Preferred Co-worker Research Articles

Internal Analyses of the Least Preferred Co-Worker (LPC) Scale

Responses of 226 undergraduates to a 22-item version of Fiedler's (1967) Least Preferred Co-Worker (LPC) Scale were subjected to several internal analyses. Factor analysis, correlations between subscale scores, cross-tabulation of classification decisions, and comparisons of internal consistency coefficients for subscales and total scale all suggest that this version of the LPC scale has two relatively independent factors. The first factor reflects the social characteristics of one's least preferred co-worker and the second factor concerns task competence characteristics. Two classroom samples with n = 21 and n = 36 yielded 9-10 week test-retest reliability coefficients of .71 and .63 for Total LPC scores; and somewhat lower stability coefficients were reported for the two subscale scores. Discussion focused in the practical implications of these results for researchers using the LPC scale.

The potential influence index as a measure of situational favourability in the contingency model of leadership

Abstract A brief review of the Contingency Model of leadership (Fiedler, 1978) indicates that a weakness in the theory is the nature of its definition of situational favourability for leaders. An alternative approach to defining favourability is offered by O'Brien's(1969) derivation of a mathermatically based index of leader's potential influence. A small group, laboratory study is reported in which leaders whose LPC (Least Preferred Co-Worker) score varied in situations that provided them with different levels of potential influence. It was found that in the moderate Influence condition LPC was positively correlated with performance (r=·43) while in the high influence condition it was negatively correlated (r=-·28). When combined with findings from previous studies which have used this index, this result provides substantial support for the hypothesized curvilinear relationship between LPC and productivity. The results also support the view that potential influence is an index of situational favourablene...

Alternatives to the Least Preferred Co-Worker Construct

Summary To test the validity of the most frequently cited interpretation of the least preferred co-worker (LPC) construct (i.e., task orientation versus supportive-interpersonal orientation), situational conditions specified by Fiedler's Contingency Model were created for 48, four-man groups (total N = 192 U.S. enlisted men). Group performance was measured on 108 dependent variables. Results of binomial analyses suggested that leader self-described supportiveness is an acceptable (indeed, preferable) alternative to the LPC construct for the purpose of predicting group performance.

Sex and least preferred co-worker score effects in leadership behavior

This study investigated the subordinate liking and the leadership style of male and female managers in a simulated business activity. Sixty-seven female and 290 male undergraduate and graduate business students participated in this study. Female managers, on average, were not less well liked, nor were they more accommodative than male managers. Among managers classified as distinctly accommodative, females were not better liked than males; among managers classified as distinctly directive, females were significantly better liked than males. Under pressure to act in a directive manner, males tended to make use of their secondary leadership style as defined by F. E. Fiedler (1972), while females did not.

A Test of the Cognitive Complexity Interpretation of the Least Preferred Coworker Scale

Cognitive complexity has been offered (Mitchell, 1970; Foa, Mitchell, and Fiedler, 1971) as an alternative conceptualization of Fiedler's (Fiedler, 1967) measure of leadership (i.e., the Least Preferred Coworker Scale—LPC). In order to establish the validity of this proposition, the completed LPC scales of 287 airmen were analyzed. ANOVA tests for linear trend revealed that, contrary to current theorizing, low LPC is more closely related to cognitive complexity (as operationalized by LPC item-variability) than is high LPC.

Least Preferred Co-Worker Score as a Measure of Cognitive Complexity

To test the assertion by Foa, Mitchell, and Fiedler (1971) and by Mitchell (1970) that Fiedler's Least Preferred Co-worker scale measures cognitive complexity, questionnaires from 357 subjects were subjected to the complexity analysis of Foa, et al. (1971). The perceptions of high scorers were not more complex than those of low scorers. Self-ratings of effectiveness of performance of 88 leaders of small groups were correlated with the ratings of their 269 subordinates. Self-assessments of high scoring leaders were not more accurate than those of low scoring leaders. Results seem to question cognitive complexity as an interpretation of scores on the Least Preferred Co-worker scale. In a second analysis, the variance score of the questionnaire, another measure of cognitive complexity (Evans & Dermer, 1974), showed subjects with high variance held more complex perceptions of their least preferred co-workers and made more accurate assessments of their own performance than did subjects with low variance.

Behavioral Correlates of Least Preferred Co-Worker Score

The data referred to in this note came from a larger study of leadership behavior involving 357 undergraduate and graduate business students who participated in a simulated business planning activity (Arnett, 1978). Students who were in the bottom third of the Least Preferred Co-worker score (Fiedler, 1967) distribution were classified as low scorers; those in the top third were classified as high scorers. During the initial phase of the planning activity, students who rook the role of manager were encouraged to use their natural leadership style. Among those students who took rhe role of subordinates in the planning activity, low scorers expressed greater liking for low-scoring managers than chey did for high-scoring managers; high-scoring subordinates expressed greater liking for high-scoring managers than they did for low-scoring managers. Results were significant (p < .05). This finding is consistent with a leadership style interpretation of Least Preferred Co-worker score: subordinates prefer managers whose leadership style is similar to their own inclination toward style. The finding is also consistent with a more general attitudinal interpretation of Least Preferred Co-worker score: persons of similar attitudes are more attracted to one another than are persons with dissimilar attitudes. During a later phase of the planning activity, studenrs who took the role of manager were instructed to criticize several aspects of the work of their subordinates. Low- and high-scoring managers did not differ in the severity of the criticism which chey expressed to their subordinates. In response to chis criticism low-scoring subordinates expressed greater loss of liking for their managers than did high-scoring subordinates irrespective of whether the manager ranked low or high in Least Preferred Co-worker score. Results were ,significant (p < .02). These findings suggest that Least Preferred Co-worker score may be primarily associated with a tendency by low scorers to express greater negative evaluation of disliked behavior than do high scorers.

Attitudinal Correlates of Least Preferred Co-Worker Score

Attitudinal Correlates of Least Preferred Co-Worker Score

Construct validity of the least preferred co-worker score.

Twenty-five years of research using Fiedler's Least Preferred Co-Worker (LPC) Scale is reviewed in order to develop the nomological network defining the construct space of LPC. Four general categories of research are reviewed: (a) attitudes held by high- and low-LPC persons, (b) observable behaviors engaged in by high- and low-LPC persons, (c) reactions of other group members to high- and low-LPC persons, and (d) determinants of responses to the LPC scale. Data concerning the relationship between leader LPC and either group performance or follower satisfaction are not reviewed; such data are thought to provide little insight into the LPC construct itself, despite their importance to the contingency model. The review provides extensive documentation for Fiedler's often repeated proposition that low-LPC persons are task oriented and high-LPC persons are relationship oriented. A value-attitude interpretation of LPC is offered as a vehicle to interpret this task-interpersonal distinction. The value-attitude interpretation is explicitly compared with previous efforts to interpret LPC.

An Empirical Examination of the Esteem for Least Preferred Co-Worker (Lpc) Construct

Summary On the basis of a “value-attitude” interpretation of the esteem for least preferred co-worker (LPC) score, it was hypothesized that task-oriented (low-LPC) persons are more extreme in attitudes toward both positive and negative attitude objects than are relationship-oriented (high-LPC) persons. Attitudes of 51 male and 59 female undergraduates were measured toward four stimulus objects on 22-item semantic differential scales: self, best friend, psychology professor, and most disliked student. A LPC × Stimulus Person interaction provided significant support for the hypothesis when Total LPC scores (p < .002) or Task LPC factor scores (p < .001) were used to classify task-oriented and relationship-oriented Ss, but not when the Social LPC factor scores were used for this purpose.

Relationship between birth order and leadership style for nursery school children.

36 nursery school children were given a revised form of Fiedler's (1967) least preferred co-worker scale designated as the least preferred playmate scale. The purpose was to investigate the relationship between least preferred playmate scores and the birth order of young children. A 2 X 2 contingency table was constructed between birth order (first and later born) and leadership style (high and low). The resulting chi squares were insignificant for the total population and for males. However, for females the results were significant with a higher percentage of firstborns being task-oriented (low score) and a higher percentage of later borns being relation-oriented (high score).

Psychometric Properties of the Esteem for Least Preferred Coworker (LPC Scale)

The factor structure, alternative scoring procedures, and reliability of the LPC scale are reviewed. Discussion and specific suggestions for future use of the LPC scale center on four issues: stability and change of LPC, role of item content, use of middle-LPC respondents, and stereotypic responses to the LPC scale.

Psychometric Properties of the Esteem for Least Preferred Coworker (LPC Scale)

Psychometric Properties of the Esteem for Least Preferred Coworker (LPC Scale)

Construct validity of the Least Preferred Co-Worker score.

Construct validity of the Least Preferred Co-Worker score.

Team Structure and Success as Related to Cohesiveness and Leadership

Summary Based upon the structural characteristics associated with interacting teams, two hypotheses were tested. Hypothesis I predicted that both players and coaches of successful volleyball teams would perceive greater team cohesion. Hypothesis II, which was derived from Fiedler's (2) contingency model for leadership effectiveness, proposed that successful teams would be coached by leaders perceived to be task-oriented in style. Data analysis consisted of a 2 × 2 × 2 (respondents × team success × level of skill) multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) for the dependent variables of cohesion and leadership. Final sample was comprised of winning and losing players (n = 71) and head coaches (n = 8) within the two most highly competitive divisions of the Southern California Women's Intercollegiate Athletic Conference volleyball league. Both players and coaches responded to the same assessment instruments, Fiedler's (2) Group Atmosphere Scale and Least Preferred Co-worker Scale. Hypothesis I was confirmed....

Human Relations Training and Task-Orientation of Individuals

The problem was to investigate the effect of human relations training on individuals' relation-orientation as measured by the Least Preferred Co-worker scale. Experimental and control groups were matched on sex and teaching experience. Both groups were administered the Least Preferred Co-worker scale at the beginning and end of the experiment. The experimental group was given an 8 mo. human relations training program while the control group did not receive any training. Relation-oriented (high score) individuals became more task-oriented (low score) after human relations training than the control sample without such training. The reverse occurred for individuals who were initially task-oriented.

Stability and Consistency of Factor Structure of Least Preferred Co-Worker Scale for Different Age Groups

It was the purpose of this study to investigate the generalizability of Fiedler's (1967) least preferred co-worker scale to different age groups. The scale was administered to junior high, senior high, and college students, and the data from each age group were factor analyzed. The resulting factor structures and the factor structure from a previously reported sample of Army trainees were compared. To determine the stability of the factor structures, each of the three populations of this study were randomly split into two sub-populations, factor analyzed, and the resulting factor structures were compared. These analyses indicated that the scale yielded a single, strong, and stable factor for the junior and senior high school populations. The factor structures for the college students yielded three factors which were moderately strong and stable.

Comparison of Task- and Relation-Oriented Individuals' Ability to Perceive Viewpoints of others

Undergraduate education students (28 males, 104 females) were administered Fiedler's Least Preferred Co-worker Scale. Those who scored greater than = ½ SD from the mean were administered a modified version of Laurendeau and Pinard's Coordination of Perspectives Test, a measure of perception of viewpoints of others in respect to the arrangement of objects. That high scoring subjects perceive the viewpoints of others more accurately than low scoring subjects was supported.

An intergrative factor analysis of leadership measures and theories.

Since the instruments for measuring most of the current leadership models have never been reconciled, it is important that the relationships between them be clearly understood before assumptions of similarity are made. A sample of 103 male working students were given a battery of tests measuring leadership orientations. The tests included role preference and role pressure measures from Sweney's Response to Power Model, the California F Scale, Fiedler's Least Preferred Co-Worker Scale and Assumed Similarity Between Opposites Scale, Costley and Downey's six scales to measure McGregor's "Theory X" and "Theory Y" constructs, modified scales for the Blake and Mouton Managerial Grid, and relevant scales from the 16 PF. The results were intercorrelated and yielded 11 varimax factors based upon a Guttman criterion, as follows: Authoritarian Role Preferance, Authoritarian Role Pressure, Equalitarian Role Preferance, Equalitarian Role Pressure, Balanced Manager, People Oriented Manager, Assumed Similarity Between Opposites, Contemptuous Indulgence, Supportive Values, People Tolerance, and Organizational Tolerance. The instruments measuring authoritarianism loaded the first factor in the right direction, but most of them had their primary loadings elsewhere, suggesting greater conceptual complexity to this area than previously recognized.

Leader esteem for the least preferred co-worker score, training, and effectiveness: An experimental examination.

A laboratory experiment supported Fiedler's Contingency Model analysis of leadership training. The effect of leadership training on group performance was contingent on leadership style, that is, the leader's relation to his least preferred co-worker (LPC). Training improved the performance of high LPC leaders, but was detrimental to the performance of groups with low LPC leaders. High intelligence leaders profited more from training than low intelligence leaders, but low intelligence leaders were more productive overall. Leader LPC times Intelligence interactions indicated that follower satisfaction and interpersonal affect were highest for groups with high LPC-low intelligence leaders or low LPC-high intelligence leaders. Implications for contingency theories of leadership are discussed.