President Barack Obama told reporters in Brasilia, Brazil that he has authorized the beginning of “limited military action in Libya” and stated that the U.S. is acting as “part of a broad coalition”. However, he did not specify exactly what he meant. He said that the U.N. Security Council was dedicated to protecting the Libyan people and that he would keep the American people fully informed.
President Obama said all this after the U.S., France, Britain, Canada, and Italy began attempts at taking out Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi’s air defenses. While the president repeated several times that the U.S. would not be sending in troops, he did say that the Libyan leader was given the chance to avoid their invasion. However, Moammar Gadhafi continued to attack his own people and the danger of the Libyan people increased. President Obama said he was acting on the best interest of the United States and the world.
Taking a deeper look at this decision, President Obama uses the contingency theory of leadership to address the current situation. First of all, the president’s leader-member relations are considered good. He has a high degree of subordinate trust and liking, and he also maintains many positive relationships with his followers. However, the task structure in this situation is low. Given the fact that Libya’s government raises a lot of uncertainty, President Obama and his allies’ path to accomplishment has many alternatives and is quite ambiguous. Also, task completion cannot be clearly demonstrated or verified because although Obama currently says no troops will be sent to Libya; there is a possibility that they will be needed there if a bigger crisis should occur. Lastly, President Obama has strong position power because he possesses the authority to reward or punish his followers by firing or hiring them, as well as offering raises in rank or pay.
Based on the contingency model, President Obama is most likely to receive a low LPC (least preferred coworker) score and would therefore be most successful as a task-motivated leader in this particular situation. Task-motivated leaders are concerned primarily with reaching a goal, which in this case is helping to save the oppressed Libyan people. Fortunately, lower LPC scores like Obama’s tend to be most effective in very unfavorable or very favorable situations. The current situation with Libya causes Obama to lead in a very unfavorable situation. While many followers are opinionated about whether or not the U.S. should be involved in this crisis, the contingency theory of leadership helps prove that Obama can be an effective leader in this particular setting.
Do you think Obama is really doing what is best for the United States and for the world?
Do you think Obama is really doing what is best for the United States and for the world?
Posted By: Christine Burklin
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/03/19/obama-on-libya-we-are-part-of-broad-coalition/?KEYWORDS=ceos
Since the only thing I know about this topic is from what was written in this blog, I do believe that Obama is doing the right thing for the United States and the rest of the world. And it is very evident that he uses the Contingency Theory of leadership. However, after reading this blog, it seemed to me that Obama would be a relationship motivated leader. He seems to be very concerned about the people of the United State and the rest of the world. In Christine’s post, she even stated how “he would keep the American people fully informed,” thus meaning he cares about the relationships he was with them. I do agree with Christine that Obama has good leader-member relations, low task structure, and strong position power, however I do not agree with the Contingency model that he is most successful with tasks, rather than relationships.
ReplyDeletePosted by: Genise Logston