Harvard University Easy Leadership and Development Discussion Paper Hey guys I really need help with this assignment. I am super stressed and do not have t

Harvard University Easy Leadership and Development Discussion Paper Hey guys I really need help with this assignment. I am super stressed and do not have the time. Please help. Its a super easy discussion post. The response does not need to be long. I just need it to be well written. The documents you need to complete the assignment it below.

The purpose of this discussion board is simply to engage in academic dialog, but remember it is not an informal chat room. Your answers and replies should be thoughtful, considerate, and use college-level language and grammar. Before posting your answers, check them for spelling and grammatical errors.

Your Task:
PART 1: READ AND REFLECT ON THE CHAPTER. YOUR READING LOG POST MUST BE COMPLETED BY THE DUE DATE. YOUR READING LOG SHOULD INCLUDE A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTER, AND AT LEAST ONE KEY TERM & QUOTE, AS WELL AS, A BRIEF REFLECTION ON ONE CASE STUDY; USE THE QUESTIONS PROVIDED AFTER THE CASE STUDIES TO GUIDE YOUR THINKING.
PART 2: READ THE RESPONSES POSTED BY YOUR CLASSMATES AND RESPOND TO AT LEAST ONE OF THOSE POSTINGS BY THE DUE DATE. CHAPTER 3
Contingency
Approaches to
Leadership
Part 1: An
Introduction
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Contingency and Contingency
Approaches
Contingency
• Theory meaning one thing depends on other
things – “It depends”
Contingency approaches
• Approaches that seek to delineate the
characteristics of situations and followers and
examine the leadership styles that can be used
effectively
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Exhibit 3.1 – Comparing the Universalistic and
Contingency Approaches to Leadership
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Exhibit 3.2 – Meta-Categories of Leader
Behavior and Four Leader Styles
Leaders can adjust
these as needed
Sources: Based on Gary Yukl, Angela Gordon, and Tom Taber, ‘‘A Hierarchical Taxonomy of Leadership Behavior: Integrating a Half Century
of Behavior Research,’’ Journal of Leadership and Organization Studies 9, no. 1 (2002), pp. 15–32 and Gary Yukl, ‘‘Effective Leadership
not be scanned,
copied
or duplicated,
or posted
to a publicly accessible
website,
in whole or2012),
in part.pp. 66–81.
Behavior:©2018
What Cengage
We KnowLearning®.
and WhatMay
Questions
Need More
Attention,’’
Academy
of Management
Perspectives
(November
Remember from Chapter 2
The Leadership Grid®
Source: The Leadership Grid figure from Leadership Dilemma—Grid Solutions by Robert R. Blake and Anne Adams McCanse (formerly the
Managerial Grid by Robert R. Blake and Jane S. Mouton). Houston: Gulf Publishing Company, p. 29. Copyright 1991 by Scientific Methods, Inc.
Reproduced by permission of the owners.
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Situational Theory
Hersey and Blanchard’s
extension of the Leadership Grid
focusing on the characteristics
of followers as the important
element of the situation, and
consequently, of determining
effective leader behavior
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Exhibit 3.3 – The Situational Model
of Leadership
Source: Adapted from The Hersey and Blanchard Situational Leadership Model / The Center for Leadership Studies, Inc.
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational
Theory—Leader Style
Telling style (Authority Compliance)
• Directive approach that reflects a high concern for tasks
and a low concern for people and relationships
Selling style (Team Management)
• Based on a high concern for both relationships and tasks
Participating style (Country Club)
• Characterized by high relationship and low task behavior
Delegating style (Impoverished)
• Reflects a low concern for both tasks and relationships
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Which Style is correct? It Depends.
The Situational Model of Leadership
Source: Adapted from The Hersey and Blanchard Situational Leadership Model / The Center for Leadership Studies, Inc.
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational
Theory—Follower Readiness
Low readiness
• Use the telling leader style
Moderate readiness
• Use the selling leader style
High readiness
• Use the participating leader style
Very high readiness
• Use the delegating leader style
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CHAPTER 3
Contingency
Approaches to
Leadership
Part 2: PathGoal Theory
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Path–Goal Theory
A contingency approach to
leadership in which the leader’s
responsibility is to increase
subordinates’ motivation by
clarifying the behaviors
necessary for task
accomplishment and rewards
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Exhibit 3.5 – Leader Roles in the
Path–Goal Model
Source: Reprinted from Organizational Dynamics, 13 (Winter 1985), Bernard M. Bass, “Leadership: Good, Better, Best,” pp. 26–40, Copyright 1985,
with permission from Elsevier.
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Situational Contingencies in PathGoal Theory
• Personal characteristics of group members
– Ability and skills
– Needs and motivations
• Work environment
– Degree of task structure
– Nature of the formal authority system
– Work group itself
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Possible Leader Behaviors in PathGoal Theory (slide 1 of 2)
Supportive leadership
• Shows concern for subordinates’ well-being and
personal needs
• Leader’s behavior is open, friendly, and approachable,
and the leader creates a team climate and treats
subordinates as equals
Directive leadership
• Tells subordinates exactly what they are supposed to
do
• Leader behavior includes planning, making schedules,
setting performance goals and behavior standards,
and stressing adherence to rules and regulations
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Leader Behavior in Path-Goal
Theory (slide 2 of 2)
Participative leadership
• Consults with subordinates about decisions
• Leader behavior includes asking for opinions and
suggestions, encouraging participation in decision
making, and meeting with subordinates in their
workplaces
Achievement-oriented leadership
• Sets clear and challenging goals for subordinates
• Leader behavior stresses high-quality performance
and improvement over current performance
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Exhibit 3.6 – Path–Goal Situations
and Preferred Leader Behaviors
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CHAPTER 3
Contingency
Approaches to
Leadership
Part 3: VroomJago
Contingency
Model
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
The Vroom–Jago Contingency Model
(slide 1 of 2)
A contingency model that
focuses on varying degrees of
participative leadership and
how each level of participation
influences the quality and
accountability of decisions
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
The Vroom–Jago Contingency Model
(slide 2 of 2)
• Situational factors shape the likelihood that
either a participative or autocratic approach will
produce the best outcome
• Tells the leader precisely the correct amount of
participation by subordinates to use in making a
particular decision
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Exhibit 3.7 – Five Leader Decision
Styles
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Selecting a Decision Style
• Timesaving-based model
– Use when a decision has to be made
immediately
• Development-based model
– Use when it is important to develop the thinking
and decision-making skills of followers
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Diagnostic Questions (slide 1 of 2)
Decision significance
• How significant is this decision for the project or organization?
Importance of commitment
• How important is subordinate commitment to carrying out the
decision?
Leader expertise
• What is the level of the leader’s expertise in relation to the
problem?
Likelihood of commitment
• If the leader were to make the decision alone, would
subordinates have high or low commitment to the decision?
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Diagnostic Questions (slide 2 of 2)
Group support for goals
• What is the degree of subordinate support for the team’s or
organization’s objectives at stake in this decision?
Goal expertise
• What is the level of group members’ knowledge and expertise
in relation to the problem?
Team competence
• How skilled and committed are group members to working
together as a team to solve problems?
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Exhibit 3.8 – Timesaving-Based
Model
Source: Reprinted from Organizational Dynamics, 28, no. 4, Victor H. Vroom, ‘‘Leadership and the Decision-Making Process,’’ pp. 82–94, Copyright
2000, with permission from Elsevier.
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Exhibit 3.9 – Employee
Development-Based Model
Source: Victor H. Vroom, ‘‘Leadership and the Decision-Making Process,’’ Organizational Dynamics 28, no. 4 (Spring 2000), pp. 82–94. This is
Vroom’s adaptation of Tannenbaum and Schmidt’s Taxonomy.
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Substitutes for Leadership
Substitute
• Situational variable that makes leadership
unnecessary or redundant
Neutralizer
• Situational characteristic that counteracts the
leadership style and prevents the leader from
displaying certain behaviors
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Exhibit 3.10 – Substitutes and
Neutralizers for Leadership
©2018 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment