The Vroom–Yetton contingency model is a situational leadership theory of industrial and organizational psychology developed by Victor Vroom, in collaboration with Phillip Yetton (1973) and later with Jago (1988).
The situational theory argues the best style of leadership is contingent to the situation. This model suggests the selection a leadership style for group decision making.
This model is a contingency model because the leaders possible behaviors are contingent upon the interaction between the questions and the leaders assessment of the situation in developing a response to the questions. This model is important for several reasons, however, perhaps the most important reason is based on the notion that item powers the leader in ways that other models might not.
Both vroom and yettonbelieve that their model allowsleaders to have the ability to vary their styles to fit the situation.
Vroom and yetton defined five different decision procedures. Two are autocratic(A1 and A2), two are consultative (C1and C2) and one is group based (G2).
Leader makes own decision using information that is readily available to him at the time. This type is completely autocratic. AI: you solve the problem or make the decision yourself, using information available to you at the time.
Leader collects required information from followers, then makes decision alone. Problem or decision may or may not be informed to followers. Here, followers involvement is just providing information.
AII: you obtain the necessary information from your follower(s), then decide on the solution to the problem yourself. You may or may not tell your followers what the problem is in getting information from them. The role played by your followers in making the decision is clearly one of providing the necessary information to you, rather than generating or evaluating alternative solutions.
Leader shares problem to relevant followers individually and seeks their ideas and suggestions and makes decision alone. Here followers do not meet each other and the leader’s decision may or may not reflect his followers influence. So, here followers involvement is at the level of providing alternatives individually.
CI:-you share the problem with relevant followers individually, getting their ideas and suggestions without bringing them together as a group. Then, you make the decision that may or may not reflect your followers influence.
Leader shares problem to relevant followers as a group and seeks their ideas and suggestions and makes decision alone. Here followers meet each other, and through discussions they understand other alternatives. But the leader’s decision may or may not reflect his followers influence. So, here followers involvement is at the level of helping as a group in decision-making.
CII: you share the problem with your followers as a group, collectively obtaining their ideas and suggestions. Then, you make the decision that may or may not reflect your followers influence.
Leader discuss problem and situation with followers as a group and seeks their ideas and suggestions through brainstorming. Leader accepts any decision and does not try to force his idea. Decision accepted by the group is the final one
GII: you share a problem with your followers as a group. Together you generate and evaluate alternatives and attempt to reach agreement (consensus) on a solution. Your role is much like that of chairperson. You do not try to influence the group to adopt your´solution, and you are willing to accept and implement any solution that has the support of the entire group.
As any good model must have done to it, the vroom-yetton contingency model has been placed through several rigorous tests to determine the effectiveness of the model when put into practical action .
It is important to remember that given that: (1) the vroom-yetton theory is a highly rational theory. (2) the managers in the field studies can be expected to present themselves as highly rational, a strong rationality bias based on social desirability may be expected in the results.