Grady’s situation in the Headaches of New Hires case demonstrates how a leadership approach that once worked well can become less effective when the people and circumstances change. His leadership problem does not appear to come from a lack of experience or technical knowledge. Instead, the composition of his team has changed, and his leadership approach has not adjusted enough to meet the needs of newer and less experienced employees. The contingency models discussed in Chapter 2 help explain why Grady is struggling and what he could do differently.
Grady’s Leadership Style, Strengths, and Weaknesses
I would describe Grady as primarily task-oriented. He values productivity, competence, clear expectations, and employees who are able to complete their responsibilities independently. This approach appears to have worked well when his team consisted mainly of experienced employees who already understood their roles and required limited supervision.
One of Grady’s strengths is that he has experience and understands the work his department must accomplish. He also appears to have high expectations and wants the team to perform effectively. These characteristics can be valuable when employees already possess the skills and confidence needed to work independently.
However, his weaknesses become more noticeable with the newer employees. He appears impatient with their need for additional instruction and becomes frustrated when they do not perform at the same level as experienced employees. Instead of recognizing that the new team requires more coaching and development, he seems to expect them to adapt quickly to the way the previous team functioned. His frustration and short temper may also make newer employees less comfortable asking questions, which could make their performance problems worse.
I have seen a similar issue while working as a personal trainer. Some clients were comfortable with exercises and needed very little instruction, while newer clients required demonstrations, corrections, encouragement, and more explanation. Using the same coaching style with everyone would not have been effective because their experience and confidence levels were different.
Grady’s Leadership Context and Situation
Grady’s leadership context has changed significantly because of employee turnover and the addition of inexperienced workers. He is no longer managing the same experienced and cohesive team that required little direction. He now has employees with different levels of knowledge, confidence, and familiarity with the organization.
This creates a more difficult leadership situation because Grady must balance accomplishing the department’s work with developing newer employees. He is also dealing with interpersonal conflict and differences between experienced and inexperienced team members. This situation requires more than task management; it requires coaching, communication, relationship-building, and adaptation.
Applying the Five Leadership Models
Fiedler’s Contingency Model (CM) suggests that leadership effectiveness depends on the match between the leader’s style and the situation. The assigned Video similarly explains that there is not one leadership style that works best in every situation (Pav P, 2017). Grady’s task-oriented style may have fit his previous experienced team, but the situation has changed. His relationships with some newer employees are weaker, and the team needs more support and development. The problem may therefore be a mismatch between Grady’s preferred style and his current leadership environment.
The Normative Decision Model (NDM) focuses on how much participation followers should have in decision-making. Grady appears to rely heavily on his own judgment and the experience of established employees. He could benefit from greater consultation with newer employees to understand where they are struggling and what resources or training they need. Involving the team would not mean giving up authority; it could provide Grady with information he does not currently have.
Path-Goal Theory (PGT) provides the strongest explanation of Grady’s situation. This model focuses on helping followers reach their goals by providing appropriate direction, support, participation, or achievement-oriented leadership. Grady’s newer employees likely need more directive and supportive behavior because they are still learning their jobs. The Path-Goal Theory video explains that leadership should change depending on follower and task needs (Pav P, 2017). Rather than becoming frustrated when employees struggle, Grady should identify the obstacles preventing successful performance and help remove them.
Substitutes for Leadership Model (SLM) also helps explain why Grady’s previous leadership approach worked. Experienced employees may require less direct supervision because their professional knowledge, experience, and understanding of the work can substitute for some leadership behaviors. His previous team may have been able to function with limited guidance because they already knew what to do. New employees do not yet have those same substitutes, so Grady cannot assume that the same level of independence will produce the same results.
Finally, Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX) focuses on the quality of the relationship between a leader and each follower. Grady appears to have stronger relationships with experienced employees than with some of the newer hires. This creates the possibility of an in-group and out-group environment. If newer employees believe that established workers receive more trust, support, or attention, it could reduce morale and make integration into the team more difficult. Grady should intentionally build strong professional relationships with each employee rather than primarily relying on those he already knows and trusts.
Of these models, Path-Goal Theory fits the case best because Grady’s primary challenge is determining what his newer employees need in order to become successful. The problem is not simply that they are new; it is that Grady has not sufficiently adjusted his leadership behavior to help them overcome the obstacles associated with being new.
What Grady Should Do
Grady should first recognize that the new team cannot immediately function like the experienced team he had before. He should establish clear expectations while increasing coaching, feedback, and communication with new employees. He should determine where each employee is struggling and provide the appropriate amount of instruction and support.
He should also meet with employees individually to strengthen relationships and identify their development needs. At the team level, he could address conflicts directly and establish expectations for collaboration between experienced and newer employees. As the new hires gain knowledge and confidence, Grady could gradually reduce the amount of supervision and give them more autonomy.
This approach is similar to what I experienced in personal training. Newer clients often needed considerable direction at first, but as they developed skills and confidence, I could step back and allow them to take greater responsibility. Leadership should work the same way. Employees should not remain dependent on the leader, but leaders need to provide enough support for employees to reach the point where independence becomes possible.
Overall, Grady does not necessarily need to change who he is as a leader completely. He needs to become more adaptable. The contingency models demonstrate that leadership effectiveness depends on the interaction between the leader, the followers, and the situation. By providing more structure and support initially, strengthening relationships, and gradually increasing employee independence, Grady can improve both individual performance and the effectiveness of the team.
References
Nahavandi, A. (2023). The Art and Science of Leadership. In The Art and Science of Leadership. Pearson Higher Education US.
Pav P. (2017, November 17). MBA 101 leadership, path-goal theory contingency models [Video]. YouTube. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XklyhJI035I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XklyhJI035I)
Pav P. (2017, November 24). MBA 101 leadership, Fiedler’s contingency theory [Video]. YouTube. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVJpHqqGEww](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVJpHqqGEww)