Understanding Fiedler’s Contingency Theory and the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) Scale

Fiedler’s Contingency Theory is a well-regarded leadership model that emphasizes the importance of matching a leader’s style with the right context or situation. Unlike other leadership theories that propose leaders can adapt their styles to different situations, Fiedler’s approach argues that leadership styles are relatively fixed and that leaders need to be placed in situations that suit their natural style to be effective. Central to this theory is the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) scale, a tool that helps to determine a leader’s orientation—whether they are more relationship-oriented or task-oriented.

What Is the LPC Scale?

The Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) scale is a psychometric tool that leaders use to assess their leadership style by reflecting on their feelings toward the person they have had the most difficulty working with. It measures a leader’s relational approach in challenging situations, offering insights into their tendency toward either task- or relationship-oriented leadership.

Leaders complete the LPC scale by rating their least preferred coworker on a range of bipolar adjectives. These adjectives, presented in a contrasting format (e.g., “friendly-unfriendly,” “cooperative-uncooperative”), are scored on a scale of 1–8. The total score indicates the leader’s underlying leadership style, categorizing them as either task- or relationship-oriented.

Interpreting the LPC Score

• High LPC Score: If a leader scores high on the LPC scale, they tend to describe their least preferred coworker in relatively positive terms. This suggests that even when faced with someone challenging to work with, the leader emphasizes maintaining relationships. Such leaders are considered relationship-oriented. They excel in situations where team cohesion and interpersonal dynamics are crucial.
• Low LPC Score: Leaders with a low LPC score describe their least preferred coworker in negative terms, indicating a focus on the task rather than the person. These leaders are task-oriented, prioritizing the completion of work and efficiency over maintaining positive relationships, especially in stressful or demanding situations.

Fiedler’s Contingency Model

According to Fiedler’s Contingency Theory, leadership effectiveness is contingent upon how well a leader’s style fits the situation. Fiedler posits that leadership style is innate and difficult to change; therefore, success is achieved by placing leaders in situations that complement their natural tendencies.

The model outlines three situational factors that determine how favourable a particular context is for a leader:

1. Leader-Member Relations: The degree of trust and respect between the leader and the team.
2. Task Structure: The extent to which tasks are clear, defined, and structured.
3. Position Power: The level of authority and control the leader has over rewards and punishments.

The theory suggests that task-oriented leaders (low LPC) perform better in either highly favorable or highly unfavorable situations—where control is either very high or very low. In contrast, relationship-oriented leaders (high LPC) excel in moderately favorable situations, where team dynamics are important, and the leader needs to balance task execution with team morale.

Criticism of the LPC Scale and Fiedler’s Theory

While Fiedler’s Contingency Theory has been influential, the LPC scale has faced criticism for several reasons:

• Reliability: Studies suggest the LPC scale is only about 50% reliable. This means that leaders might score differently when taking the test multiple times, leading to inconsistent results.
• Subjectivity: The scale assumes that a leader’s description of their least preferred coworker reflects their overall leadership style. However, some argue that leaders could have experienced particularly negative interactions with a single individual, which might not represent their broader leadership tendencies.
• Inflexibility: Critics argue that Fiedler’s theory implies leaders are rigid in their style, whereas other leadership models suggest that leaders can adapt their behaviour to fit different situations.

Practical Applications of the LPC Scale in Project Management

Fiedler’s Contingency Theory and the LPC scale have practical implications for project managers. Understanding whether a project manager is more task- or relationship-oriented can help in tailoring their role to suit the project’s needs:

• Task-Oriented Leadership: In projects with strict deadlines, high complexity, or a need for clear direction, a task-oriented leader may be more effective. Their focus on getting things done aligns well with high-pressure environments where clear, decisive leadership is required.
• Relationship-Oriented Leadership: For projects requiring innovation, creativity, or collaboration, a relationship-oriented leader may foster a more supportive and cohesive team environment. Their ability to navigate interpersonal dynamics ensures that the team works well together, which is particularly useful in agile environments.

Conclusion

The LPC scale provides valuable insights into a leader’s natural tendencies, whether they are more task- or relationship-oriented. While Fiedler’s Contingency Theory has faced some criticism, it remains a useful framework for understanding how leadership styles align with situational factors in project management. By identifying the right fit between leadership style and context, organizations can better leverage their leaders’ strengths and ensure project success.

Preparing for PMP Exam can be super easy with 800+ PMP Terms - Buy Now