Five Guys Burgers and Fries
Chapter 3: Contingency Approaches to Leadership
Your Leadership Challenge
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:
• Understand how leadership is often contingent on people and situations.
• Apply Fiedler’s contingency model to key relationships among leader style, situational favorability, and group task performance.
• Apply Hersey and Blanchard’s situational theory of leader style to the level of follower readiness.
• Explain the path–goal theory of leadership.
• Use the Vroom–Jago model to identify the correct amount of follower participation in specific decision situations.
• Know how to use the power of situational variables to substitute for or neutralize the need for leadership. Chapter Outline
66 The Contingency Approach
68 Fiedler’s Contingency Model
73 Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Theory
77 Path–Goal Theory
82 The Vroom–Jago Contingency Model
88 Substitutes for Leadership
In The Lead
72 Mark Hurd, Hewlett-Packard
77 Carole McGraw, Detroit Public Schools
79 Alan Robbins, Plastic Lumber Company
87 Art Weinstein, Whitlock Manufacturing
Leader’s Self-Insight
69 T–P Leadership Questionnaire: An Assessment of Style
76 Are You Ready?
90 Measuring Substitutes for Leadership
Leader’s Bookshelf
67 Leadership and the New Science
Leadership at Work
92 Task versus Relationship Role Play
Leadership Development: Cases for Analysis
93 Alvis Corporation
94 Finance Department
S teven Sinofsky leads a team of Microsoft software engineers working on the next generation of Windows operating system software. Over at Apple, Bertrand Serlet is leading a team to try to make sure the new Macintosh operating system is better. Although they hold the same type of job, Sinofsky and Serlet are widely different in their leadership styles. Sinofsky is a meticulous planner and likes to run a tight ship. “Under Sinofsky,” one engineer said, “you plan and you stick to the
Your Leadership Challenge
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:
• Understand how leadership is often contingent on people and situations.
• Apply Fiedler’s contingency model to key relationships among leader style, situational favorability, and group task performance.
• Apply Hersey and Blanchard’s situational theory of leader style to the level of follower readiness.
• Explain the path–goal theory of leadership.
• Use the Vroom–Jago model to identify the correct amount of follower participation in specific decision situations.
• Know how to use the power of situational variables to substitute for or neutralize the need for leadership. Chapter Outline
66 The Contingency Approach
68 Fiedler’s Contingency Model
73 Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Theory
77 Path–Goal Theory
82 The Vroom–Jago Contingency Model
88 Substitutes for Leadership
In The Lead
72 Mark Hurd, Hewlett-Packard
77 Carole McGraw, Detroit Public Schools
79 Alan Robbins, Plastic Lumber Company
87 Art Weinstein, Whitlock Manufacturing
Leader’s Self-Insight
69 T–P Leadership Questionnaire: An Assessment of Style
76 Are You Ready?
90 Measuring Substitutes for Leadership
Leader’s Bookshelf
67 Leadership and the New Science
Leadership at Work
92 Task versus Relationship Role Play
Leadership Development: Cases for Analysis
93 Alvis Corporation
94 Finance Department
S teven Sinofsky leads a team of Microsoft software engineers working on the next generation of Windows operating system software. Over at Apple, Bertrand Serlet is leading a team to try to make sure the new Macintosh operating system is better. Although they hold the same type of job, Sinofsky and Serlet are widely different in their leadership styles. Sinofsky is a meticulous planner and likes to run a tight ship. “Under Sinofsky,” one engineer said, “you plan and you stick to the
References: 1. John Markoff, “Competing as Software Goes to Web,” The New York Times (June 5, 2007), pp. C1, C5. 2. Gary Yukl, Angela Gordon, and Tom Taber, “A Hierarchical Taxonomy of Leadership Behavior: Integrating a Half Century of Behavior Research,” Journal of Leadership and Organization Studies 9, no. 1 (2002), pp. 15–32. 4. Reported in George Anders, “Theory & Practice: Tough CEOs Often Most Successful, a Study Finds,” The Wall Street Journal (November 19, 2007), p. B3. 5. Adam Lashinsky, “Mark Hurd’s Moment,” Fortune (March 16, 2009), pp. 90–100; Jon Fortt, “Mark Hurd, Superstar,” Fortune (June 9, 2008), pp. 35–40; and “Memo To: Mark Hurd,” BusinessWeek (April 11, 2005), p. 38. 9. Roya Ayman, M. M. Chemers, and F. Fiedler, “The Contingency Model of Leadership Effectiveness: Its Levels of Analysis,” Leadership Quarterly 6, no. 2 (1995), pp. 147–167. 10. Paul Hersey and Kenneth H. Blanchard, Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources, 4th ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1982). 11. Jonathan Kaufman, “A McDonald’s Owner Becomes a Role Model for Black Teenagers,” The Wall Street Journal (August 23, 1995), pp. A1, A6. 12. Carol Hymowitz, “New Face at Facebook Hopes to Map Out a Road to Growth,” The Wall Street Journal (April 14, 2008), p. B1. 13. Cheryl Dahle, “Xtreme Teams,” Fast Company (November 1999), pp. 310–326. 14. Carol Hymowitz, “Managers Find Ways to Get Generations to Close Culture Gap” (In the Lead column), The Wall Street Journal (July 9, 2007), p. B1. 15. Carole McGraw, “Teaching Teenagers? Think, Do, Learn,” Education Digest (February 1998), pp. 44–47. 17. Robert J. House, “A Path–Goal Theory of Leadership Effectiveness,” Administrative Science Quarterly 16 (1971), pp. 321–338. 18. M. G. Evans, “Leadership,” in S. Kerr, ed., Organizational Behavior (Columbus, OH: Grid, 1974), pp. 230–233. 19. Robert J. House and Terrence R. Mitchell, “Path–Goal Theory of Leadership,” Journal of Contemporary Business (Autumn 1974), pp. 81–97. 20. Dyan Machan, “We’re Not Authoritarian Goons,” Forbes (October 24, 1994), pp. 264–268. 21. Timothy Aeppel, “Personnel Disorders Sap a Factory Owner of His Early Idealism,” The Wall Street Journal (January 14, 1998), pp. A1–A14. 23. V. H. Vroom and Arthur G. Jago, The New Leadership: Managing Participation in Organizations (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1988). 24. The following discussion is based heavily on Victor H. Vroom, “Leadership and the Decision-Making Process,” Organizational Dynamics 28, no. 4 (Spring 2000), pp. 82–94. 27. Based on a decision problem presented in Victor H. Vroom, “Leadership and the Decision-Making Process,” Organizational Dynamics 28, no. 4 (Spring, 2000), pp. 82–94. 29. J. P. Howell, D. E. Bowen, P. W. Doreman, S. Kerr, and P. M. Podsakoff, “Substitutes for Leadership: Effective Alternatives to Ineffective Leadership,” Organizational Dynamics (Summer 1990), pp. 21–38. 34. Based on David Hornestay, “Double Vision,” Government Executive (April 2000), pp. 41–44.