I posted a while ago about a few things I'd done that day, and have noticed that it's getting more views than other posts, and I'm not entirely sure why, but I'm guessing it may be because I mentioned an essay I was writing: Describe one contingency theory of leadership and discuss how this theory can be applied by a university lecturer to lead the students' learning process.

On the off chance people were coming here looking for that essay, I've decided to post it here. It's about 800 words long.

Describe one contingency theory of leadership and discuss how this theory can be applied by a university lecturer to lead the students learning process

Although a university lecturer may not immediately seem to be a leader, lecturers do occupy a role which involves interaction with students who allow the lecturers to non-coercively influence them towards the achievement of certain objectives. This is one way of defining leadership, but also shows how students who do not wish to learn simply stop allowing themselves to be influenced. Fiedler’s (1967) contingency theory, also called the Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Model, explains how a leader’s preferred style and other contingency factors interact to influence group performance, and can be applied to a lecturer to examine ways in which they can lead the learning process.

Fiedler believes the most appropriate leader behaviour is the one that leads to high group productivity (unlike many other theories which also include follower satisfaction as an important factor in measuring leader effectiveness). He says that productivity is a product of two factors: the leader’s behavioural style, and contingent contextual circumstances.

The leader’s behavioural style is fixed and is assessed by means of a psychological scale based around his orientation to the co-worker he was least able to work successfully with in the past. A low LPC score indicates a task-orientated leader, while a high LPC score indicates a relationship-orientated leader.

There are three key contingent circumstances: Leader-member relations (the quality of the relationship between leader and followers), task structure (how well defined or routine the task is), and leader position power (the amount of formal authority given to the leader by his position in the organisation).

Different combinations of circumstances affect the favourableness of the situation, that is how easy it is for the leader to influence his followers, and each set of circumstances has a leadership style that is most appropriate. As he believed leadership style to be fixed, Fiedler ruled out changing leader behaviour to suit the situation and instead suggested changing the situation to suit the leader.

In the context of a university lecturer, position power is normally strong: lecturers are the source of expert knowledge on the subject, responsible for planning the delivery and sometimes content of a module, they are the first point of contact regarding their modules, and are often responsible for marking student’s work.

Task structure is more varied, as it depends on the subject being studied: science and engineering based degrees can be easier to break into structured parts than social science degrees where there are a larger number of interrelated topics and competing theories. In general however, we can say task structure is low, because study is guided by the lecturer who selects relevant material to cover whereas otherwise what to study is ambiguous, and also, because as they are part of the learning process, coursework or seminar tasks set by the lecturer are not routine as often the problems set are new to students.

Leader-member relations are the most varied of all, depending on the individual lecturer and students. There will be a full range of relations, from good to bad.

To summarise the resulting description of the context a university lecturer works in, position power is strong, task structure is low, and leader member relations vary. Fiedler’s model suggests that for Strong, Low, Good circumstances and Strong, Low, Bad circumstances a task-orientated style is best.

However, as Fiedler’s theory states leadership styles are fixed, relationship-orientated lecturers will not get high performance unless they modify the situation to suit their style.

To adapt the situation to their style, relationship-orientated lecturers can take different actions depending on which circumstance they find themselves in. For situations where there is Strong position power, Low task structure, and Good leader-member relations, lecturers can weaken their position power by sharing decisions with their students, perhaps by giving students input into what order they will cover topics or how fast they cover material.

For situations where there is Strong position power, Low task structure, and Bad leader-member relations, lecturers can attempt to improve leader-member relations by increasing the opportunities for informal contact such as extra office hours and offering help beyond what is expected (but within university regulations). Alternatively, lecturers can increase the task structure of the situation by providing clear frameworks to aid study, such as following a core textbook or provided suggested readings to guide students, or providing detailed exam preparation in order to give less ambiguous criteria for success.

In conclusion, using Fiedler’s LPC model, the contextual circumstances can be described as having strong position power, low task structure, and either good or bad leader-member relations. Whilst this suits task-orientated lecturers, relationship-orientated lecturers will have to modify the situation to achieve the best results. Depending on the circumstances, they can weaken their position power, increase the task structure, or improve their relationships, and by doing so create conditions where their style of leadership works best.

It's generally accepted that modern life is quite hectic, that we're busy trying to fit as much into our lives as possible. I find that I'm somewhat wasteful with my time, although I'm trying to be more productive, however I get the impression that no matter how productive I become, there will always be more tasks than I have time to do.

Where does that leave spirituality? Quite often there are real and legitimate influences against incorporating spiritual practice into our daily lives, perhaps it's because you work long hours, have no where to practice, have children, or something else. I've always struggled to make time to meditate, for example: I always feel too tired to concentrate in the evenings, and getting up early in the morning is a challenge I've yet to overcome.

That's why I like what people such as Jon Kabat-Zinn say: that spirituality needn't be, and perhaps should never be, restricted to one part of our life, instead it should be something that permeates throughout it.

In short, you can be mindful wherever you are, whatever you are doing. Whatever you happen to be doing, you can use the experience as an object for meditation, whether you practice concentration or mindfulness.

For example, as you walk down the street, not just keeping your head down and walking as fast as you can to get to your destination, but being aware of the street, seeing what's going, hearing it, smelling it.

Essentially, living in the present, all the time, and experiencing our lives in as much depth as is available to us.

Lectures began on Monday, and as I write this I have had at least one lecture on each of this semester's modules and received a copy of the module's study guide.

This means, now I know what the core textbooks are, that I've been buying books. I've accumulated a modest collection of books over the years, ranging from children's fiction to adult fiction to philosophy to technical self-study books. Some names from my bookshelves include Orwell, Nietzsche, Byron, Pratchett, Thich Nhat Hanh, and the Dalai Lama.

Textbooks are always the most expensive to buy. Not because of the cost of producing them, but the premium put on the information in them. It can't help that there is an almost captive market for university textbooks: if your course requires certain books it's quite prudent to get hold of a copy of each (although sometimes you can get by without them).

The internet has done wonders for freely spreading information, but still, highly academic topics can be hard to find, and expensive when you do. The various academic journals are good examples of this, as they charge you to view their archives (I don't know how expensive journal subscriptions are, I've not had to pay one, but I can't imagine them being cheap).

I can't help but wonder, why is knowledge so expensive?

As for myself, I like owning books, perhaps it's something to do with reinforcing my self-image of being an intelligent person, but on a practical level I often refer back to technical books and enjoy rereading good books. That's why I prefer to buy my books, rather than borrow them from the library, although I've taken to using the second hand bookshop instead of buying new.

Finally, the book buying that prompted this post amounted to £160, with books ranging from £5 from the second hand bookshop to £60 from amazon.com and shipped to the UK (the shipping charge hurt, but I wanted it quickly so I could study from it)

Today was the first day of term.

I got up around 9 and phoned my landlord about the broken washing machine and the lack of gas/electric bills (we've been here for 4 months now and no sign of a bill, although there are lots of letters for him from British Gas - we think something is amiss) and he said he'd sort out the washing machine and come around later this evening to pick up the letters.

I then spent the rest of the day writing an essay titled "Describe one contingency theory of leadership and discuss how this theory can be applied by a university lecturer to lead the students’ learning process."

When I came home I separated my kitchen things from the pile in the kitchen sink and washed up.

The landlord never showed up... no surprise there. He's one of the least reliable people I've ever had to deal with, which is made all the more frustrating because he's also taking our money each month!

No.

That's the short answer.

The long answer goes something like this:

No, because I don't believe in making resolutions. I don't make resolutions because it's almost expected that you'll fail to keep them, which doesn't really help, but also because I don't believe there's a special time to set these kinds of goals.

The best time is now, not tomorrow, and as much as I hate the cliché, I hate people who always talk about doing something tomorrow (perhaps a bit of projection there).

Even if you can't start a new goal now, plan when you're going to start and how. Then the key part, and the hardest: actually do it. I struggle with this bit as much as the next person.

In 2009, there won't be a new me. There will be the same old me, trying to overcome the same old bad habits, and making progress one step at a time. Wish me luck