A critical evaluation of Fiedler's predictor measures of leadership effectiveness
General Material Designation
[Thesis]
First Statement of Responsibility
Hosking, Dian Marie
.PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC
Name of Publisher, Distributor, etc.
University of Warwick
Date of Publication, Distribution, etc.
1978
DISSERTATION (THESIS) NOTE
Dissertation or thesis details and type of degree
Ph.D.
Body granting the degree
University of Warwick
Text preceding or following the note
1978
SUMMARY OR ABSTRACT
Text of Note
Fiedler has claimed that leadership effectiveness is a function of: a) the type of leader (measured by LPC or ASO), b) the type of group, c) the type of task, and d) the position-power of the leader. In Part I, evidence is presented to show that LPC/ASO scores correlate with leadership effectiveness, but not in the manner required by Fiedler's theory. The conclusions reached differ from those usually presented in the literature, and are based on a detailed, systematic description of available research. It is felt that this critique constitutes a substantial theoretical contribution, worthy of publication in its own right. In Parts II and III, the meaning of LPC/ASO is examined. Particular attention is paid to relationships between LPC/ASO and: a) cognitive complexity; b) perceptions of leader behaviour. Three types of evidence are presented: a) a critical review of existing studies (felt to be a substantial contribution to the literature); b) correlations between LPC/ASO and independent measures of cognitive complexity (calculated for subjects with and without leadership experience); c) an experimental investigation of perceptions of leader behaviour It is concluded that: a) Existing interpretations of LPC/ASO are inadequate. In particular, LPC/ASO do not relate to measures of cognitive complexity used in this study. b) LPC/ASO do not appear to reflect straightforward differences in perceptions of leader behaviour. c) No satisfactory interpretation of LPC/ASO exists, furthermore, recent research calls into question their test-retest reliability. d) Fiedler's theory contains severe theoretical and methodological flaws, and lacks empirical support. It is suggested that his theory be rejected, and further research concentrate on other individual-difference variables.