Effective Leadership Patterns Taking A Situational Approach

There have been numerous theories surrounding leadership, which attempt to explain which form is most effective in the workplace. A universalistic approach was once used to rationalize leadership and it was believed that successful leaders possessed certain common abilities and traits. However, today due to external factors such as globalization and advanced technologies, there has been an evolution towards a new paradigm of leadership. Subordinates want to feel empowered and engaged at the workplace and often the behaviors and relationships between leaders and their subordinates become important to understand in order to fully understand effective leadership. Contingency theories have been developed in which people began to look at the behavior of leaders in specific situations. Two such contingency theories are: Path-Goal and Hershey and Blanchard’s Situational Theory.

Leadership is a facet of management. It is just one of the many assets a successful manager must possess. The main aim of a manager is to maximize the output of the organization through administrative implementation. To achieve this managers must undertake the four functions of management: planning, organization, leading and controlling. In some cases leadership is just one important component of the leading function. Predpall (1994) said, "Leaders must let vision, strategies, goals, and values be the guide-post for action and behavior rather than attempting to control others". In some circumstances, leadership is not required. For example, self-motivated groups may not require a single leader and may find leaders dominating. The fact that a leader is not always required proves that leadership is just an asset and is not essential.

1.1 Describe the factors that will influence the choice of leadership styles or behaviours in workplace situations

There are four main leadership styles, the first being Autocratic style which the manager retains as much control and decision making authority as possible, the manager does not give employees any input or consultation. The next is Bureaucratic which is where the manager manages ‘by the book’ which is where everything must be completed according to procedure and protocol. Mangers using this style will only consult with those above them in the chain of command. They simple enforce the rules of the workplace. The next style of leadership is Laissez-Faire which is also known as the ‘hands off’ approach to management. The manager usually provides little or no direction and give employees as much freedom as possible. All power is given to employees and they are to dictate their own work ethics. The last leadership style is the Democratic style which is also known as the participative style and this is where employees are encouraged to be a part of the decision making process. The democratic manager keeps their employees informed about everything that affects

The contingency approach, founded in the 1970’s differs from the behavioral approach. “Examining various situational variables is central to understanding leadership in organizations, according to the contingency theorist” (Stojkovic, Klofas & Kalinich, 2012). Fiedler’s Contingency Model is one of those contingency theories.

As an important philosophy in the management, the management theory has a direct impact on the organisation’s development. At the same time, it was suggested that when superiors do not supervise subordinates, subordinates will complain about everything and started to become lazy, they even spoke ill of each other and caused trouble (Blaug, 1999). Based on the research, this essay argues that a good manager should have the basic knowledge of human psychology, and even learn about the needs of subordinates to help them work enthusiastically without strict management. This essay first analyses the strengths and weaknesses of the theory X, which related to Blaug 's statement. Subsequently, it compares theory X and theory Y to give an overview of both. Finally, this essay states which theory that managers should choose for the current regulatory environment.

Fiedler’ model is considered the first highly visible theory to present the contingency approach. It stated that effective groups depend on a proper match between a leader’s style of interacting with subordinates and the degree to which the situation gives control and influence to the leader (Fiedler, 1967). Fiedler argued that the leadership style could be indentified by

The Tannenbaum-Schmidt Leadership Continuum Theory is a simple model of leadership theory which shows the relationship between the level of freedom that a manager chooses to give to a team, and the level of authority used by the manager. As the team 's freedom is increased, the manager 's authority decreases. While the Tannenbaum and Schmidt model concerns delegated freedom to a group, the value of being able to apply different levels of delegated freedom closely relates to the 'levels of delegation ' on the delegation practice.

It is important for managers to understand the sources of power and influence as they must rely upon the cooperation of subordinates in order to be successful. Strong managers rely upon more than just authority they also use leadership skills and power to obtain the most productivity from their staff. According to French and Raven (1959) there are five sources of power. Referent power seems to be the most influential and the least affected by change. To quote Paul Argenti,

Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory (SLT) asserts that a leader’s effectiveness is dependent upon the readiness, or ability and willingness, of the leader’s followers to complete a task. This leadership style is an amalgamation of task-oriented and relationship-oriented characteristics that are employed depending upon the situation and the followers involved. According to the SLT, as followers increase in readiness the leader’s style is to adapt accordingly (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2009).

The Contingency Theory applied to factors unique to each situation to determine whether specific leader characteristics and behaviors will be effective. Researched findings credit Fiedler 's contingency theory as the first to specify how situational factors interact with leader traits and behavior to influence leadership effectiveness. This theory suggests high interest in the situation determines the effectiveness of task- and person-oriented leader behavior.

The situational leadership model was developed by two authors, Ken Blanchard, and Paul Hersey in the year 1969. These authors based this model on the concept that leadership should adapt to different management practices and approaches to fit different situations and surpass any diversity of their encounters (Lussier & Achua, 2010). In particular, this model provides guidance on how to analyze a situation, choose effaceable strategies and adopt the most appropriate leadership style. Apparently, the two developers of the model researched and found that, given some case, leadership may fail to accomplish some goals due to adopting single

Fielder’s contingency theory argues the effectiveness of a leader is contingent to leader ship style and the extent the leadership situation gives him or her influence and control over outcomes.

Overall, the path-goal theory, path-goal theory of leader effectiveness, or path-goal model can be considered as a variant on Transactional Leadership Theory, where the leader clearly is directing activity and the only factor that varies is the manner in which this is done. There are some aspects of Contingency Theory, as well, where various means of application vary with the situation. The leader sees a path that needs to be tread, one leading to the accomplishment of a goal and she or he attempts to clear it and get the group members to tread on it. The leader may cajole command, reward or punish, get suggestions from the group, or sugar coat the tasks, if necessary, but it is clear that democracy is not the hallmark of this method. The Path-goal of Leadership Effectiveness was created to rectify prior research and anomalies resulting from empirical investigations of the effects of leader/task orientation and leader/person orientation/relationship on worker satisfaction and performance (House 1971).

People have always asked if there is any style of leadership that is most effective. Nevertheless, numerous theories and models have been created to show that there is no style of leadership that is the best. Rather, styles of leadership need to adjust depending on the variables such as the leader, the situation, the subordinate, the task, the environment and other factors. Paul Hersey, Kenneth H. Blanchard, and Dewey E. Johnson noted that if the leader’s style of behavior is appropriate or matches the situation it is considered effective. If it is not appropriate to a given situation, it is deemed ineffective. The difference between the effective and ineffective styles is often not the actual behavior of the leader, but the appropriateness of that behavior to the environment in which it is used. In reality, the third dimension is the environment.