Matching leadership to circumstances? A vignette study of leadership behavior adaptation in an ambiguous context

Abstract

Public organizations are often characterized by contextual ambiguity, which creates extra demands on leaders. Yet to what extent leaders adapt their behavior to the ambiguity remains largely unknown. Drawing on the concept of requisite variety, we hypothesize that more ambiguous situations require more complex leadership behavior. Furthermore, it is hypothesized that formal authority moderates such adaptation. Data were collected in a 2x2x2 vignette interview study with leaders in Dutch universities (n observations = 240, n participants = 30), organizations particularly prone to ambiguity. The within-person experimental design enables analyzing how contextual variations elicit different choices by the same participant, controlled for between-person differences. Multilevel analyses show that, contrary to expectations, fewer leadership behaviors are used in situations with more contextual ambiguity, while formal authority increases the number of leadership behaviors. The results suggest that leaders in ambiguous contexts narrow the range of their actions, and a lack of authority in particular constrains the available repertoire.