Monday, July 29, 2019

Basic Approaches And Contemporary Issues In Leadership Management Essay

Basic Approaches And Contemporary Issues In Leadership Management Essay The first complete contingency model for leadership was presented in 1967 by Fred Fiedler’s. His contingency hypothesis was the first to identify how situational factors interrelate with the traits and behaviors of leaders to have an impact on the effectiveness of leadership. The theory proposed that the â€Å"favorability† of the circumstances is what decides how effective the task and the behavior of the person-oriented leader will be. Favorability is established by (1) the amount of trust and respect that devotees or rather followers have for their leaders; (2) the degree to which the responsibilities of individuals who are second to the leader can be organized and the performance measured; and (3) the power that the leader has over the rewards of followers. The circumstances is most encouraging when subordinates have trust and respect for their leaders, respect and trust the leader, the job is greatly structured, and the control over rewards and punishment is held by the leader (Barnett, 2010). The research done by Fiedler showed that leaders who were task-oriented were more valuable and effective when there was either an extremely â€Å"favorable† or extremely â€Å"unfavorable† circumstance, however, leaders who were person-oriented were more valuable if the circumstances were either â€Å"moderately favorable,† or unfavorable.† This hypothesis did not really suggest that in various situations, the leader could become accustomed to their leadership styles, but rather that leaders who had various styles would be more valuable when they are put in situations that go with the leadership style that they prefer (Barnett, 2010). Fiedler is of the assumption that the leadership style of an individual is â€Å"fixed† because if the circumstance has a need for someone who is task-oriented but the person who is in that leadership position is relationship-oriented, then either the leader has to be changed or the situa tion needs to be altered (Robbins, and Position power: The leaders power by virtue of the position in the organization and the extent to which, as the leader, he or she can implement power on followers so that they obey and receive the leaders’ guidance and leadership (â€Å"Feidler’s contingency model,† 2009). Feidler’s position is that leader-member relations are either good or poor, task structure is either high or low and position power is either strong or week. The healthier the relationship between the leader and followers the more organized the job will be and the more resilient the position of power the more command the leader will have (Robbins, so the whether the intellect and know how of an individual has any bearing on the performance of leadership is determined by the level of stress. Other studies corroborated the fact that when the level of stress is low and the leader instructed followers on what he needed done, intellect was key to the effectiveness of the leader, but if the circumstance was a high stress one then intellect did not help as much because the leaders’ thought process was strained. In the same manner, if the leader does not tell his followers what he wants done then intellect do not help because of his reluctance (Robbins, & Judge, 2009). The recommendation of Feidler is that organizations employ and choose persons with the essential intellect, know how, and understanding, and then allow those individuals to work under those situations that let them use the resources that they have cognitively. Additionally, the feeling that the leader has of being in control of the circumstance and the level of stress that he is experiencing is essential (Carter, III, 2006).

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.