Numerous studies have shown that some leadership styles are associated with increased productivity and worker satisfaction. Although their authors generally qualify their findings by stating that the specified leadership style is probably successful only in certain types of organizations or situations, relatively little work has been aimed at establishing the effect of "situational factors" on leadership effectiveness. The concern of this paper is with the relationship between effective leadership and these "situational factors." Research directed at this problem is reviewed, and it is concluded that progress in this area is limited not only by lack of knowledge but also by lack of adequate conceptualization of "the situation," or organizational setting. Finally, the usefulness of one conceptual scheme, structural role theory (Oeser & Harary, 1962, 1964; Oeser & O'Brien, 1967), for guiding leadership research and practice, is considered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Argyris, C.Personality and organization. New York: Harper, 1957.
2.
Argyris, C.Organizational leadership. In L. Petrullo & B. Bass (Eds.), Leadership and interpersonal behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1961.
3.
Baldamus, W.Efficiency and effort. London: Tavistock, 1961.
4.
Bennis, W. G.Leadership theory and administrative behavior: The problem of authority. Admin. Sci. Quart., 1959-60, 4, 259-301.
5.
Fiedler, F. E.A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. New York: Academic Press, 1964. Pp. 150-191.
6.
Fiedler, F. E.Engineer the job to fit the manager. Harvard bus. Rev., 1965, 43, 115-122.
7.
Fleishman, E. A., Harris, E. F., & Burtt, H. E.Leadership and supervision in industry. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State Univer., 1955.
8.
Forehand, G. A., & Gilmer, B. H.Environmental variation in studies of organizational behavior. Psychol. Bull., 1964, 62, 361-382.
9.
Gross, N., Mason, W. S., & McEachern, A. W.Explorations in role analysis. New York: Wiley, 1958.
10.
Guest, R. H.Organizational change: The effect of successful leadership. London: Tavistock, 1962.
11.
Harary, F., Norman, R. Z., & Cartwright, D.Structural models: An introduction to the theory of directed graphs. New York: Wiley, 1965.
12.
Kahn, R., Wolfe, D., Quinn, R., Snoek, J. D., & Rosenthal, R.Organizational stress. New York: Wiley, 1964.
13.
Katzell, R. A.Contrasting systems of work organization. Amer. Psychologist, 1962, 17, 102-108.
14.
Lafitte, P.Social structure and personality in the factory. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1958.
15.
Levinson, D. J.Role, personality and social structure in the organizational setting. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1959, 58, 170-180.
16.
Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., & White, R.Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. I. soc. Psychol., 1939, 10, 271-299.
17.
Likert, R.New patterns of management. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961.
18.
McGregor, D.The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.
19.
Mann, J. H., & Mann, Carola H.The importance of a group task in producing group-member personality and behavior changes. Human Relat., 1959, 12, 75-80.
20.
O'Brien, G. E.Methods of analyzing group tasks. Technical Report No. 46, ONR. Urbana, Ill.: Group Effectiveness Research Laboratory, Univer. of Illinois, 1967.
21.
O'Brien, G. E.The measurement of cooperation. Org. Behav. human Performance, 1968, 3, 427-439.
22.
Oeser, O. A., & Harary, F.A mathematical model for structural role theory, I. Human Relat., 1962, 15, 89-109.
23.
Oeser, O. A., & Harary, F.A mathematical model for structural role theory, II. Human Relat., 1964, 17, 3-17.
24.
Oeser, O. A., & O'Brien, G. E.A mathematical model for structural role theory, III. Human Relat., 1967, 20, 83-97.
25.
Pelz, D. C.Influence a key to effective leadership in the first line supervisor. Personnel, 1952, 29, 3-11.
26.
Porter, L. W., & Lawler, E. E.Properties of organization structure in relation to job attitudes and job behavior. Psychol. Bull., 1965, 61, 23-51.
27.
Rice, A. K.Productivity and social organization. London: Tavistock, 1958.
28.
Roby, T. B., & Lanzetta, J. T.Considerations in the analysis of group tasks. Psychol. Bull., 1958, 55, 88-110.
29.
Schutz, W. C.What makes groups productive?Human Relat., 1955, 8, 429-465.
30.
Schutz, W. C.The ego, FIRO theory and the leader as completer. In L. Petrullo & B. Bass (Eds.), Leadership and interpersonal behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1961.
31.
Shaw, M.Scaling group tasks: A method for dimensional analysis. Technical Report No. i. Gainesville, Fla.: Univer. of Florida, 1963.
32.
Tannenbaum, A. S.Personality change as a result of experimental change of environmental conditions. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1957, 55, 404-406.
33.
Tannenbaum, A. S., & Allport, F.Personality structure and group structure: An interpretative study of their relationship through an event-structured hypothesis. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1956, 53, 272-280.
34.
Trist, E. L., & Bamforth, K. W.Some social and psychological consequences of the long-wall method of coal-getting. Human Relat., 1951, 4, 3-38.
35.
Vroom, V. H., & Mann, F. C.Leader authoritarianism and employee attitudes. Personnel Psychol., 1960, 13, 125-140.
36.
Whyte, W. F.Human relations in the restaurant industry. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1948.
