Week 2: Contingency Theory in Local Government

Wrapping up my second week with the City Planner at Palos Verdes Estates, I am starting to get a better sense of how local government operates at both the staff level and the representative level. I work with the City Planner, which is a staff position in charge of implementing policy; our role is strictly for executing the municipal code as it pertains to construction and development activities. It is NOT a policy articulation body like the City Council or Planning Commission, which absorbs opinions from the community and then turns them into policy. This difference is self-evident but far from trivial; these roles require completely different skill-sets and leadership styles, which can be captured well using Fred Fiedler’s Contingency Theory.

Before I apply Contingency Theory to the government of Palos Verdes Estates, I will briefly describe Contingency Theory. Contingency Theory challenges more deterministic theories of leadership which suggest that there is a specific set of personality and leadership traits which is inherently most suitable for leadership roles. Instead, this theory suggests that multiple leadership styles and personality traits can be successful depending on the context of the leadership situation. Typically, leadership style is bifurcated into “task orientation” versus “relationship orientation.” Task oriented leaders tend to be more technical, less extroverted, and focused on achievement, while relationship oriented leaders tend to be more open, more sociable, and focused on group relationships. Situations are described in terms of leader power and the degree of structure involved in the group’s task.

Contingency Theory can be applied to Palos Verdes Estates government quite readily. The City Council’s authority is representative in nature, so Council members cannot issue orders to members of the public or exert direct authority over their actions. Additionally, their task of “representation” is relatively loose and they tend to follow precedent and custom, rather than adhering to a strict standard operating procedure (with the exception of Council Meetings, which do follow strict SOPs). As such, I would classify the environment of the City Council to be loose. I would consequently predict that success in the City Council environment is based more on informal, relationship-based interactions, as their task is simply being responsive to public influence. In contrast, my work with the City Planner is far more work-based and involves close adherence to the municipal code, including close reading of construction plans and following strict requirements for submissions. The City Planner is therefore a more tightly structured environment than the City Council, and I predict that task-oriented leadership, as well as a personality which asserts technical competency.

Contingency Theory has readily predicted the leadership scenario in the City Council. In my brief interactions with Councilmen, I have gleaned that they are all extremely sociable, extroverted people who are very responsive to input and can articulate themselves with confidence. But Contingency Theory does not predict the leadership within the City Planner as well as it does for the Council. My supervisor, Elizabeth, is highly competent in the technical application of the municipal code to development proposals within the city. But she is far from introverted, and is probably one of the most sociable people in the city government. I will illustrate her leadership style using the task she assigned me this week. For instance, next week is the monthly Planning Commission meeting, in which appointed commissioners review all development proposals and make the final decision on whether or not to approve them. Our role in the City Planner’s office is to provide the commissioners objective, unbiased reports about the scale and nature of the development to help inform their decision–Elizabeth tasked me with producing these reports this week. She was incredibly professional and helped me use technical language and make appropriate calculations. But once we finished the reports, she relaxed quite a bit and we casually discussed some of the proposals which had received frivolous complaints from community members in a joking way. Elizabeth also demonstrates tact when discussing complaints with community members during counter hours.

Overall, Contingency Theory is a solid predictor with a few gaps. I’m really excited for my first Planning Commission meeting this week!