Contingency Theories Of Leadership

328 Words2 Pages
Contingency Theories of Leadership Wayne Chen In Chinese, there's a saying that "Harsh rules are more useful in chaotic time." In terms of management, rules should not be changed, but it depends on situation. However, these four contingency theories are totally different with anyone theory I learned before. It doesn’t emphasize the unique principle. Contingency theory means that it will always depend on the specific situation and change for different case. But are these four contingency theories real contingent? The normative decision model focus on quality and acceptance; the situational leadership model focus on the readiness; the contingency model focus on the LPC score and situational favorability; and the path-goal theory depends on follower and situational factors. Of course, these four theories are contingency theories, they vary styles with different people in different situation, but the true is that they are not real contingency theories. In the other words, the contingency theories are not contingent enough. Although every of each change with different situations, but there are still unified factors we have to follow. Therefore, these theories have their own factors to focus on and emphasized, they have clue to follow, it not the complete contingency theory. In my opinion, real contingency theory is that we do not care anything but effectiveness and achievement. There’s no rule, no unified concept and standard, of course no reference. Leaders will solely measure the situation base on their own judgments. They change their behaviors by experience, and personal way. The only one thing to consider is the effectiveness. There are no specific patterns, it doesn’t mean no reference. Leaders still depends on situation, followers, own experience, or different background information. In other words, real contingency theory means “no specific rules”, leads
Open Document