Week 5 – Contingency/LMX theory in action at the Bose Corporation
Other than the overwhelming examples of transformational leadership that I mentioned in my last ‘Theories in Action’ post, I have noticed some other theories on a lesser scale. The first one is contingency theory. My team of about 10 people has at least one meeting a week to discuss the most pressing topics. These meetings are very helpful so we can all make sure we are working productively as a team for the company. Every meeting consists of many topics, and almost every time there is a different person leading the meeting, if not multiple different people each time. The leader depends solely on the discussion topic at hand, because each person has different areas of expertise. We have found that the most efficient way to keep everyone informed and make the most of our hour-long meetings is to give the floor to whoever has insights to share.
I have found this to be a productive dynamic. We also try to consistently follow a process every time we meet which allows us to prioritize the discussion so that the most important things are guaranteed to be covered. We like to go by the ‘Decide. Inform. Discuss.” guidelines. The idea is that we decide which subjects are most important, the person with the most knowledge on the topic will inform the rest of the group, and then we discuss whatever it is that needs to be discussed. This is advantageous because it keeps us focused and allows us to make intelligent decisions in the best way.
Another theory I have seen represented in my internship this summer at Bose Corporation is the LMX theory. Another benefit of having a small team is that it is easier to have relationships with everyone around me that I work with. Having the same 10 people in those meetings makes it more comfortable of an environment to speak up, ask questions, and ultimately learn more in depth. It is great to be able to work closely, both on projects and in physical proximity, with the people around me that have far more experience than me. Relationships are an important part of our team and the company as a whole. They see the value in creating dyadic connections and it has proved to accelerate the success of teams here.
Good to consider/recognize that other theories may be relevant to your experience as well. With regard to contingency theory, any insight into the situational variables (leader/member relations, task structure, position power)? You’ve obviously already spoken to the fact that it is a leader-match theory (e.g. different individuals take the lead depending on the situation), just wondering if you have made observations about those individuals success in relation to the leader/member relations and task structure. As for the insights about LMX, any observations about the in-groups and out-groups within the organization?