Page 104 - leadership-experience-2008

CikguOnline
CikguOnline
CHAPTER 3: CONTINGENCY APPROACHES 85
As the person most knowledgeable about the engine, Robbins has spent two
IN THE LEAD weeks in the fi eld inspecting the seized engines and the auto plant where they were

installed. In addition, he has carefully examined the operations and practices in
Whitlock’s plant where the engine is manufactured. Based on this extensive research,
Robbins is convinced that he knows what the problem is and the best way to solve
it. However, his natural inclination is to involve other team members as much as pos-
sible in making decisions and solving problems. He not only values their input, but
thinks that by encouraging greater participation he strengthens the thinking skills of
team members, helping them grow and contribute more to the team and the organi-
zation. Therefore, Robbins chooses to consult with his team before making his fi nal
decision. The group meets for several hours that afternoon, discussing the problem
in detail and sharing their varied perspectives, including the information Robbins has
gathered during his research. Following the group session, Robbins makes his deci-
sion. He will present the decision at the team meeting the following morning, after
which testing and correction of the engine problem will begin. 28
In the Whitlock Manufacturing case, either a time-driven or a development-
driven decision tree can be used to select a decision style. Although time is of
importance, a leader’s desire to involve subordinates can be considered equally
important. Do you think Robbins used the correct leader decision style? Let’s
examine the problem using the development-based decision tree, since Robbins
is concerned about involving other team members. Moving from left to right in
Exhibit 3.9, the questions and answers are as follows: How significant is this

decision for the organization? Definitely high. Quality of the decision is of critical
importance. The company’s future may be at stake. How important is subordi-
nate commitment to carrying out the decision? Also high. The team members
must support and implement Robbins’s solution. If Robbins makes the decision
on his own, will team members have high or low commitment to it? The answer
to this question is probably also high. Team members respect Robbins, and they
are likely to accept his analysis of the problem. This leads to the question, What
is the degree of subordinate support for the team’s or organization’s objectives
at stake in this decision? Definitely high. This leads to the question, What is the

level of group members’ knowledge and expertise in relation to the problem?
The answer to this question is probably Low, which leads to the Consult Group
decision style. Thus, Robbins used the style that would be recommended by the
Vroom–Jago model.
Now, assume that Robbins chose to place more emphasis on time than on
participant involvement and development. Using the time-based decision matrix
in Exhibit 3.8, trace the questions and answers based on the information just
provided and rate Robbins’s level of expertise as high. Remember to avoid cross-
ing any horizontal lines. What decision style is recommended? Is it the same or
different from that recommended by the development-based tree?

Substitutes for Leadership

The contingency leadership approaches considered so far have focused on the
leader’s style, the follower’s nature, and the situation’s characteristics. The fi nal
contingency approach suggests that situational variables can be so powerful that
29
they actually substitute for or neutralize the need for leadership. This approach
outlines those organizational settings in which task-oriented and people-oriented
leadership styles are unimportant or unnecessary.