Organizational Behavior (Stephen Robbins)

ronmental variables that are outside the control of the employee and variables that are

part of the personal characteristics of the employee. House assumes that leaders are

flexible and can display any or all of these behaviours, depending on the situation.

Some situations may in fact need more than one style from the leader. The theory pro-

poses that employee performance and satisfaction are likely to be positively influenced

when the leader compensates for things lacking in either the employee or the work set-

ting. However, the leader who spends time explaining tasks when those tasks are already

clear or when the employee has the ability and experience to handle them without

interference is likely to be ineffective because the employee will see such directive behav-

iour as redundant or even insulting. Research generally supports path-goal theory.^27

One question that arises from contingency theories is whether leaders can actually

adjust their behaviour to various situations. As we know, individuals differ in their

behavioural flexibility. Some people show considerable ability to adjust their behav-

iour to external, situational factors; they are adaptable. Others, however, exhibit high lev-

els of consistency regardless of the situation. High self-monitors are usually able to

adjust their leadership styles to suit changing situations better than low self-monitors.^28

Clearly, if an individual’s leadership style range is very narrow and he or she cannot or

will not adjust (that is, the person is a low self-monitor), that individual will be successful

only in very specific situations suitable to his or her style. To find out more about your

style of leadership, see the Learning About Yourself Exerciseon pages 286.

Substitutes for Leadership

The previous three theories argue that leaders are needed, but

that leaders should consider the situation in determining

the style of leadership to adopt. However, numerous studies

collectively demonstrate that, in many situations, leaders’

actions are irrelevant. Certain individual, job, and organi-

zational variables can act as substitutesfor leadership or neu-

tralizethe leader’s ability to influence his or her followers.^29

If employees have appropriate experience, training, or “professional” orientation or if

employees are indifferent to organizational rewards, the effect of leadership can be

266 Part 4Sharing the Organizational Vision

CONTINGENCY FACTORS

Environmental

• Task structure


• Formal authority system


• Work group

Subordinate

• Locus of control


• Experience


• Perceived ability

Leader’s Behaviour

• Directive


• Supportive


• Participative


• Achievement-oriented

Outcomes

• Performance


• Satisfaction

EXHIBIT 8-6 Path-Goal Theory

Is a leader always

*necessary?