What are the conceptual weaknesses of Fiedler’s Contingency Theory?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Fiedler’s method of measuring leadership style does not allow leaders to be rated as high on both task and relationship leadership. He developed a Least Preferred Coworker Measure to assess leaders’ styles (Fiedler & Chemers, 1984). According to this measure, task leaders rate their least preferred coworkers relatively negatively, whereas relationship leaders are still relatively accepting of their least preferred coworkers. This is a rather indirect way of measuring leadership style, and it is also one that puts somewhat of a negative spin on task leaders. As discussed in the chapter on the behavioral approach to leadership, leaders can be high on both initiating structure and showing consideration. Thus, while Fiedler’s model and supporting research indicate that under certain conditions, leaders should focus on either task leadership or relationship leadership, it says nothing about whether they should back up the dominant focus with a supporting role from the other style. For example, under the highly favorable conditions in row 1, the meta-analysis supports Fiedler’s model in showing that task leadership produces better results than relationship leadership, but it is possible that task leaders, who in addition perform consideration-type behaviors, might do even better. There has been almost no research using Fiedler’s contingency model since the 1980s. Although the meta-analysis provided fairly good support for this model, it is possible that cultural changes and the empowerment movement might change how employees would react to purely task-oriented leadership.