Page 103 - leadership-experience-2008

CikguOnline
CikguOnline
84 PART 2: RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES ON LEADERSHIP

Exhibit 3.9. Beginning again at the left side of the matrix: How significant is this de-
cision for the project or organization? If the answer is High, proceed to importance
of commitment: How important is subordinate commitment? If high, the next ques-
tion concerns likelihood of commitment (leader expertise is not considered because
the development model is focused on involving subordinates, even if the leader has
knowledge and expertise): If the leader were to make the decision alone, how likely
is it that subordinates would be committed to the decision? If there is a high likeli-
hood, the leader next considers group support: What is the degree of subordinate
support for the team’s or organization’s objectives at stake in this decision? If the
degree of support for goals is low, the leader would proceed directly to the Group
Consult decision style. However, if the degree of support for goals is high, the leader
would then ask: What is the level of group members’ knowledge and expertise in
relation to the problem? An answer of High would take the leader to the question:
How skilled and committed are group members to working together as a team to
solve problems? An answer of High would lead to the delegate style, in which the
leader allows the group to make the decision within certain limits.

Note that the time-driven model takes the leader to the first decision style that
preserves decision quality and follower acceptance, whereas the development-
driven model takes other considerations into account. It takes less time to make
an autocratic decision (Decide) than to involve subordinates by using a Facilitate
or Delegate style. However, in many cases, time and effi ciency are less important
than the opportunity to further subordinate development. In many of today’s
organizations, where knowledge sharing and widespread participation are con-
sidered critical to organizational success, leaders are placing greater emphasis on
follower development when time is not a critical issue.
Leaders can quickly learn to use the model to adapt their styles to fi t the
situation. However, researchers have also developed a computer-based program
that allows for greater complexity and precision in the Vroom–Jago model and
incorporates the value of time and value of follower development as situational
factors rather than portraying them in separate decision matrixes.
The Vroom–Jago model has been criticized as being less than perfect, but
26
it is useful to decision makers, and the body of supportive research is growing. 27
Leaders can learn to use the model to make timely, high-quality decisions. Let’s try
applying the model to the following problem.

IN THE LEAD Dave Robbins, Whitlock Manufacturing
When Whitlock Manufacturing won a contract from a large auto manufacturer to
produce an engine to power its flagship sports car, Dave Robbins was thrilled to be

selected as a project manager. The engine, of Japanese design and extremely com-
plex, has gotten rave reviews in the automotive press. This project has dramatically
enhanced the reputation of Whitlock Manufacturing, which was previously known
primarily as a producer of outboard engines for marine use.
Robbins and his team of engineers have taken great pride in their work on the
project, but their excitement was dashed by a recent report of serious engine prob-
lems in cars delivered to customers. Fourteen owners of cars produced during the

first month have experienced engine seizures. Taking quick action, the auto manu-
facturer suspended sales of the sports car, halted current production, and notifi ed
owners of the current model not to drive the car. Everyone involved knows this is a
disaster. Unless the engine problem is solved quickly, Whitlock Manufacturing could
be exposed to extended litigation. In addition, Whitlock’s valued relationship with one
of the world’s largest auto manufacturers would probably be lost forever.