Primary Task Response: Writing Within The Discussion Board A

Primary Task Response: Within the Discussion Board area, write 400-600 words that respond to the following questions with your thoughts, ideas, and comments.

This week, your discussion will focus on contingency theory. This theory has been the most recognized work of Fred Fiedler. Research the work of Fiedler on contingency theory, and respond to the following questions: Communicate your understanding of the contingency theory. Evaluate why authentic leadership is important to contingency theory. Compare and contrast the aspects of path–goal theory, Blanchard’s situational theory approach, and Fiedler’s contingency theory.

Paper For Above instruction

Contingency theory in leadership studies emphasizes that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to effective leadership. Instead, the effectiveness of a leadership style depends on the context or environment in which it is applied. Fred Fiedler's contingency theory, one of the most influential models in this domain, posits that a leader’s effectiveness is contingent upon the match between their leadership style and the specific situational variables present (Fiedler, 1964). According to Fiedler, leadership styles are primarily categorized as task-oriented or relationship-oriented, and the success of these styles depends on factors such as leader-member relations, task structure, and positional power. When these situational factors align with the leader’s style, effectiveness is maximized; when they do not, leadership success diminishes.

Fiedler’s contingency theory underscores the importance of situational assessment and adaptability, suggesting that leaders must understand their style and work to match or modify their approach according to specific circumstances. This aligns with the concept of authentic leadership, which emphasizes self-awareness, transparency, and consistency in values. Authentic leaders are crucial in contingency settings because they foster trust and genuine relationships, enabling them to adapt authentically to various situations (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). Authentic leadership ensures that leaders remain true to their core values while adjusting behaviors to fit contextual demands, thus improving their effectiveness, especially within the contingency framework.

In discussing the comparison of contingency-related theories, it is essential to consider Path-Goal Theory, Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory, and Fiedler’s Contingency Theory. Path-Goal Theory, developed by Robert House (1971), emphasizes that leaders should clarify the path to subordinate goals, adjusting their leadership style based on subordinates’ competence and motivation. Unlike Fiedler's task versus relationship orientation, Path-Goal Theory focuses on leader behaviors such as directive, supportive, participative, or achievement-oriented styles, which are selected based on the subordinate's needs and the task complexity.

Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory (SLT), on the other hand, advocates that effective leadership depends on the maturity or development level of followers, which is determined by their competence and commitment. Leaders modify their style—directive or supportive—to match follower readiness (Blanchard, 1996). While Fiedler’s model emphasizes structural situational factors and stable leadership styles, SLT underscores the dynamic adjustment of leadership behavior based on follower development, thus emphasizing flexibility in leadership approaches.

Both Path-Goal and Blanchard’s theories emphasize adaptability of leadership style in response to followers' needs and task demands, but Fiedler’s contingency theory stresses the importance of aligning leadership style with fixed situational parameters. Fiedler’s model has been critiqued for its rigidity in assuming leadership style cannot be changed. Conversely, Path-Goal and Situational Leadership theories promote the view that leaders can and should adapt their behavior to meet changing circumstances.

In conclusion, Fiedler’s contingency theory underscores the importance of matching a leader’s style to situational variables to achieve effectiveness, which aligns with the core principles of authentic leadership—self-awareness and genuine interactions. While Path-Goal Theory and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership emphasize adaptability and follower-centric adjustments, Fiedler's model highlights the importance of situational fit, providing a foundational framework for understanding effective leadership in varied contexts. The integration of authentic leadership within these models enhances leader effectiveness by fostering trust, transparency, and moral integrity, which are essential for leading successfully across diverse situations.

References

• Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315–338.
• Blanchard, K. H. (1996). Situational leadership II: Developing leaders for rapidly changing environments. Leadership Publishing Services.
• Fiedler, F. E. (1964). A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 1, 149–190.
• House, R. J. (1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16(3), 321–339.
• Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Sage publications.
• Liden, R. C., & Antonakis, J. (2014). Transformational leadership. In D. V. Day (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of leadership and organizations (pp. 355–386). Oxford University Press.
• Graeff, C. L. (1983). The role of values in the ethical decision-making process. Academy of Management Review, 8(4), 562–569.
• Yukl, G. (2012). Leadership in Organizations. Pearson.
• Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 78–90.
• Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Sage Publications.