Assignment Prompt & Instructions
– ## Module6discussion.docx
**## Module6discussion.docx**
Module 6
MSL 680
Module Six Lecture Notes and Discussion Questions
**Module Six**
Discussion topics include:
1. Situational leadership
2. Contingency theory
3. Path-goal theory
Assignments for Session 6 include:
1. Text: Chapters 14 – 15
Chapters 14 and 15 are all about the situation and situational approaches to leadership theory. Your textbook authors look at the situation through the lens of organizational structure. Most of you are already familiar with concepts like departmentalization, centralization/decentralization, and organizational designs such as functional, product, geographic, and matrix.
Chapter 14 looks at the situational leadership theories, all of which are considered much more useful than either trait or behavioral theories today. Two important theories, contingency leadership by Fred Fiedler and Situational Leadership by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard are highlighted in this chapter.
Fiedler’s Contingency Leadership is historically the first real situational theory and is important from that standpoint.
**Contingency Leadership Theory**
Contingency Leadership Theory was the original situational leadership theory and belongs to a man by the name of Fred Fiedler. Study the model in your book and take notice of the three factors:
1. Leader-member Relations: How are the leader and followers getting along?
2. Position Power: How strong is the leader’s power?
3. Task Structure: Is the task stable and structured or dynamic and changing?
Depending on the situational favorableness, Fiedler teaches that you need either a task oriented leader (what he calls low LPC) or people oriented (high LPC). The LPC category comes from your score on his Least Preferred Coworker Questionnaire (LPCQ) which I, for one, find highly marginal to predict anything. Nevertheless, I think you can categorize people into either task-oriented or people-oriented.
The theory concludes that if the situation is highly favorable or highly unfavorable you need a task person to lead. Likewise if the situation is moderately favorable or unfavorable, you need a people person. This seems to make sense. If things are very bad, you need a take-charge, goal-oriented leader before you go out of business. If things are very good, interpersonal relations are already smooth, and a goal-setter can take you to the next place. I think, however, that most situations are somewhat in the middle and might demand someone with human relations skills.
The secret according to Fiedler is to match the person to the situation. Analyze the situation and hire or promote the right type of leader. Nor does he think that the average leader can change from one style to another. Leadership style, according to Fielder, is very much a matter of personality and hard to change. I agree. By the way, research to validate Fiedler’s model is generally positive.
**Situational Theory**
Situational Theory, according to Hersey and Blanchard, however, does not agree. These theorists are of the mind that leaders can and do change styles depending on with whom they are dealing. Situational Leadership is the most popular leadership theory of the day. It is very friendly, easy to understand, and many corporate staffs have received training in Situational Leadership. Study the model carefully in the book and note that the Asituation@ depends on the readiness level of the follower.
R1: Unable and unwilling
R2: Unable and willing
R3: Able but unwilling
R4: Able and willing
The four leadership styles that match these readiness levels are as follows:
S1: Requires Telling@ high task-low relationship
S2: Requires Selling@ high task-high relationship
S3: Requires Participating@ high relationship-low task
S4: Requires Delegating@ low relationship-low task
**Week 6 Discussion Question (due by Thursday)**
Note: Please type the question and then the answer which should be about 250 words.
Provide a brief scenario when each of the Situational Leadership styles would be appropriate. Remember the the S1-S4 styles are used for very specific situations and not as overall styles.
**## Module6discussion.docx**
Module 6
MSL 680
Module Six Lecture Notes and Discussion Questions
**Module Six**
Discussion topics include:
1. Situational leadership
2. Contingency theory
3. Path-goal theory
Assignments for Session 6 include:
1. Text: Chapters 14 – 15
Chapters 14 and 15 are all about the situation and situational approaches to leadership theory. Your textbook authors look at the situation through the lens of organizational structure. Most of you are already familiar with concepts like departmentalization, centralization/decentralization, and organizational designs such as functional, product, geographic, and matrix.
Chapter 14 looks at the situational leadership theories, all of which are considered much more useful than either trait or behavioral theories today. Two important theories, contingency leadership by Fred Fiedler and Situational Leadership by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard are highlighted in this chapter.
Fiedler’s Contingency Leadership is historically the first real situational theory and is important from that standpoint.
**Contingency Leadership Theory**
Contingency Leadership Theory was the original situational leadership theory and belongs to a man by the name of Fred Fiedler. Study the model in your book and take notice of the three factors:
1. Leader-member Relations: How are the leader and followers getting along?
2. Position Power: How strong is the leader’s power?
3. Task Structure: Is the task stable and structured or dynamic and changing?
Depending on the situational favorableness, Fiedler teaches that you need either a task oriented leader (what he calls low LPC) or people oriented (high LPC). The LPC category comes from your score on his Least Preferred Coworker Questionnaire (LPCQ) which I, for one, find highly marginal to predict anything. Nevertheless, I think you can categorize people into either task-oriented or people-oriented.
The theory concludes that if the situation is highly favorable or highly unfavorable you need a task person to lead. Likewise if the situation is moderately favorable or unfavorable, you need a people person. This seems to make sense. If things are very bad, you need a take-charge, goal-oriented leader before you go out of business. If things are very good, interpersonal relations are already smooth, and a goal-setter can take you to the next place. I think, however, that most situations are somewhat in the middle and might demand someone with human relations skills.
The secret according to Fiedler is to match the person to the situation. Analyze the situation and hire or promote the right type of leader. Nor does he think that the average leader can change from one style to another. Leadership style, according to Fielder, is very much a matter of personality and hard to change. I agree. By the way, research to validate Fiedler’s model is generally positive.
**Situational Theory**
Situational Theory, according to Hersey and Blanchard, however, does not agree. These theorists are of the mind that leaders can and do change styles depending on with whom they are dealing. Situational Leadership is the most popular leadership theory of the day. It is very friendly, easy to understand, and many corporate staffs have received training in Situational Leadership. Study the model carefully in the book and note that the Asituation@ depends on the readiness level of the follower.
R1: Unable and unwilling
R2: Unable and willing
R3: Able but unwilling
R4: Able and willing
The four leadership styles that match these readiness levels are as follows:
S1: Requires Telling@ high task-low relationship
S2: Requires Selling@ high task-high relationship
S3: Requires Participating@ high relationship-low task
S4: Requires Delegating@ low relationship-low task
**Week 6 Discussion Question (due by Thursday)**
Note: Please type the question and then the answer which should be about 250 words.
Provide a brief scenario when each of the Situational Leadership styles would be appropriate. Remember the the S1-S4 styles are used for very specific situations and not as overall styles.