The most effective leader in this situation would be high LPC — that is, a leader who can focus on building relationships first. In this situation, a task-focused leadership style would be most effective. One of the biggest is lack of flexibility.
Leader-Member Exchange s Leaders from high-quality relationships with some subordinates but not others. The quality of leader-subordinates relationship affects numerous workplace outcomes. Charismatic Leadership s and s Effective leaders inspire subordinates to commit themselves to goals by communicating a vision, displaying charismatic behavior, and setting a powerful personal example.
Substitutes foe Leadership s Characteristics of the organization, task, and subordinates may substitute for or negate the effects of leadership behaviors.
These included the trait approach s and sthe behavioral approach s and sand the contingency or situational approach s and s. The scientific study of leadership began with a focus on the traits of effective leaders.
The basic premise behind trait theory was that effective leaders are born, not made, thus the name sometimes applied to early versions of this idea, the "great man" theory.
Many leadership studies based on this theoretical framework were conducted in the s, s, and s. Leader trait research examined the physical, mental, and social characteristics of individuals. In general, these studies simply looked for significant associations between individual traits and measures of leadership effectiveness.
Physical traits such as height, mental traits such as intelligence, and social traits such as personality attributes were all subjects of empirical research. The initial conclusion from studies of leader traits was that there were no universal traits that consistently separated effective leaders from other individuals.
In an important review of the leadership literature published inRalph Stogdill concluded that the existing research had not demonstrated the utility of the trait approach.
Several problems with early trait research might explain the perceived lack of significant findings. First, measurement theory at the time was not highly sophisticated. Little was known about the psychometric properties of the measures used to operationalize traits. As a result, different studies were likely to use different measures to assess the same construct, which made it very difficult to replicate findings.
In addition, many of the trait studies relied on samples of teenagers or lower-level managers. Early trait research was largely atheoretical, offering no explanations for the proposed relationship between individual characteristics and leadership. Finally, early trait research did not consider the impact of situational variables that might moderate the relationship between leader traits and measures of leader effectiveness.
As a result of the lack of consistent findings linking individual traits to leadership effectiveness, empirical studies of leader traits were largely abandoned in the s. Partially as a result of the disenchantment with the trait approach to leadership that occurred by the beginning of the s, the focus of leadership research shifted away from leader traits to leader behaviors.
The premise of this stream of research was that the behaviors exhibited by leaders are more important than their physical, mental, or emotional traits. The two most famous behavioral leadership studies took place at Ohio State University and the University of Michigan in the late s and s.
These studies sparked hundreds of other leadership studies and are still widely cited. The Ohio State studies utilized the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire LBDQadministering it to samples of individuals in the military, manufacturing companies, college administrators, and student leaders.
Answers to the questionnaire were factor-analyzed to determine if common leader behaviors emerged across samples. The conclusion was that there were two distinct aspects of leadership that describe how leaders carry out their role. Two factors, termed consideration and initiating structure, consistently appeared.
Initiating structure, sometimes called task-oriented behavior, involves planning, organizing, and coordinating the work of subordinates.Contingency management (CM) is most-widely used in the field of substance abuse, often implemented as part of clinical behavior benjaminpohle.com refers to the application of the three-term contingency (or operant conditioning), which uses stimulus control and positive reinforcement to change behavior.
Patients' behaviors are rewarded (or, less often, punished); generally, adherence to or failure to. The Instructor’s Guide for Management and Organization Theory includes a test bank, PowerPoint slides, key terms, discussion questions, and course activities.
The Instructor’s Guide is available free online. If you would like to. Chapter 6 – Contingency Theory Questions for Study 1. What researcher is most associated with contingency theory?
Contingency theory is a leader-match theory, . A contingency theory is an organizational theory that claims that there is no best way to organize a corporation, to lead a company, or to make decisions. Instead, the optimal course of action is contingent (dependent) upon the internal and external situation.
Pennings carried out an empirical study on a sample of retail brokerage offices. Charles Darwin was born in , seven years after his grandfather Erasmus had died. Charles grew up during a conservative period in British and American society, shortly after the Napoleonic Wars. The trait model of leadership is based on the characteristics of many leaders - both successful and unsuccessful - and is used to predict leadership effectiveness.