Fiedler's LPC Theory

Fiedler's Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Theory

Assumptions

Leaders prioritize between task-focus and people-focus.

Relationships, power and task structure are the three key factors that drive effective styles.

Description

Fiedler identified the a Least Preferred Co-Worker scoring for leaders by asking them first to think of a person with which they worked that they would like least to work with again, and then to score the person on a range of scales between positive factors (friendly, helpful, cheerful, etc.) and negative factors (unfriendly, unhelpful, gloomy, etc.). A high LPC leader generally scores the other person as positive and a low LPC leader scores them as negative.

High LPC leaders tend to have close and positive relationships and act in a supportive way, even prioritizing the relationship before the task. Low LPC leaders put the task first and will turn to relationships only when they are satisfied with how the work is going.

Three factors are then identified about the leader, member and the task, as follows:

• Leader-Member Relations: The extent to which the leader has the support and loyalties of followers and relations with them are friendly and cooperative.

• Task structure: The extent to which tasks are standardised, documented and controlled.

• Leader's Position-power: The extent to which the leader has authority to assess follower performance and give reward or punishment.

The best LPC approach depends on a combination of there three. Generally, a high LPC approach is best when leader-member relations are poor, except when the task is unstructured and the leader is weak, in which a low LPC style is better.

# (i) Leader-Member Relations (ii) Task structure
   (iii) Leader's Position- power  (iv) Most Effective leader

1. (i) Good    (ii) Structured         (iii) Strong    (iv) Low LPC


2. (i) Good    (ii) Structured         (iii) Weak     (iv) Low LPC


3. (i) Good    (ii) Unstructured    (iii) Strong    (iv) Low LPC


4. (i) Good    (ii) Unstructured    (iii) Weak      (iv) High LPC


5. (i) Poor     (ii) Structured         (iii) Strong    (iv) High LPC


6. (i) Poor    (ii) Structured          (iii) Weak      (iv) High LPC


7. (i) Poor    (ii) Unstructured     (iii) Strong     (iv) High LPC


8. (i) Poor    (ii) Unstructured     (iii) Weak       (iv) Low LPC


Discussion

This approach seeks to identify the underlying beliefs about people, in particular whether the leader sees others as positive (high LPC) or negative (low LPC). The neat trick of the model is to take someone where it would be very easy to be negative about them.

This is another approach that uses task- vs. people-focus as a major categorisation of the leader's style.

Source:

http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/theories/fiedler_lpc.htm

Contingency Theory

Contingency Theory

Assumptions

The leader's ability to lead is contingent upon various situational factors, including the leader's preferred style, the capabilities and behaviors of followers and also various other situational factors.

Description

Contingency theories are a class of behavioral theory that contend that there is no one best way of leading and that a leadership style that is effective in some situations may not be successful in others.

An effect of this is that leaders who are very effective at one place and time may become unsuccessful either when transplanted to another situation or when the factors around them change.

This helps to explain how some leaders who seem for a while to have the 'Midas touch' suddenly appear to go off the boil and make very unsuccessful decisions.

Discussion

Contingency theory is similar to situational theory in that there is an assumption of no simple one right way. The main difference is that situational theory tends to focus more on the behaviors that the leader should adopt, given situational factors (often about follower behavior), whereas contingency theory takes a broader view that includes contingent factors about leader capability and other variables within the situation.

Source:

http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/theories/contingency_theory.htm

Human Resources Planning Q&A #3

What is workforce analysis?

You can't plan in human resources if you don't have the information on which to base your actions. Workforce analysis involves identifying current and anticipated future supply of labor and skills, identifying what you need and will need in the future in terms of labor, skills and competencies (demand analysis), and then identifying the gaps between the current and future supply and current and future demands (a gap analysis). Then you action plan around how to reduce the gaps.

The Government of Saskatchewan has produced a nice guide that explains these processes in more detail, and that can be accessed here. Here's a brief summary of these processes:

Supply Analysis

• Internal supply

- Current workforce demographics

- Workforce trends – eligibility for retirement, separation rate, etc.

• External supply

Demand Analysis

• Critical occupations and competencies required to meet projected needs

• Anticipated changes of programs and services (volume, delivery channel, location and duration)

• Separation/turnover rates

• Vacancy rates

Gap Analysis

• Compare supply with demand analysis to determine future shortages and excess in the number of employees needed, types of occupations, and competencies.