Leader Motivation and Contingency Leadership

Leadership: Leader Motivation and Contingency

A leader needs to behave proactively without losing the trust of his employees as employee hiring as well as retention of the talented ones is a serious strategic decision. Leaders’ specific personality traits have to be brought into effect for dealing with contingency situations that might sometimes get the brand’s image and stakeholders’ trust in jeopardy. No one size could be considered a fit for all situations and a contingency one (Vidal et al., 2017). This paper aims to scrutinize two leaders and their motivational and contingency leadership styles based on contingency theory.

Mary Barra, GM CEO

Motivational Style and Contingency Leadership

The motivational style of Mary Barra could be attributed to transformational leadership in which she allowed the employees to express their viewpoints. After listening to them, she asked about their values and how they chose them (Bin Sattar, n.d.). This led her to understand what employee perceptions could be matched with her workplace and organizational culture conducive to their productivity. The employees were motivated to work with her when they could belong to their workplace and knew that they were heard and treasured by their CEO.

Mary’s feedback-seeking behavior effectively developed trust between the leaders and employees and proactively sought answers to questions that the top management might be unaware of. As the employees were working on their tasks daily, they were of the daily difficulties, which the top management might not be informed of frequently. Mary responded to the situation requirements to make the working environment smoother (Bin Sattar, n.d.). She asked whether they received what they were expecting and also what they thought could improve certain matters. It is one of the employees’ adaptation processes based on the social exchange theory that gives returns in exchange for feedback, a typical social exchange (Qian et al., 2018). The norm of reciprocity infuses motivation among the employees with a reflection of Mary’s empowering leadership.

Mary’s respectful nature and humility led others to follow her unconditionally. She believed trust and motivation are natural by-products of inclusiveness through information-sharing and collaboration. She gave credit to the teams and did not own all the credit, which was a great sign of her polite and humble personality. Trust and motivation were gained through extensive information sharing so that employees’ behaviors are adjusted for the natural attaining of goals without having to impose them- a crucial element of fair and honest leadership for giving strength to the subordinates (Ngyuen et al., 2020). A culture was created such that a learning organization with the learning of new information each day encouraged the employees to be a part of the process.

How This Leader Fits Into Contingency Leadership Model/Theory

Contingency leadership assumes that a certain leadership style could fit into a specific situation and might not be effective in other circumstances. According to Fiedler’s contingency theory, Mary Barra’s leadership style appears valuable in all situations. It was not only her style that helped her gain control over the ignition switch failure but also assisted the firm in getting out of the financial downfall it faced afterward (Tai, 2020; Villanova University, 2022). Control over the situation was quickly gained, with tasks and procedures being outlined clearly. It was regular transparent communication with the employees that brought both parties closer. She took responsibility for the wrongdoings of the company and the fatal results of a technical error. She cited that not knowing is okay and that the company would work towards gaining a better position on the calamity it has unknowingly created. She did not use a blame strategy, and employees did not get demotivated, despite firing some of them afterward for showing poor performance. Punishments were used intelligently based on the contingency that occurred and caused the leader to contemplate severe repressions. Close supervision of previous and current matters was witnessed, which is the crux of Fiedler’s theory. It could be deduced that certain traits had to be changed when responding to a crisis, which Mary did effectively as she took the company out of the financial climax with a trust-building and problem-solving approach.

John Stumpf, Wells Fargo former CEO

Motivational Style and Contingency Leadership

It is the sole responsibility of the transformational leader, which asks for an obligatory process of motivating his subordinates. The team’s and individuals’ self-interests have to be prioritized over the leader’s, instilling a vision and inspiration to move swiftly toward the goals (Steinmann et al., 2018). John’s leadership did not display such features since he was quite the opposite. He did not like taking the blame for his actions when Well Fargo’s fake accounts case was decided. It was too late when the matter was brought to the board’s notice as incidents and consequences had gone out of hand, and no proactive move could be undertaken at that movement (Ochs, 2016). The secret moving of money and forging signatures was enough proof that John allowed counterfeiting to happen deliberately and without the employees’ will, which the employees later disclosed.

The employees disclosed that they were forced to commit these activities and later were targeted with John’s contempt and ruthless remarks in front of the court. The employees became angry as ethical damage to the firm had already been done. John could not take this criticism and did not admit that the organizational culture was toxic with his leadership style (Ochs, 2016). The employees were hesitant to carry out the orders that John had ordered them. An unnecessary sales pressure was looming over their heads, for which, sometimes, the sales targets were unachievable (PBS News Hours, 2016). The employees mentioned that they were doubtful whether they would gain bonuses but were forced to meet targets to keep their employment. The unrealistic targets of opening new bank accounts were enforced upon them, leading them to make fake accounts of customers without bringing this to their notice (PBS News Hours, 2016). It seemed as if negative reinforcement or motivation was seen to meet the targets, which the employees did not approve of themselves.

How This Leader Fits Into Contingency Leadership Model/Theory

Under Fiedler’s contingency theory, the kind of leadership John continued with unnecessary sales targets forced upon the employees; the management did not notice how the employees were fearful. A culture of fear and intimidation was created the John ignored himself. The high-pressure sales culture caused the employees to go under stress and to reach daily sales; they had to take steps without bringing it to the notice of the management or CEO.