Throughout chapter three of “Understanding Behaviors for Effective Leadership” there are five contingency models for leadership described. While these five models are all effective in their own ways, only one is the most useful to me as a leader. Taking into consideration my personality and leadership qualities, the Normative Decision-Making Theory of Participation would be the most useful to me.
Overview
The Normative Decision-Making Theory of Participation was originally created by Vroom and Yetton and later revised by Vroom and Jago. This model “involves the degree of participation that followers should be allowed in different decision making situations.” Essentially, it creates a flow chart which a leader can use to match situational …show more content…
Leader expertise is low due to the fact that I do not know all the cadets academic and extracurricular schedules. Likelihood of commitment is also low as if I make a decision alone and it causes scheduling conflicts with cadets, they will not attend extra drill meetings. Group support is high as all cadets are dedicated to training to become the best Air Force officers. Additionally, group expertise is high as cadets know their schedule and what meeting times will and will not fit for them. Finally, team competence is high due to the fact that cadets are trained to work well as a flight. Inputting these ratings into the Normative Decision-Making model yields a decision-making style of facilitate. This is exactly the style which I have used in the past and which has worked best for scheduling extracurricular drill …show more content…
Some argue that this model is too complex and that it can be simplified down into a smaller amount of decision-making styles. To the contrary, I find that the complexity and use of five decision-making styles aids me when utilizing a decision-making style. My personality is one that prefers to have clear and defined instructions. By having five focused decision-making styles it appeals to my desire for specificity. By narrowing down the styles, they would become too broad and more difficult for me to
Overview
The Normative Decision-Making Theory of Participation was originally created by Vroom and Yetton and later revised by Vroom and Jago. This model “involves the degree of participation that followers should be allowed in different decision making situations.” Essentially, it creates a flow chart which a leader can use to match situational …show more content…
Leader expertise is low due to the fact that I do not know all the cadets academic and extracurricular schedules. Likelihood of commitment is also low as if I make a decision alone and it causes scheduling conflicts with cadets, they will not attend extra drill meetings. Group support is high as all cadets are dedicated to training to become the best Air Force officers. Additionally, group expertise is high as cadets know their schedule and what meeting times will and will not fit for them. Finally, team competence is high due to the fact that cadets are trained to work well as a flight. Inputting these ratings into the Normative Decision-Making model yields a decision-making style of facilitate. This is exactly the style which I have used in the past and which has worked best for scheduling extracurricular drill …show more content…
Some argue that this model is too complex and that it can be simplified down into a smaller amount of decision-making styles. To the contrary, I find that the complexity and use of five decision-making styles aids me when utilizing a decision-making style. My personality is one that prefers to have clear and defined instructions. By having five focused decision-making styles it appeals to my desire for specificity. By narrowing down the styles, they would become too broad and more difficult for me to