According to the article by Houghton and Yoho, leadership is mainly based on the indefinite component. Through this component, the reader understands that there is no superlative method of organizing a corporation, leading a company, or making decisions. Rather, the critical course of action depends on the external and internal situation (Chemers, 2007, p. 37) The contingency model of leadership is also based on the matching component. The matching component suggests that the effectiveness of a leader is dependent on how a person’s leadership style fits into the situation or context. As such, many theories about the contingency model of leadership fail because they do not acknowledge the organization structure and the management style.
In accordance with the contingency theory, leadership styles are described as relationship-oriented or task-oriented. As such, the psychological empowerment factor comes into play. For example, task-oriented leaders are focused on completing a task or achieving a particular goal. Psychologically, such leaders are born with a competitive nature that pushes them to pursue their goals. On the other hand, certain leaders may have the necessary skills and talents to achieve an objective but lack that competitive drive (Antonakis, Cianciolo & Sternberg 2004, p. 37). Such leaders need the right kind of psychological motivation or advice to push them towards achieving their set goals.
Furthermore, the contingency model of leadership reveals the relationship between dependence and leadership outcome. The matching component reveals this relationship clearly. In this case, a leader’s effectiveness depends on how his or her leadership style fits into the situation or context. Therefore, a person may exhibit excellent leadership skills but may fail in his or her tasks if the environment does not suit that particular leadership style. Therefore, this premise suggests that it is necessary to identify and understand the business model. This strategy is supposed to ensure that the contingency of leadership is implemented accordingly to facilitate proficiency and optimum productivity (Houghton & Yoho, 2005, p. 86)
Indeed, studying the article by Houghton and Yoho (2005, p. 75) reveals a number of similarities with the theories studied in class. For example, both the article by the authors suggests that if a leader’s qualities do not match the environment, he or she is bound to experience anxiety and stress. Afterwards, the individual is to resort to less professional methods of dealing with the situation. Ultimately, the outcome spells negative work results and poor decision-making. What I have learned in class holds a similar view. A favorable situation occurs when there is high leadership power, a highly structured highly, and a beneficial leader-member relationship. In particular, a favorable relationship between the leader and junior staff fosters a favorable business environment.
conclusion, the contingency model of leadership by Houghton and Yoho reveals
critical factors such as natural leadership style, business environment, and
the flexibility of changing leadership style among others. Ultimately, Houghton
and Yoho suggest contingency model centered on three major considerations. The
first consideration involves identifying one’s leadership style. By taking this
action, a leader can identify personal strengths and weakness and realize how
to work to his or her advantage. The second consideration rests with
identifying the situation (Houghton & Yoho, 2005, p. 103). In this regard,
a leader needs to analyze his or her influence on the business and understand
whether leader-member relations are poor or good. Lastly, Houghton and Yoho
vouch for determining an effective leadership style. As such, this is supposed
to employ the best qualities of the leader and channel them towards the best
interests of the organization.
Antonakis, J, Cianciolo, AT & Sternberg, RJ 2004, The nature of leadership, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications.
Baggett, WO 2012, An evaluation of the contingency model of leadership effectiveness, Thesis (Ph. D.). University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Chemers, MM 2007, An integrative theory of leadership, Mahwah, N.J., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Houghton, J & Yoho, S 2005, Toward a Contingency Model of Leadership and Psychological Empowerment: When Should Self-Leadership Be Encouraged? Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 11, 65-83.