian and Portuguese Leadership Practices: Cross-Cultural Leadership Universality or Contingency?. South East European Journal of Economics and Business, 8(2), pp.7-15.

Sharma, A. and Grant, D., (2011). Narrative, drama and charismatic leadership: The case of Apple’s Steve Jobs. Leadership, 7(1), pp.3-26.

Vroom, V.H. and Jago, A. G. (2007). 'The Role of the Situation in Leadership', American Psychologist, 62(1), pp. 17-24.

Zaccaro, S. J. (2007). 'Trait-based Perspectives of Leadership', American Psychologist, 62(1), pp. 6-16.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us