The Contingency theory has strengths and disadvantages just like the Strain theory. Some could say one of the strengths of contingency theory is its longevity Contingency theory has survived over the decades as a valid and reliable approach on how to achieve effective leadership because it is grounded in empirical research. Researchers who have followed Fiedler have validated contingency theory with their own research. (Boyd, Takacs Haynes, Hitt, Bergh, & Ketchen, 2011, p. 3) Contingency theory has broadened the scope of leadership understanding from a focus on a single, best type of leadership to emphasizing the importance of a leader 's style and the demands of different situations. (Boyd, Takacs Haynes, Hitt, Bergh, & Ketchen, 2011, p. 4)
…show more content…
Therefore, it has not adequately spelled out various types of actions which can be taken under different situations. It is not sufficient to say that ‘a managerial action depends on the situation.’ The approach should provide ‘if this is the situation, this action can be taken.’ (Boyd, Takacs Haynes, Hitt, Bergh, & Ketchen, 2011, p. 6) Unless, this is done, the approach cannot offer much assistance to the practice of management. No doubt, researches have been conducted in this direction but, by and large, they have not satisfied the needs of managers. Some would say the Contingency theory doesn’t openly look for a problem instead, the theory suggest to wait for a problem to occur. Contingency approach is basically reactive in nature. Evidently it suggests what managers can do in a given situation. Therefore, managers are responsible to manage the environment in such a way that they avoid the undesirable aspects of …show more content…
One way managers can help is by measuring task motivation, or relation motivation, by the least preferred co-worker (LPC) scale. (Boyd, Takacs Haynes, Hitt, Bergh, & Ketchen, 2011, p. 17) One size does not fit all. The LPC scale asks the manager to think of the person they least liking working with and then rate that person on a set of questions, each involving an 8-point scale. (Boyd, Takacs Haynes, Hitt, Bergh, & Ketchen, 2011, p. 17) For example, a score of one would be uncooperative, and a score of eight would be cooperative. Fielder believed that people with a higher LPC score try to maintain harmony in their work relationships, while people with a lower LPC score are motivated to focus on task accomplishment. (Van de Ven, Ganco, & Hinings, 2013, p. 4) The theory states that task or relations motivations is contingent upon whether the manager is able to both control and effect the group 's situational favorability, or outcome. (Van de Ven, Ganco, & Hinings, 2013, p. 4) According to the theory, mangers can assess situational favorability by three
Therefore, it has not adequately spelled out various types of actions which can be taken under different situations. It is not sufficient to say that ‘a managerial action depends on the situation.’ The approach should provide ‘if this is the situation, this action can be taken.’ (Boyd, Takacs Haynes, Hitt, Bergh, & Ketchen, 2011, p. 6) Unless, this is done, the approach cannot offer much assistance to the practice of management. No doubt, researches have been conducted in this direction but, by and large, they have not satisfied the needs of managers. Some would say the Contingency theory doesn’t openly look for a problem instead, the theory suggest to wait for a problem to occur. Contingency approach is basically reactive in nature. Evidently it suggests what managers can do in a given situation. Therefore, managers are responsible to manage the environment in such a way that they avoid the undesirable aspects of …show more content…
One way managers can help is by measuring task motivation, or relation motivation, by the least preferred co-worker (LPC) scale. (Boyd, Takacs Haynes, Hitt, Bergh, & Ketchen, 2011, p. 17) One size does not fit all. The LPC scale asks the manager to think of the person they least liking working with and then rate that person on a set of questions, each involving an 8-point scale. (Boyd, Takacs Haynes, Hitt, Bergh, & Ketchen, 2011, p. 17) For example, a score of one would be uncooperative, and a score of eight would be cooperative. Fielder believed that people with a higher LPC score try to maintain harmony in their work relationships, while people with a lower LPC score are motivated to focus on task accomplishment. (Van de Ven, Ganco, & Hinings, 2013, p. 4) The theory states that task or relations motivations is contingent upon whether the manager is able to both control and effect the group 's situational favorability, or outcome. (Van de Ven, Ganco, & Hinings, 2013, p. 4) According to the theory, mangers can assess situational favorability by three