Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Contingency Theory
Group 5: Tran Hoang Mai Duong Thi Huong
Ha The He Bui Nhu Hong Hanh
Nguyen Le Thuc Oanh Le Minh Tan Trung
Contingency Theory
Leadership Styles
Situational Variables
Application
Understanding the Model
Situational
Leadership Styles v.s. Favorableness
Leadership Styles
Leadership Styles
three factors:
1. Leader-member relations
2. Task structure
3. Position power
Leader-member relation
the
- Is the degree to which the requirements
performer of a task are
know the requirement clear and spelled out
clearly
completely
- Task that are the path to structured tendthe
accomplishing to give
task more control
has few to the leader,
alternatives
completion
whereas vague and unclearthe
tasks
tasklessen the
can be leaders
clearly control and influence.
demonstrated
Position power: the amount of authority the leader has to reward or to punish followers
Includes the legitimate power
Strong: a person has the authority to hire and fire or give raises in rank or pay
Weak: vice versa
Situational Variables
The most favorable situation are those having good leader-follower relations,
defined tasks, and strong leader-position power. (task-motivated)
The least favorable situation are those having bad leader-follower relations,
structured tasks and weak leader-position power. (task-motivated)
The moderately favorable fall b/w these two extremes. (relationship-motivated)
Contingency theory is concerned with
a. 1
b. 2
c..33
c
d. 4
Strengths and Criticisms
Strength
s Criticisms
Unfriendly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Friendly
Unpleasant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Pleasant
empirical research and It failed to explain fully why
Rejecting
predictive power
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Accepting
people with certain leadership
Tense 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 styles are more effective in some
Relaxed
situation than in others
Cold 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Warm
broaden
Boring our 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Interesting
understanding of
Backbiting
leadership 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Loyal
Uncooperative 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Fails to explain adequately what
Cooperative
organization should do when
Hostile
do not require that
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 there is a mismatch betweenSupportive
leaders be effective in all
Guarded 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 leader and the situation Open
situational
Insincere 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Sincere
Unkind 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Kind
provides data on leaders styles
Inconsiderate 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 The LPC scale does notConsiderate
seem
that could be useful to valid on the surface because it
organization
Untrustworthy in developing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 does not correlate well with other
Trustworthy
leadership profiles. standard leadership measures
Gloomy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Cheerful
Applications
??????
Conclusion