Normative Leadership Style
In this article have analyzed Normative Leadership theory, a theory that is theoretically elegant and characteristically practical. Even in today’s increasingly changing global business scenarios, this robust theory enables Leader to select one of the five leadership styles namely decide, consult individually, consult group, facilitate and delegate by using the model’s time-driven and development-driven decision tree.
Trait and Behavioural Theory Timeline:
In the 1930s leadership theories were based on leaders’ traits. Two dimensional behavioral theory (autocratic versus democratic) was published at University of Iowa in 1939. In 1940s University of Michigan published Job centered versus employee centered theories and in mid 1950s University of Ohio published considerations versus structure theories. In 1960s Fredrick came out with two factor theory maintenance or extrinsic factor versus motivators or intrinsic factors. In 1967 McGregor suggested leadership behaviors based on different assumptions on employee motivations in describing his “Theory X” and “Theory Y”.
Birth of Contingency Leadership Theory:
In 1970s, it became evident that no single leadership style is best for all situations; leaders need to change their leadership style to suit situation. Researchers then started working on situational and contingency factors which led to the development of contingency theories such as Fiedler theory (1967), Leadership continuum theory (Tannenbaum & Schmidt, 1973), Path goal theory (House & Mitchell, 1974) and Normative theory (Vroom & Yetton, 1973; Vroom & Jago, 1988, 1995). While Fiedler theory recommends changing the situation rather than changing leadership style, rest of the contingency theories recommend using right style at right situation to deliver effective leadership.
Normative Leadership Theory:
In 1973 Vroom and Yetton developed a contingency model based on the leader’s choice of autocratic versus participative responses
Trait and Behavioural Theory Timeline:
In the 1930s leadership theories were based on leaders’ traits. Two dimensional behavioral theory (autocratic versus democratic) was published at University of Iowa in 1939. In 1940s University of Michigan published Job centered versus employee centered theories and in mid 1950s University of Ohio published considerations versus structure theories. In 1960s Fredrick came out with two factor theory maintenance or extrinsic factor versus motivators or intrinsic factors. In 1967 McGregor suggested leadership behaviors based on different assumptions on employee motivations in describing his “Theory X” and “Theory Y”.
Birth of Contingency Leadership Theory:
In 1970s, it became evident that no single leadership style is best for all situations; leaders need to change their leadership style to suit situation. Researchers then started working on situational and contingency factors which led to the development of contingency theories such as Fiedler theory (1967), Leadership continuum theory (Tannenbaum & Schmidt, 1973), Path goal theory (House & Mitchell, 1974) and Normative theory (Vroom & Yetton, 1973; Vroom & Jago, 1988, 1995). While Fiedler theory recommends changing the situation rather than changing leadership style, rest of the contingency theories recommend using right style at right situation to deliver effective leadership.
Normative Leadership Theory:
In 1973 Vroom and Yetton developed a contingency model based on the leader’s choice of autocratic versus participative responses
References: Achua, Christopher F and Lussier, Robert N.: Effective Leadership, 4th Edition, South- Western Cengage Learning Chan, Patrick Dr., Class Lecture Notes Palanski, Michael E. and Yammarino, Francis J.: Integrity and Leadership: A multi-level conceptual framework: The Leadership Quarterly 20 (2009) 405-420 Vroom, Victor H, Yale University and Jago, Arthur G, University of Missouri. Situation Effects and Levels of Analysis in the Study of Leader Participation: Leadership Quarterly Vol. 6 No.2 1995 Vroom, Victor H. Research: A New Look at Managerial Decision Making