You are considering which leadership theories and models will help you succeed even further?

 Introduction

Assume that you have just been promoted to a new position where you have leadership responsibility. You have never had formal leadership responsibilities before, and you wish to maximize the possibility that you will be successful with this new responsibility. Thus, you are considering which leadership theories and models will help you succeed even further. How do you make the final decision? Recall the rational decision-making process, you should identify your subject first. For example, you wish to maximize the possibility that you will be successful with this new responsibility and it also fits with your style. Why it also should be fit with your style? Because it will influence your self-confidence in doing it. For example, with a contingency style of leadership, it would not fit with someone who believes that all subordinates should be treated identically. Now, we have two basic factors, fit with your own personal style and maximize your performance. The next step will be to research and brainstorm possible solutions for your problem. In this case, the possible solutions are the major leadership theories and models that we have learned. Therefore, the major challenge is to develop a pro and con list involving at least three of these theories or models and examine how the theory fits with your own personal style. 

Fits Leadership Theories and Models with My Personal Style

To find a solution, I have to develop a pro and con list involving some of these theories and models. The theories and models I list here are those I am more likely to consider adopting. Transactional leadership such as active management and passive management are not in my consideration because leaving employees to do their jobs without interference, proactively predicting potential problems, and preventing them from occurring, is not my style. That is likely to lead to many unpredictable issues and even big troubles, thus more stress will be pushed on me and my subordinates. Passive management is the same. I cannot leave employees alone and wait until something goes wrong before coming to the rescue because sometimes it will be too late to rescue them. Contingent rewards are probably the ones which relatively acceptable for me. Rewarding employees for their accomplishments is a positive stimulus for better performance. However, it is also can be a dark one when you can provide the same rewards anymore during a crisis such as the COVID-19.

Among The Theories and Models

Therefore, here I will discuss Fiedler’s Contingency Theory, Path-Goal Theory of Leadership, Vroom and Yetton’s Normative Decision Model, Transformational Leadership, and whether they are fit with my personal style. First, I conducted a Least Preferred Coworker scale (LPC) survey and found out I tend to combine my personal liking of a person from my ability to work with that person. However, it is not absolute. I think I can separate business generally, and personal life and work with those people when I am their leader.

Fiedler’s Contingency Theory

According to Fiedler’s theory, different people can be effective in different situations. Placing the right people in the right situation or changing the situation to suit an individual is important to increase a leader’s effectiveness. The theory predicts that in favorable and unfavorable situations, a low LPC leader would be successful. When situational favorableness is medium, a high LPC leader is more likely to succeed. Three conditions are creating situational favorableness: leader-subordinate relations, position power, and task structure. If the leader has a good relationship with subordinates and the task at hand is structured, the situation is favorable. In contrast, low-quality relations with subordinates and the task is relatively unstructured, it is unfavorable. 

Pros

i. Leader-subordinate relations, position power, and task structure are also three crucial parts of evaluating leadership.

ii. The journey of finding low or high LPC leadership is also a trip to better know yourself and understand what styles work better with you.

Cons

i. The relationship is not always at its stable status. Not to mention how to measure and define what is good or what is a bad relationship. 

ii. To predict where are we such as in favorable and unfavorable situations, is a complicated task and time-consuming.

Path-Goal Theory of Leadership

Robert House’s path-goal theory of leadership is based on the expectancy theory of motivation. The expectancy theory of motivation suggests that employees are motivated when they believe their effort will lead to high performance and to be valuably rewarded. So, the leader’s major task is to make sure that happens. In addition, the theory identifies four leadership styles, Directive, Supportive, Participative, and Achievement-oriented. Each of these styles can be effective, depending on the characteristics of employees and characteristics of the work environment. 

Pros

i. The theory makes specific predictions about what type of leader behavior will be effective under which circumstances.

ii. With a supportive style, treating employees well, is a way to build loyalty and also a relatively fair working environment.

iii. With participative style, making sure that employees are involved in the making of important decisions, is similar to providing a stage for excellent actors. It will be more effective when employees have high levels of ability.

iv. Achievement-oriented style challenges employees and focuses their attention on work-related goals. This style is likely to be effective when employees have both high levels of ability and high levels of achievement motivation.

Cons

i. Directive style provides specific directions to the employees by clarifying role expectations, setting schedules, and making sure that employees know what to do. However, the same messages do not get the same results from different people.

ii. House’s path-goal theory underlines the importance of varying one’s style depending on the situation. However, if I misunderstand the situation, I will apply the incorrect style.

Vroom and Yetton’s Normative Decision Model

The Vroom-Yetton model is designed to help leaders to identify the best decision-making approach and leadership style to take, based on each specific situation. Therefore, no single decision-making process fits every scenario. The leader is suggested to make the decision alone using available information, obtains additional information from group members before making the decision alone, shares the problem with group members but makes the final decision alone, shares information about the problem with group members collectively and acts as a facilitator, or just lets the team make the decision. 

Pros

i. Although the model is somewhat complicated, research results support the validity of the model. 

ii. It provides a citation list for adopting a leadership style, rather than looking for a needle in a haystack. 

Cons

i. Vroom and Yetton’s normative model is somewhat complicated.

ii. There are always some chances to be incorrect in each step when trying to find a solution. So, identifying the right scenario you are in is also a tricky task.

Transformational Leadership

Transformational leaders lead employees by aligning employee goals with the leader’s goals. Thus, employees start focusing on the company’s well-being rather than on what is best for them as individual employees. 

Pros 

i. More research has been conducted on this theory than all the contingency theories combined. So, it is a supported model.

ii. Transformational leaders lead employees by aligning employee goals with the leader’s goals. Thus, employees start focusing on the company’s well-being rather than on what is best for them as individual employees. 

iii. Trustworthy. When leaders demonstrate transformational leadership behaviors, followers are more likely to trust the leader. 

Cons

i. It can be hard to always be a charismatic leader, even though it is possible to train people to increase their charisma and increase their transformational leadership.

ii. Charisma is only one element of transformational leadership, and leaders can be effective without charisma.

Conclusion

In doing business or leading and managing a team, I tend to find a win-win strategy for each of the members. Therefore, I tend to align subordinate goals with my goals. It looks like the transformational leadership is relatively suitable for me. Moreover, it is also more research has been conducted and supported theory than all the contingency theories combined. 

References

Fiedler's contingency theory of leadershipif(typeof __ez_fad_position!='undefined'){__ez_fad_position('div-GPT-ad-expertprogrammanagement_com-box-3-0')}; Expert Program Management. (2019, April 30). Retrieved March 14, 2022, from https://expertprogrammanagement.com/2018/11/fiedler-contingency-theory/ 

the Mind Tools Content Team By the Mind Tools Content Team, Team, the M. T. C., wrote, M., & wrote, A. (n.d.). The vroom-yetton decision model: Deciding how to decide. Decision Making From MindTools.com. Retrieved March 14, 2022, from https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTED_91.htm