Eugene Lin Week 6: Theories in Action
One of the benefits of working in such a large organization as an intern, is that I am able to shadow many different department heads and see how these “leaders” compare in their leadership style. The main department heads that I work with, Jonathon McNamara and Bernadette Jay all have a different way in which they lead. Given the different nature of their work and their different personas, I thought it would be interesting to compare their leadership style using Fiedler’s Contingency Theory and the LPC scale. Fiedler’s Contingency Theory emphasizes the importance of both the leader’s personality and the situation in which that leader operates. The LPC scale indicates that to establish strong leadership, there needs to be strong leader-member relations, task with clear goals and procedures, and the ability for the leader to mete out rewards and punishments.
The department head that I work most closely with, Jonathon McNamara, is an extremely charismatic guy. He is very sociable, likable, and gets along with others very well. Thus, he scores highly on Leader-member relationship. However, his direction, instructions, and overall communication for the work he has is unclear. Thus, he scores low on task structure. Lastly, his position of power is high. He is the head of the communications department and is well respected by his peers. Thus, he scores very favorably on the LPC scale. This makes sense as Jonathon’s strong relationship with his followers and high position of power makes up for the fact that his task structure is weak. My explanation for this is that his followers, like myself, function well with Jonathon given his likable personality. Even despite unclear directions, his strong emotional intelligence allows his followers to understand his work expectations. This factor, coupled with his strong position of power helps motivate his followers.
In contrast, the second department head that I work with is Bernadette Jay. Her approach to work is different from Jonathon McNamara. Firstly, although our relationship is not poor, she is very formal. She is not as charismatic as Jonathon and much more straightforward with what she wants. Thus, she scores low on Leader-member relations. However, she is very organized and always offers clear directions for the work she wants done. As a result, she scores high on task structure. Lastly, her position of power is strong as she is the department head of the biomedical department. She too is well respected by her peers. As a result, she scores moderate in terms of her situational control. My explanation for this is that strong leader-member relation is very important. Although she makes up for this with strong task structure and a strong position of power, she did not score as highly as Jonathon on the LPC scale because of she lacked strong leader-member relations.
The main difference between my two department heads is that whereas with Jonathon, I often need to ask him several questions about his assignments, I always feel comfortable and at ease doing so. The fact that I need to communicate with him so often to finish his assignments help facilitate strong leader-member relations. However, with Bernadette, her instructions are usually always clear and concise that I don’t often have any questions with her. Thus, our relationship becomes a very formal one that is heavily task structured.
