Contingency Leadership Model and Situational Leadership Application

This report delves into the Contingency Leadership Model, examining its application through a case study involving Raphael and Barry. The analysis explores different leadership styles, including legitimate political and reward power, and their ethical implications. The report evaluates the actions of Raphael, who takes credit for his team's achievements, and Barry's response to these actions. It examines the Situational Leadership Model, detailing the four leadership styles (telling, selling, participating, and delegating) based on follower readiness. The report provides recommendations for Barry, suggesting strategies to address unethical practices and improve team dynamics, and concludes with an application of the situational leadership model to Barry's new team, offering insights into how he can effectively lead his diverse team members based on their skill and motivation levels, offering advice on how to use different leadership styles to help them to improve their performance.

Running head: CONTINGENCY LEADERSHIP MODEL
Contingency Leadership Model
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1CONTINGENCY LEADERSHIP MODEL
Answer 1:
Raphael applies a combination of legitimate political and rewards power to lead his
team of subordinates. The case study shows that he projected the targets achieved by his
subordinates to gain recognition before the senior managers and the apex management. He
did not consider it illegitimate to use the performances of his followers to gain his own
recognition. However, it can be pointed out that he used his power unethically to gain more
recognitions and rewards. It can be pointed out that these rewards and promotions would
once again increase his power to project the performances of his followers to gain further
promotions. Thus, Raphael used legitimate political power and rewards power to lead his
team and take credit of its performances for his own professional benefits like promotion
(Keskes 2014).
Answer 2:
Barry should complain against the unethical practices of Raphael to exploit the
performances of his team members to obtain his own professional development. He should
complain to his skip level managers and the apex management about this unethical practices
of Raphael. He should substantiate his complaints using statistical figures which would prove
his high level performances before the senior management. He should also point out the
devastating impacts of Raphael’s immoral activities on the motivation, morale and
performances of the juniors. These strong evidences against Raphael would enable the apex
management takes steps against him (Flin et al. 2013).
Politicking is the appropriate method, which Barry can use to highlight his own high
performances before the apex management and his skip level manager. He can use five
political ways to retaliate the unethical practices of Raphael. First, he can approach Raphael

2CONTINGENCY LEADERSHIP MODEL
directly and speak to him about the unjust practices the latter is practicing. The case study
show that Raphael and Barry were once peers and enjoyed great professional relationship.
Barry can point out to Raphael that the practice of taking credit of his performances by the
latter is having devastating impact on his motivation and hampering their career growth. If
Raphael does not cooperate with Barry and uses his power to subdue him, Barry must use the
second strategy of asserting his performances before the apex management and his skip level
boss. He should support his claim of legitimacy of promotion to higher posts on the grounds
of his high performances (Getha-Taylor et al. 2015). The third step would be forming
coalition with other employees but it is not very prudent as Raphael might come know of his
stances. This may give him scope to counteract Barry legitimate claims using his superior
position in the organisation. The fourth approach, which Barry can take, is to appear
indispensible before the management using his superior performances. The last step, which
Barry can take, is to obtain support the apex management, skip level boss and gain the
permission to report directly to them. He might also gain the permission to join a different
team (Carter et al. 2013). Thus, Barry can approach the apex management, appear
indispensible, claim his legitimate right to take advantage of his high performances and gain
the support of the management.
Answer 3:
Excessive whining and complaining against the seniors reveal the insecure position
and the acute performance lack in employees. However, there are also other ways, which
employees can take to complain against injustices. They can approach their skip level
managers and bosses to complain against unfair treatments in the hands of their seniors.
However, they must support their claims with strong evidences. This will make them claim

3CONTINGENCY LEADERSHIP MODEL
appear legitimate and substantial thus enabling the management to take actions to deal with
the matter (Namasivayam, Guchait and Lei 2014).
Barry can avoid being a whiner by substantiating his claims with statistics and figures
proving his performances. This will allow the apex management and the skip level mangers
to look into his matter. This will allow them to take legitimate actions to ensure that Barry
gets due crefit for his performances and is not exploited by Raphael. This procedure of
supporting his claims with proofs will help Barry to make his claim appear legitimate and not
like whining (Dinh et al. 2014).
Answer 4:
Barry should look for another job if the apex management is not able to give positive
outcomes and take steps against Raphael. He should first approach Raphael and explain him
the harmful effect his exploitative actions are having on his team members including
himself(Barry). If his attempts to reconcile things with Raphael fail, he should approach the
management to take actions against Raphael. He must substantiate his claim with figures
proving his high level of performances. If the management fails to come up with a solution to
the problem, then Barry must change his job. However, if the management succeeds in taking
up steps against Raphael, he must not change his job (Thompson and Glasø 2015).

4CONTINGENCY LEADERSHIP MODEL
Answer 5:
Part 1:
Situational leadership model:
The situatiaonal leadership model is a leadership model developed by Paul Hersey
and Ken Blanchard. The chart below shows situational leadership style stresses on both the
attributes of the followers and the leadership styles the leaders can take to ensure these four
classes of followers achieve their performance parameters. The four types of subordinates are
low motivation and low task skills, high motivation and low task skills, low motivation
and task skills and high motivation and high task skills. The theory also states the specific
actions the leaders can apply in the case of these four readiness levels (McCleskey 2014).
Readiness level(of followers) Leadership styles
R1 Low motivation and low task skills S1 Telling
R2 High motivation and low task skills S2 Selling
R3 Low motivation and task skills S3 Participating
R4 High motivation and high task skills S4 Delegating
Figure 1. Situational Leadership model
(Source: Author)
The first group of subordinates consist of employees with low motivational level
and low task skills. These employees lack the professional experience and skills to achieve
high level of professional performances. They lack motivation, which impedes them to
acquiring new skills to improve their skills and efficiency. The leader in this case has to

5CONTINGENCY LEADERSHIP MODEL
assume the ‘telling style’. He commands and gives specific instructions to the followers
belonging to the low motivation and low task skill category (Sethuraman and Suresh 2014).
The second category of employees fall under high motivation and low task skills.
This category of employees has high level of motivation but lack the required skills and
expertise. The heads of the departments in order to deal with these employees have to follow
the ‘selling style’. The departmental heads, while leading subordinates, similar to telling
style, issue commands and clear directions to them. However, in case of high motivation and
low task skill group, the leaders interact more with their subordinates of this category
compared to the first category. There are smooth exchanges of information between the
superiors and the subordinates. The followers here are motivated and readily cooperate with
the leaders if trained. The leaders offer training and mentoring to this group of employees to
improve their efficiency (Khuong and Hoang 2015).
The third group of employees consist of employees having high task skills and low
level of motivation. These employees have experience but lack the motivation to achieve
high-level f performances. This lack of motivation stems from several factors like lack of
self-esteem, lack of participative environment within their departments and weak
organisational culture. The leaders in order to deal with these employees lack motivation in
spite of having skills encourage them to participate in making strategies to achieve the
assigned targets (Berg et al. 2016). The leaders here create a positive organisational culture
and environment, which stimulates the employees to collaborate readily. They value
relationships among the team members and themselves. Participating in making strategies
encourage higher self-esteem among the employees which boosts their motivation. As a
result, they start performing well which ultimately boosts the team performances (Hogan and
Coote 2014).

6CONTINGENCY LEADERSHIP MODEL
The fourth category of staff consists of employees having high level of task skills
and high level of motivation. This category of employees is the most efficient among the
four groups. They are highly motivated to perform and take up new responsibilities. Leaders
apply delegating method while leading this category of workers. As a result, the leaders vest
many responsibilities in the employees having high level of motivation and job skills. It can
also be pointed out that employees having high level of efficiency and motivation usually
have more chances of availing promotions. They as a result experience high level of job
satisfaction and career development (Carlos Pinho, Paula Rodrigues and Dibb 2014). It can
also be pointed out that employees having high level of skill and motivation contribute
largely to the performance enhancement of their teams. As a result the leaders interact a lot
with this group of followers and there is a high degree of collaboration between them once
again, leading to high departmental or group performances.
Application of situational leadership in the case of Barry:
The case study of Barry reveals that he has a new team and can apply situational
leadership theory to lead it. It already says Barry has a new team and it can be assumed that
the new team would consist of employees having various levels of skills and motivation.
Since the team is new, it can be further assumed that the team would have inexperienced
employees, some who have low level of motivation and others who lack it (Chatman et al.
2014). The team would also have the second category of employees with high motivation
with low knowledge and skills. There would also be third category of employees having low
motivation and high skills. The fourth group consists of employees having high level of
experience, knowledge and motivation.
It can be pointed out that the team of Barry would have both senior and junior
employees. However, being a new team it is likely to have more junior employees and less

7CONTINGENCY LEADERSHIP MODEL
experienced employees compared to highly efficient and motivated employees. This
combination of members in the new team under Barry show that it can led by applying
situational leadership style (Wang, Noe and Wang 2014).
Barry can use ‘telling’ leadership skills to tackle the first group of employees
containing low level of knowledge, experience and motivation. He should direct the
inexperienced employees who are most probably newly hired employees. He should issue
them clear instructions and guide them while they perform their duties (Keskes 2014). Flinx
et al.(2013) further points out that the leader require to supervise and monitor the
performances of these employees. The improvement in the performance of the employees
would point out the outcome of the telling leadership style. Getha-Taylor et al.(2015) further
points out that these employees with low skills can be trained to improve their performances.
Barry can offer training to these low skilled employees to enhance their efficiency. This
training would result in enhancement in the work standards of the employees, which would in
turn boost their motivation. The employees after post training would be able to fulfil their job
responsibilities better which would boost their confidence, efficiency and competencies. This
would allow them to shift to the second category of workers having newly acquired skills but
high level of motivation due to acquisition of new knowledge (Huang et al. 2014).
The next group of employees having newly acquired skills and high level of
motivation would require Barry to use selling leadership style. This would involve Barry
using his authority to direct and guide his juniors. These junior employees would still require
training to enhance their skills and capabilities. However, the selling style differs from the
telling styles. In case of telling style the employees lack both motivation and skill. Hence, the
manager has to direct the employees and there is almost no interaction between the leader and
the follower. The workers are motivated to work and improve their performance, which
makes the manager interact with them more compared to the telling style.

8CONTINGENCY LEADERSHIP MODEL
The third category of employees consists of senior and experienced employees
lacking motivation, which would require Barry to use participating leadership style.
According to Carter et al.(2013), the experienced employees play important roles like
advising the team leaders and motivating the juniors in the team. However, lack of employee
empowerment under Raphael and his taking credit for the high performances of the team led
to low level of motivation among the senior employees. Barry can apply participating style of
leadership so that they feel important. Namasivayam, Guchait and Lei (2014) state that
empowerment of employees increases self esteem and motivation among senior employees.
They participate more actively in the strategy making which ultimately enhance the
performance of the team.
The fourth category consists of workers having level of skills and motivation, which
would require Barry to use delegating style of leadership. These types of employees are high
performers in whom Barry can vest crucial job responsibility.
The above discussion clearly shows that Barry can use situational leadership style of
to manage his new team. This is because the theory recognises the four types of followers adn
assigns a style of leadership appropriate to lead each type of follower. The subordinates
having low scale of motivation and skill can be dealt with using telling leadership style. Barry
can use selling style of leadership to lead subordinates having low skill but acquired
motivation. He can use participation style to manage employees having high skill but low
motivation. He can finally use delegation style of leadership to manage high performing
workers having high rate of motivation (Huang et al. 2014).
Part 2:
Barry can use the situational leadership theory of contingency to manage his new
team. The theory recognises four types of subordinates in professional teams and assigns four

9CONTINGENCY LEADERSHIP MODEL
different leadership styles to lead these four types of subordinates. The first type consists of
employees mostly newly hired having low scale of motivation and knowledge. Barry can
manage these followers using the telling leadership style by ordering them and giving them
clear directions. The second sort of followers is motivated but lack knowledge and
experience. Barry can lead this sort of subordinates using the selling style where he other than
ordering the employees also encourages them to participate in the team planning. Barry can
use the third group of employees lacking motivation in spite of having knowledge by
encouraging them to participate more proactively in team planning. This would create a
sense of importance and self esteem among these employees and they would be motivated to
contribute towards team performance. The fourth group of employees consists of
experienced, efficient and motivated employees. Barry should not intervene in their work. He
should instead delegate them more power and promote them to higher offices to bring about
their career growth. He should aim at retaining them by giving them benefits like salary
hikes, perks and flexible timing facilities (Sethuraman and Suresh 2014).
Barry should use motivational tactics to manage the first three groups of employees to
retain and develop their quality. He should train them to improve their skills and motivate
them. He should mentor them and provide them with conductive working environment to
improve their efficiency. This will ensure that Barry manages his team well and achieves
high level of performance. This high level of team performance would bring the managerial
qualities of Barry in light before the apex management. It would also pave ways for his
further promotion (Carlos Pinho, Paula Rodrigues and Dibb 2014).

10CONTINGENCY LEADERSHIP MODEL
References:
Berg, M.E., Berg, M.E., Karlsen, J.T. and Karlsen, J.T., 2016. A study of coaching leadership
style practice in projects. Management Research Review, 39(9), pp.1122-1142.
Carlos Pinho, J., Paula Rodrigues, A. and Dibb, S., 2014. The role of corporate culture,
market orientation and organisational commitment in organisational performance: the case of
non-profit organisations. Journal of Management Development, 33(4), pp.374-398.
Carter, M.Z., Armenakis, A.A., Feild, H.S. and Mossholder, K.W., 2013. Transformational
leadership, relationship quality, and employee performance during continuous incremental
organizational change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(7), pp.942-958.
Chatman, J.A., Caldwell, D.F., O'Reilly, C.A. and Doerr, B., 2014. Parsing organizational
culture: How the norm for adaptability influences the relationship between culture consensus
and financial performance in high‐technology firms. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 35(6), pp.785-808.
Dinh, J.E., Lord, R.G., Gardner, W.L., Meuser, J.D., Liden, R.C. and Hu, J., 2014.
Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and
changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), pp.36-62.
Flin, R., Fioratou, E., Frerk, C., Trotter, C. and Cook, T.M., 2013. Human factors in the
development of complications of airway management: preliminary evaluation of an interview
tool. Anaesthesia, 68(8), pp.817-825.
Getha-Taylor, H., Fowles, J., Silvia, C. and Merritt, C.C., 2015. Considering the effects of
time on leadership development: A local government training evaluation. Public Personnel
Management, 44(3), pp.295-316.

11CONTINGENCY LEADERSHIP MODEL
Hogan, S.J. and Coote, L.V., 2014. Organizational culture, innovation, and performance: A
test of Schein's model. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), pp.1609-1621.
Huang, J.L., Ryan, A.M., Zabel, K.L. and Palmer, A., 2014. Personality and adaptive
performance at work: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(1),
p.162.
Keskes, I. (2014). Relationship between leadership styles and dimensions of employee
organizational commitment: A critical review and discussion of future directions. Intangible
Capital, 10(1).
Khuong, M.N. and Hoang, D.T., 2015. The effects of leadership styles on employee
motivation in auditing companies in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. International Journal of
Trade, Economics and Finance, 6(4), p.210.
McCleskey, J.A., 2014. Situational, transformational, and transactional leadership and
leadership development. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 5(4), p.117.
Namasivayam, K., Guchait, P. and Lei, P., 2014. The influence of leader empowering
behaviors and employee psychological empowerment on customer satisfaction. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26(1), pp.69-84.
Sethuraman, K. and Suresh, J., 2014. Effective leadership styles. International Business
Research, 7(9), p.165.
Thompson, G. and Glasø, L., 2015. Situational leadership theory: a test from three
perspectives. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(5), pp.527-544.

12CONTINGENCY LEADERSHIP MODEL
Wang, S., Noe, R.A. and Wang, Z.M., 2014. Motivating knowledge sharing in knowledge
management systems: A quasi–field experiment. Journal of Management, 40(4), pp.978-
1009.