Contingency Approach to Change Contingency Approach Developmental transitions, task-focused transitions, charismatic transformations, turnarounds and Taylorist methods

Contingency theory suggests that there is no singular, prescriptive way of enacting change. Rather, the specific circumstances must be taken into consideration. In general, contingency theory proposes that change is dependent upon the relationship between the leaders and followers, the structure of the task, and the position of the leader (Doyle & Smith 2001). For example, in a developmental or gradual transition, the leader is more likely to be in a weaker position of power and need additional 'buy-in' from employees. A major departmental overhaul may be more appropriately rendered in such a fashion, given the shock of a sudden transition along with the close-knit nature of the community. Another good example of when a developmental approach might be used is when the needed changes the organization might embark upon are uncertain. Through collaboration, the path of change is arrived at by all organizational participants. The leader exercises some direction, but accepts input from other organizational members. For example, when a university is enacting changes to serve the student body, the president will likely solicit information from faculty members and students, rather than dictate changes in philosophy or coursework in an autocratic fashion.

In contrast, during task-specific transitions, the leader exercises a great deal of authority. A task-focused transition may feature a more powerful leader. Also, "if the task is clearly spelled out as to goals, methods and standards...

A good example of a task-specific transition might be a shift to using a new type of computer system at work. In such a shift, the known transition is already decided. The task is defined and relatively enclosed. In task-specific transitions, usually the leader has a fair amount of authority in deciding how the structure of the change will take place. This is because of the definite nature of the task, and the fact that the leader possesses the greatest amount of knowledge in terms of how the change will be orchestrated, and the planning of the change.
With charismatic transitions, the leader can exert considerable influence over his or her followers. The followers are also often willing to obey, because of the charismatic sway of the leader's personality. Charisma is, of course, difficult to define, but examples of charismatic leaders include the late Steve Jobs. It is said that employees at the Apple Company were often willing to accept lower levels of pay than they might receive elsewhere, simply because they were so eager to work at Apple. "Google's perks and benefits seem to be better than Apple. And Microsoft's health benefits are supposedly amazing. Apple's don't seem to be anything special... If you have a project that Steve is not involved in, it will take months of meetings to move things forward. If Steve wants it done, it's done faster than anyone thinks is humanly possible.... Apple employees believe they are changing the world... you are part of something much bigger than you" (Yarow 2011). Employees who did not believe that they are doing…