Skip to main content

Behavior and Law

Contingency / Situational Theories

Leadership: Theories, Types, Styles, Challenges, Effectiveness

Paper III · Unit 3 Section 5 of 12 0 PYQs 22 min

Public Section Preview

Contingency / Situational Theories

4.1 Fiedler's Contingency Model (1967)

Fred Fiedler (1967, A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness) argued that no single leadership style is effective in all situations — effectiveness depends on the match between style and situation.

Step 1: Measure Leadership Style
Using the Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Scale — ask leader to rate their least preferred co-worker. High LPC = relationship-motivated leader; Low LPC = task-motivated leader.

Step 2: Measure Situational Favourableness
Three factors:

  1. Leader-Member Relations: Quality of interpersonal relationships (Good/Poor)
  2. Task Structure: Degree to which the job is clearly defined (Structured/Unstructured)
  3. Position Power: Formal authority of the leader (Strong/Weak)

Matching:

  • Task-motivated (Low LPC) leaders are most effective in very favourable (high control) and very unfavourable (low control) situations
  • Relationship-motivated (High LPC) leaders are most effective in moderately favourable situations

Criticism: LPC scale's validity questioned; assumes leadership style is fixed (not developable).

4.2 Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership Theory (1969, 1977)

Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard (1969) proposed that effective leaders adapt their style to the follower's readiness/maturity — defined as a combination of:

  • Competence: Skills and knowledge for the task
  • Commitment: Motivation and confidence

Four Leadership Styles (matched to Follower Readiness levels):

Style Behaviour Follower Level Description
S1 — Telling (Directing) High Task, Low Relationship R1: Low competence, Low commitment Give specific instructions; closely supervise
S2 — Selling (Coaching) High Task, High Relationship R2: Some competence, Low commitment Explain decisions; encourage questions
S3 — Participating (Supporting) Low Task, High Relationship R3: High competence, Variable commitment Share ideas; support and encourage
S4 — Delegating Low Task, Low Relationship R4: High competence, High commitment Give responsibility; minimal oversight

Applied to public administration: A new sub-divisional officer (SDO) joining a district needs S1 (Telling). A senior section officer with 20 years' experience needs S4 (Delegating). The collector must diagnose follower readiness and flex accordingly.