Search

Leadership depends on the situation. Few social scientists would dispute the validity of this statement. But the statement can be interpreted in many different ways, depending, at least in part, on what one means by leadership. This article begins with a definition of leadership and a brief description of 3 historically important theories of leadership. The most recent of these, contingency theories, is argued to be most consistent with existing evidence and most relevant to professional practice. The Vroom, Yetton, and Jago contingency models of participation in decision making are described in depth, and their work provides the basis for identifying 3 distinct ways in which situational or contextual variables are relevant to both research on and the practice of leadership.

The article focuses on a study that investigates the problems of direct and objective observation of leader behavior in field settings. The study is designed to examine the importance of subordinate acceptance of effective decision implementation. Also discussed are the relative degrees to which subordinates share relevant organizational goals. The results of this study suggest a meaningful and systematic variance with displayed differences in problem set responses in regards to the reported degree of participation in decision making situations.

Computer simulations were used to assess disagreements in classifying leadership situations when Fiedler's contingency model of leadership was compared with LEADER MATCH, a training program purported to be based on that model. Each simulation generated 100,000 hypothetical leadership situations, using varying assumptions about the properties of LEADER MATCH scales. Even under the most favorable set of assumptions, the results revealed that the instruments used in LEADER MATCH can be expected to classify almost one fourth of those using it in a manner inconsistent with the contingency model. The causes of this nonequivalency between theory and application, as well as its consequences, are discussed. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Previous research validating the Vroom-Yetton leadership model has provided support for all the prescriptions of the model except the Conflict Rule. This rule prescribes group decision-making methods when conflict among subordinates is anticipated and acceptance of the decision is critical, on the grounds that a group process provides a more effective vehicle for conflict resolution than other less participative methods. The present experiment tests the Conflict Rule against an alternative hypothesis that predicts conflict intensification and polarization is group settings. Forty groups of five members each considered a decision task chosen for its likelihood of generating task-based conflict. The 2 X 2 design (decision-making process by leader reward structure) created conditions in which a particular decision-making process either conformed to or violated the normative prescriptions of Vroom and Yetton's model. Both attitudinal and behavioural measures of decision acceptance revealed that the interactive group process was significantly more effective than one-to-one consultation in generating support for a leader's solution. A secondary analysis treating the quality of the leader's decision as a covariate revealed no significant variation in the pattern of subordinate acceptance explained by this factor. Overall, the results support Vroom and Yetton's Conflict Rule and suggest that subordinates are far more likely to accept a leader's decision following an interactive group process regardless of either the leader's desire to reach consensus or the technical quality of the decision. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Investigates the employment of information concerning the dimensions of decision making situations in choosing leadership behaviors by managers. Similarities and differences between normative and descriptive models of leadership; Individual differences among managers; Implication for the design of data feedback in management training programs.

This research investigates the relationship between the hierarchical level of managerial personnel and individual differences in their leadership styles, specifically the degree to which they are disposed to the use of participative versus autocratic decision-making strategies. Analysis of self-report data collected from four different levels of managers suggests a greater propensity for use of participative methods at higher organizational levels. Subordinate descriptions of their immediate superiors further support this relationship. However, members asked to describe this relationship reveal perceptions incongruent with the direction of effect implied by the between-level group differences. Reasons for the incongruity and its implications for the organization are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper a normative model of social processes for decision making was presented. This model represented a slightly elaborated and refined version of a model presented in Vroom and Yetton. We share the previous authors' view that such models are far from perfect but can serve a useful function in stimulating research which, in time, will be reflected in better models. The latter half of this paper was devoted to questions related to how managers do select decision processes—to the factors which influence the degree to which they share their decision-making power with their subordinates. In pursuing these questions, we also relied heavily on the previous work of Vroom and Yetton by using a set of standardized cases selected in accordance with an experimental design. Each case depicted a leader faced with a problem to solve, and subjects were asked to assume his role and to select from a specified list of decision processes the one they would employ. The major difference from Vroom and Yetton was in the nature of the experimental design used in the construction of the "problem set." Whereas Vroom and Yetton's design utilized 30 "group problems" and five decision processes, the design used here provided for seven decision processes and 24 group and 24 individual problems. This design permitted the additional exploration of relationships between behavior on each kind of problem, and of the consistency of the behavior on the latter with the normative model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Addressing questions concerning the dependence of leadership style on hierarchical position, this investigation employs an instrument offering greater internal validity than similar instruments used in previous research. Middle-level managers from three organizations (N = 167) were asked to indicate the degree of subordinate involvement they would permit in hypothetical decision situations occurring at different hierarchical levels. For that subset of problems for which selection of high-quality solution was required (i.e., problems possessing a quality requirement), the degree of participation deemed appropriate for low-level situations did not differ significantly from the degree of participation deemed appropriate for high-level situations. However, for the subset of problems for which all possible alternatives were equally suitable (i.e., problems lacking a quality requirement), substantially greater participation was judged appropriate for low-level situations than for otherwise comparable high-level situations. It is argued that these effects reflect perceived tradeoffs between the expected costs and benefits of participation at different hierarchical levels. Previous research suggesting a positive relationship between level and participation is evaluated in light of these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]