Fred Fiedler developed the Fiedler's Contingency Model in the 1960s. It is a theory focused on the efficiency of leaders within an establishment. To help develop the model, Fiedler investigated the behaviors and personalities of leaders. The model’s overarching argument is that there is no best style to lead people (da Cruz et al., 2011). Subsequently, the best style to lead people is based on the prevailing situation, which is an outcome of two main factors. The two include the style of leadership and situational control. Usually, in stressful events, leaders center their intellectual capabilities on others and thus cannot perform well. Hence, it is concluded that a leader’s intelligence is best applied when there is no stress. Also, Fiedler argues that in conditions with lower stress levels, experience impairs performance while contributing to performance under high-stress situations. In this paper, the leadership and situation factors described in Fiedler’s Contingency Model will be defined. Likewise, the essay will explore the primary predictions of the model.
Fiedler’s Contingency Model
The Fiedler’s Contingency Model postulates that there is no sole method that administrators and leaders can use to lead organizations (da Cruz et al., 2011). Based on the prevailing situations, managers will be required to adopt different styles. For instance, the procedure for solving a particular challenge relies on the factors influencing the situation. Considering a highly automatic (mechanistic) environment with numerous repetitive tasks, a relatively directive leadership style may breed higher results compared to others. On the other hand, an environment with dynamic events requires a participative leadership style. In the development of the model, Fielder considered three key situational factors (da Cruz et al., 2011). These are the relationship between leaders and members, the structure of tasks, and the authority bestowed on the leader.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The leadership factors in consideration include whether they are oriented to relationships or tasks (da Cruz et al., 2011). Leaders who are oriented to tasks perform well when working in environments with healthy relationships between leaders and members, well-structured tasks, and with weak or strong leader authority. When the responsibilities are unstructured with strong authority, their performance is optimum. Task-oriented leaders also perform when the relationships between members and leaders are between weak to moderate, and the responsibilities are unstructured. On the other hand, leaders oriented to relationships perform better in all other conditions. Hence, based on the arguments, various conditions within an organization may call for leaders with different leadership styles (Bolden et al., 2003).
The model’s variables are merged and weighted on a scale, from favorable to unfavorable, and these define the model’s primary predictions. Thus, the model predicts that the task-oriented leadership is usually at the preferred extremes of favorable and unfavorable surroundings while relationship-oriented leadership resides in the middle ground. In each condition, managers can recreate the environment to suit their styles. Thus, the structure of tasks, manager-member relations, and power position prescribe the manager’s ability to control situations. The relationships define the amount of loyalty, support, and dependability that a leader receives from his subordinates. The leader can also perceive how well he can control his workers. The model also predicts that when relationships are favorable, the task structure is well-defined and managers can punish or reward those who do well. Conversely, in conditions of unfavorable relationships, tasks are indefinite, and managers have insufficient power (Frosyth, 2006).
Conclusion
The ability to regulate the conditions of an organization is essential for a manager. Leaders who have situational control can command their team and direct them on what they should do. Situational control is thus necessary for effective leadership, which is determined by the three principal components. These are task structure, manager-member relation, and position power. However, according to Fiedler’s Contingency Model, there is no perfect leadership style. Both relationship-oriented and task oriented leaders can be effective depending on the prevailing situation. The contingency model proposes a shift in the environment to suit the preferred leadership style. However, there is no good or bad leadership style; it depends on the prevailing conditions.
References
Bolden, R., Gosling, J., Marturano, A., & Dennison, P. (2003). A review of leadership theory and competency frameworks . Centre for Leadership Studies, University of Exeter.
da Cruz, M. R. P., Nunes, A. J. S., & Pinheiro, P. G. (2011). Fiedler's Contingency Theory: Practical Application of the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) Scale. IUP Journal of Organizational Behavior , 10 (4).
Frosyth, D. R. (2006). Leadership. In D. R. Forsyth (Ed.), Group Dynamics (pp. 245-277). Belmont: CA, Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
