Fiedler contingency model

The Fiedler contingency model is a leadership model designed by famed psychologist Fred Fiedler. Fiedler was an Austrian-American professor who worked at both the University of Illinois and the University of Washington in Seattle. He was best known for his book A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness (1967), and for shifting the focus of leadership studies toward the study of different styles of leadership.

According to the Fiedler Contingency Model, leadership styles are fixed and can be accurately measured. Leaders are either relationship-oriented or task-oriented. They can discover which style they prefer by using Fiedler’s Least-Preferred Co-worker (LPC) scale, then measuring their results.

Fiedler did not believe that either leadership style was inherently better than the other. Instead, he mapped specific situations where one style was most effective. To assess different situations, Fiedler measured the relationship between leaders and their subordinates, whether the task was rigid or creative, and how much power that leaders were given over their followers.

Some psychologists criticized Fiedler’s ideas, believing them inaccurate. Many critics disagreed with Fiedler’s assessment that leadership styles were fixed, and could not be changed. Others questioned whether his leadership test provided an accurate assessment of leaders’ abilities.

Background

Fred Fiedler was born in Vienna, Austria, on July 13, 1922. He was Jewish, and commonly faced antisemitism. Hitler’s armies invaded Austria when Fiedler was just 16. In response, Fiedler and his family fled to the United States.

During World War II, Fiedler fought as a member of the United States Army. After his return, he returned to school. Fiedler attended the University of Chicago, graduating with a Ph.D. in psychology. He then began to practice psychology, focusing on the study of leadership. In 1953, Fiedler was hired by the Psychology Department at the University of Illinois. While working for the University of Illinois, Fiedler began publishing works on theories of effective leadership. He was quickly regarded as an expert in the field. Fiedler’s work A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness (1967) was particularly influential.

Fiedler accepted a position as a professor of psychology at the University of Washington in Seattle in 1969. While in attendance, Fiedler created an organizational research group. With his group, Fiedler developed leadership training programs. He also earned a position in the University of Washington’s school of business, focusing on management practices.

Fiedler’s work shifted the perspective of the field of leadership studies. Prior to his work, most leadership studies focused on the personality traits of successful leaders. Fiedler instead focused on leadership styles and the behaviors of successful leaders. Fiedler passed away in 2017.

Overview

Fiedler argued that leadership styles are fixed and can be accurately measured. In order to accomplish this, Fiedler developed the Least-Preferred Co-worker (LPC) scale. When using this scale, leaders are asked to think of their least favorite co-worker or employee. They then rate that employee on a series of personality traits. Ratings range from a negative statement to a positive statement, and a scale of one to eight. For example, test takers will be asked to rate their least-preferred co-worker one a scale of one to eight, with one being “backbiting” and 8 being “loyal.” Other pairs of traits include boring vs. interesting, inconsiderate vs. considerate, gloomy vs. cheerful, tense vs. relaxed, rejecting vs. accepting, and guarded vs. open.

According to Fiedler, someone’s score on this test determines their leadership style. Individuals who score a high number on the test are relationship-oriented leaders. Individuals who score a lower number on the test are task-oriented leaders. If someone scores in the middle, his or her leadership style may be flexible. Task-oriented leaders tend to view their LPCs more negatively, while relationship-oriented leaders tend to view their LPCs more favorably.

Neither task-oriented leaders nor relationship-oriented leaders are considered the more favorable choice. Instead, each type of leader is best suited to certain types of work. In order to assess this, Fiedler recommends analyzing the leadership situation according to a specific set of criteria. First, he suggested that participants assess relations between themselves and their team. This specifically included how much trust team members had in them as leaders. Secondly, he suggested that they evaluate whether the team’s tasks were clear-cut or vague. Vague tasks tend to require more creativity, while clear-cut tasks tend to require more discipline. Finally, Fiedler suggested that participants analyze how much authority they genuinely held over the team.

Once the answers to those questions have been answered in an accurate and honest manner, leaders can begin applying the correct form of leadership to specific situations. Fiedler provides a chart showing which leadership style is appropriate for any given situation. For example, if leader-member relations are poor, the task is structured, and the leader has little power over his or her followers, then a relationship-oriented leader will secure the best performance for his or her team. However, if leader-member relations are good, the task is unstructured, and the leader holds a significant amount of power, a task-based leader will secure the best performance.

Many psychologists have criticized Fiedler’s work. The most common criticism is the lack of flexibility. Some people argue that leadership styles are not necessarily fixed, and that leaders can work to adapt to a style that best first their team. Instead, Fiedler argued that the correct course of action was to remove an ineffective leader and find a different one. Other critics argue that Fiedler’s test did not always produce an accurate portrayal of a leader’s abilities. It is possible that the employee or co-worker in question was genuinely incompetent, and that the leader’s feelings were not merely a reflection of how he or she views others.

Bibliography

Cherry, Kendra. “Leadership Styles and Frameworks You Should Know.” VeryWellMind, 2020, www.verywellmind.com/leadership-styles-2795312. Accessed 12 Feb. 2020.

“Fiedler’s Contingency Model.” Mindtools, www.mindtools.com/pages/article/fiedler.htm. Accessed 12 Feb. 2020.

“Fiedler’s Contingency Theory of Leadership.” EPM, expertprogrammanagement.com/2018/11/fiedler-contingency-theory/. Accessed 12 Feb. 2020.

“Fiedler’s Contingency Theory & A Leader’s Situational Control.” Study.com, 2020, study.com/academy/lesson/fiedlers-contingency-theory-a-leaders-situational-control.html. Accessed 12 Feb. 2020.

“Fred Fiedler.” Tobias Leadership Center, tobiascenter.iu.edu/research/oral-history/audio-transcripts/fiedler-fred.html. Accessed 12 Feb. 2020.

LaMarco, Nicky. “The Advantages of Fiedler’s Contingency Model.” Chron, 2018, smallbusiness.chron.com/advantages-fiedlers-contingency-model-18368.html. Accessed 12 Feb. 2020.

Leadership and the Contingency Theory.” Villanova, 2019, www.villanovau.com/resources/leadership/leadership-and-contingency-theory/. Accessed 12 Feb. 2020.

Mitchell T. “Fred Edward Fiedler (1922-2017).” PubMed, 2018, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29481111/. Accessed 12 Feb. 2020.