How Participative Should a Leader Be?

Back in 1973, Victor Vroom and Phillip Yetton developed a leader-participation model that related leadership behavior and participation to decision making.17 Recognizing that task structures have varying demands for routine and nonroutine activities, these researchers argued that leader behavior must adjust to reflect the task structure. Vroom and Yetton’s model was normative. That is, it provided a sequential set of rules to be followed in determining the form and amount of participation in decision making in different types of situations. The model was a decision tree incorporating seven contingencies (whose relevance could be identified by making yes or no choices) and five alternative leadership styles.

More recent work by Vroom and Arthur Jago has revised that model.18 The new model retains the same five alternative leadership styles but expands the contingency variables to 12—from the leader’s making the decision completely by himself or herself to sharing the problem with the group and developing a consensus decision. These variables are listed in Exhibit 13–3.

Exhibit 13–3

Contingency Variables in the Revised Leader-Participation Model

  1. Importance of the decision

  2. Importance of obtaining follower commitment to the decision

  3. Whether the leader has sufficient information to make a good decision

  4. How well structured the problem is

  5. Whether an autocratic decision would receive follower commitment

  6. Whether followers “buy into” the organization’s goals

  7. Whether there is likely to be conflict among followers over solution alternatives

  8. Whether followers have the necessary information to make a good decision

  9. Time constraints on the leader that may limit follower involvement

  10. Whether costs to bring geographically dispersed members together are justified

  11. Importance to the leader of minimizing the time it takes to make the decision

  12. Importance of using participation as a tool for developing follower decision skills

Source: Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge, Organizational Behavior, 13th ed., ©2009, p. 400. Reprinted and electronically reproduced by permission of Pearson Education, Inc., New York, NY.

Research on the original leader-participation model was encouraging.19 But unfortunately, the model is far too complex for the typical manager to use regularly. In fact, Vroom and Jago have developed a computer program to guide managers through all the decision branches in the revised model. Although we obviously can’t do justice to this model’s sophistication in this discussion, it has provided us with some solid, empirically supported insights into key contingency variables related to leadership effectiveness. Moreover, the leader-participation model confirms that leadership research should be directed at the situation rather than at the person. That is, it probably makes more sense to talk about autocratic and participative situations than autocratic and participative leaders. As House did in his path-goal theory, Vroom, Yetton, and Jago argue against the notion that leader behavior is inflexible. The leader-participation model assumes that the leader can adapt his or her style to different situations.20

..................Content has been hidden....................

You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.
Reset