Construct validity of the Least Preferred Co-Worker score.

Abstract

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.

Gender and leadership style: A meta-analysis.

“…Because the methodological issues that have been raised remain largely unresolved by leadership researchers, we did not attempt to settle these issues in order to base our meta-analytic generalizations on only those measures that we or other investigators might regard as most valid. Instead, we included all measures that researchers regarded as assessing task-oriented and interpersonally oriented styles or 3 Although the Least Preferred Co-Worker Scale has been given a variety of interpretations, the view that Iow-LPC people are task oriented and high-LPC people are relationship oriented seems to be the most widely accepted of these interpretations (see Rice, 1978).4 Although Bass (1981 ) distinguished between (a) democratic versus autocratic leadership and (b) participative versus directive leadership, we treated these measures as a single class because we found this distinction difficult to maintain when categorizing measures. We refer to this single class as democratic versus autocratic style.…”

Leadership experience and leadership performance.

“…This can be a subordinate, a peer, or a supervisor. The scale is illustrated below: been supported by two separate meta-analyses (Strube & Garcia, 1981;Peters, Hartke, & Pohlmann, 1985) as well as numerous other studies (e.g., Fiedler, 1971;Rice, 1978aRice, , 1978b. Since experience tends to result in better leader-member relations and high taskstructure, we expect that a gain in experience will have the same effect as an increase in situational control.…”

Liderazgo gerencial : una revisión de la teoría y la investigación

“…Fiedler considera el LPC como un indicador de la jerarquía de motivos del líder con las necesidades de afiliación siendo dominantes para el líderes altos en LPC y las necesidades de logro en la tarea siendo dominantes en el caso de los líderes bajos en LPC. Rice (1978) sugirió que la investigación delLPC favorece una interpretación en términos de actitud-valorde manera que los líderes bajos en LPC valoran el éxito en la tarea mientras los líderes altos en LPCvaloran eléxito interpersonal. Un gran número deestudios ha sido conducido para probar el modelo.…”