In what ways are the trait and behavior approaches to leadership similar? How does Fiedler's contingency model differ from both? Even though these two approaches to leadership are very different in many ways, we have found that they are in fact very similar as well. We notice that the trait approach focuses on the leaders’ personal characteristics yet ignores the situation in which they try to lead. In a very similar way the behavior approach identifies the behaviors responsible for effective leadership without considering how the situation affects behavior. This has always been interesting to me because I do not understand how one trait can functional successfully without the other. I think a person’s personal characteristics and behavior affect their overall leadership style and the way they treat their employees. Fiedler’s contingency model actually focuses on the two most important things in leadership styles. 1. Why, in particular situations some leaders will become more effective than other leaders even though they have equal credentials, and 2. Why a particular leader may be effective in one situation but not in another. Like the trait approach, Fiedler’s theory acknowledged that personal characteristics influence the effectiveness of leaders and he was particularly interested in the styles of leadership, and how a person approaches being a leader. Basically Fiedler considers leadership styles to be relatively fixed or enduring. He stated that leaders cannot be “taught” to be relationship oriented or task oriented, nor can a leader alter his or her style according to the situation. Their managers must either change the situation to fit the leader or put the leader somewhere where they will be effective. (Objective 4.1)
What are the sources of organizational conflict? What are the main conflict resolution strategies? The sources of organizational conflict come from organizational politics. This is when one person or group attempts to influence the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document