The Contingency Theory

Contingency theory
Student’s Name
Institutional affiliation
Course
Date
Contingency theories form a significant part in understanding organizations especially on the behavioral point of view. The fundamental part of all contingency theories is that opinion held by most theorists that there exist no best way of leading people in an organization (Hickson et al., (1971). They hold a broader view that is inclusive of contingent factors about organization leaders and other factors within an organization. There are many articles that support this idea. Additionally, there are those who do not agree with same ideas as shown in the discussion below.
Donaldson (1987) argues that although contingency theory is static, it provides a significant framework for organization design. He further argues that most organizations leadership and structures are designed to fit certain contingencies within the organization. The success of leadership within the organization is a function of contingencies that are employees in the organization. However, contrary to this opinion, Kimberly (1976) holds that sometimes it is not sensible for organizations to design their functions to correspond to their contingencies. This is because as much as the organizations are aligning their activities to meet the contingencies, the contingencies themselves are changing. Therefore, leaders must create different styles that are appropriate to the needs of leadership at a given moment.
Another contribution to the body of knowledge is how organization should respond to the environment. Perrow (1967) suggests in any organization; analyzable technologies demand centralized structures from the organizational while those unanalyzable technologies require decentralized structures (pg.199). He further adds that as exceptions increase, more flexibility within organization strategies is required. Therefore, organization with routine tasks needs specialization. They also need hierarchy and centralized power. Formalization and specialization are significant in contingency decision making. Sine et al. (2006) seem to agree to agree with contingency theory on leadership and organization behavior. However, they add that the formalization is necessary for any tasks carried in an organization. Sine, Mitsuhashi and Kirsch (2006) suggest that in any new activity carried by an organization, especially those activities being carried in a dynamic and external environment, performance can be increased with formalization and functional specialization. Furthermore under these circumstances, administrative intensity and role formalization are required. However, there are other theorists who hold a different contingency theory that meets that needs of organization’s immediate environment.
In contrary, Lawrence & Lorsch (1967) suggest that leaders must have the knowledge to balance differentiation and integration in their organization. This article suggests effective methods to handle different tasks within changing environment ...