Fiedler Contigency Theory Case Solution And Analysis, HBR Case Study Solution & Analysis of Harvard Case Studies

Fiedler Contigency Theory Case Study Solution

Identification of the Favourableness of the situation

The second step is to identify the level of favourableness of the situation. This can be identified by scoring each of the factor i.e. leader-member relations, task structure and position power, from 1 to 10. The scores calculated would help in identifying the overall level of favourableness of the given situation. For example, if the score for leader-member relations is 8, the score for task structure is 3 and the score for the position power is 9, then on the basis of the total of the scores i.e. 20 out of 30, the overall situation would be favourable for the leader.(Unknown, 2019)

Determination of the Effective Leadership Style

After identification of the natural leadership style and the level of complexity of the situation, the leaders are required to check their suitability in a particular situation. Appendix 2 shows that which style is suitable with different level of situation favourableness.

The table shown in the Appendix 2 shows the best leadership style with different combinations of the situational factors. The red line shows the overall performance with Relationship Oriented Style and the Yellow Line shows the overall performance with the Task Oriented Style.

It can be seen that when there is high leader member relationships, with structured task and high level of authority of the leader with its subordinates, the effective leadership style is Task Oriented. Along with it, it can be seen that where there is low leader-member relations with highly vague task and low position power, the Task Oriented Leadership Style is effective.

It implies that, in extremely favorable and un favorablesituations, Task Oriented Style is effective. Only in the middle level situations, the Relationship Oriented Style seems to be more effective.(Unknown, Fiedler’s Contingency Theory of Leadership, 2018)

Evaluation of the Model

Although, the approach is somehow correct, but there are still various lacking which tends to some level of disagreement with Fielder. One of the major lacking of the Fielder’s approach is the lack of flexibility. Fiedler believes that the natural leadership style is constant and it cannot be changed, and he suggests to change the leader not the leadership style. However, the modern approach about the effective leadership style is to adapt with the given situation.

Along with it, the determination of the leadership style in the model is through determining LPC scores. The method could be beneficial for the leaders having scores either below 54 or above 72. However, the leadership style for the leaders lying in between of these two ranges is difficult to identify. On the basis of the above points, we disagree with Fiedler. However, the effectiveness of the model to determine an effective leadership style cannot be denied.

Conclusion

The Fielder Contingency is simple and effective in determining the effective leadership style for various situations. However, due to its inflexibility in the leaders, the modern approach of adaption of the particular leadership style for a particular situation is recommended.

Appendices

Appendix-1: LPC Scores Example

Trait	Scores								Trait
Unfriendly	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	Friendly
Unpleasant	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	Pleasant
Rejecting	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	Accepting
Tense	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	Relaxed
Backbiting	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	Loyal
Uncooperative	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	Cooperative
Total

Appendix-2: Fiedler Contingency Theory

This is just a sample partical work. Please place the order on the website to get your own originally done case solution.

Fiedler Contigency Theory Harvard Case Solution & Analysis

Fiedler Contigency Theory Case Study Solution

Identification of the Favourableness of the situation