Contingency & Situational Leadership

1. Contingency & Situational Leadership Question: what is the relationship between leaders & followers & how does that affect response? • News • Term paper • Theories • Path-Goal • Multiple Linkage Model • Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) & Vertical Dyad Linkage (VDL) • Team Task

2. Term Paper Format [Cover Page] Title Your Name Course # & title Instructor Date How you can be reached: Phone Fax E-mail • Title • The purpose of this paper is to…. Overview what you will do. • Introduction of theory: major components, assumptions, why selected • Application of theory to case: • Briefly describe the case • Explain the situation in terms of the theory • Use the theory to recommend intervention • Evaluate the theory • References BE SURE to check writing suggestions on the website!!!

3. Path-Goal Theory of Robert House & Martin Evans • Key question: How to choose the best path to reach the goal (based on expectancy theory of motivation) • Follower characteristics: locus of control & self efficacy • Environmental characteristics: situational demands such as task structure, level of authority, & work group • Vary leadership style depending on contingencies • Ensure subordinate goals are consistent with organizational goals • Enhance work satisfaction & productivity How would you create a model out of these building blocks?

4. Path-Goal Theory • In the early 1970’s House & Evans proposed path-goal theory • Specifies what a leader should do to achieve high productivity & satisfaction • This is done by clarifying the path to the work/performance goal • The leadership style should consider needs of the worker and task demands, and match efforts accordingly • It identifies four worker needs and corresponding leader styles

6. Sample Locus of Control Scale Items

7. Subordinate Self-Perception factors in Path-Goal Outcomes are influences by luck, fate, chance, or powerful others Outcomes are influenced by oneself, motivation, skill and effort

8. Subordinate Self-Efficacy & Path-Goal

9. Study showing variance accounted for (R2) by self-efficacy in remote workers in virtual organizations Staples, D. S., Hulland, J. S., & Higgins, C. A. (1998). A Self-Efficacy Theory Explanation for the Management of Remote Workers in Virtual Organizations. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3(4), http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue4/staples.html

10. You prefer what you are…

11. Performance influence tactics • Recognize & activate needs over which leader has influence • Increase personal and team payoffs for high performance • Coach and direct to make paths to rewards easier • Help clarify his expectations lead to performance & performance leads to rewards (Vroom’s expectancy theory) • Remove and reduce barriers to performance and goals • Make opportunities for personal satisfaction contingent on performance • Avoid micro-managing that may induce regression in worker maturity (Argyris) • Clarify desirability of goals, provide structure, and make rewards contingent on performance to enhance productivity & satisfaction.

13. Multiple-Linkage Model (Yukl, 1994) • Recognizes complexity in formal organizations • Incorporates other theories • Leaders have short (tactical) and long term (strategic) impact • Short term relies on skillful correction of deficiencies of intervening variables in the work unit • Long term relies on leader changing situational variables to be more favorable (e.g., strategic planning, policy formation, program development, organizational change, political activity, etc. )

14. Short-term Long-term Extent to which these are appropriately used will reflect the leader’s success

15. Vertical Dyad Linkage (VDL) / Leader-Member Relations (LMX) • Think of a work/team situation in which there have been an “in-group (close to the boss) and “out-group” (well established but just not given those special tasks) • How what influenced the formation of those two groups? • What did the boss expect of each group? How did s/he treat them differently? • What were advantages and disadvantages of being in each group? • How did the groups perceive each other? • How could it be made to work more effectively?

16. Vertical-Dyad Linkage Model (Dansereau, Cashman, & Graen, 1973) • Leaders behave differently toward employees depending on whether they are in-group or out-group; • Focus is on the dyadic relationship, not the individual; leadership varies from dyad to dyad • Each dyad is seen as a social exchange unit in which the leader exchanges privilege for performance • Negotiating latitude: as relationship evolves, the leader enables the role incumbent to further define his/her own role • Leaders with low POWn give more negotiating latitude to subordinates with low POWn than to those with high POWn Phase 1: Role-taking as leaders and members come to understand how the other views and desires respect. Phase 2: Role-making is the trust that develops in order for leaders and members to further extend the relationship and influence over each other's attitudes and behaviors Phase 3: Role-routinization of the social exchange pattern becomes routine 

17. performance

18. Team Discussion • Each team will select a theory & use it to discuss a case • Consider how well the theory accounts for the case, lends itself to explanation and intervention • Evaluate the theory • Report to the class