Multiple-Linkage Model

The objective is to analyze the multiple-linkage model and its influence on performance.

I have learned thus far that he multiple-linkage model is offered as a replacement for the earlier contingency theories. Specifically, this model replaced "broadly defined behaviors... with specific types of leader behaviors" and identifies mediating variables including leader behaviors, explanatory mediating variables, outcome variables, and situational variables(Yukl & Gardner, 2020, p. 61 - below).

• We had to read Managerial Leadership: A Review of Theory and Research -Get PDF here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237935280_Managerial_Leadership_A_Review_of_Theory_and_Research
• As one will see in Yukl's (1989) article, "The multiple linkage model was based on finding in prior research; as yet, little new research has been conducted to test and refine the model" (p. 268). Further, the text states "Several research methods have been used to test the multiple-linkage model, but no studies have directly tested all aspects of the model"(Yukl & Gardner, 2020, p. 65 - below).

1. What peer-reviewed research is there, dated after 1989 that supports or negates Yukl's multiple-linkage model? Please explain how it supports or negates Yukl's multiple-linkage model...
2. After providing an explanation of the model, its intended use, and the research found: how would you examine its benefit (if any) compared to the other contingency theories discussed this week? Please explain.

situation accurately and select appropriate behaviors, and laboratory experiments with observation of leaders in team simulations conducted over a period of several weeks. Other methods for measuring leadership behavior (e.g., observation, diaries, interviews, and critical incidents) should be used more often, and ineffective forms of leadership behavior should be examined in addition to effective forms of behavior (e.g., Amabile et al., 2004; Yukl & Van Fleet, 1982). Other improvements in the research are also desirable, and some deal with limitations already described for the behavior research in Chapter 20. Most studies only examined how much leaders used one or two broad behaviors such as task-oriented and relations-oriented behaviors, and the studies only examined simple linear relationships between the broad behaviors and outcomes. To understand adaptive leadership, it is also necessary to examine how specific types of leader behavior affect outcomes in different situations (Uhl-Bien & Arena, 2018; Yukl & Mahsud, 2010). It is essential to consider the optimal amount of behavior in each situation and the optimal timing of the behavior. Researchers should also pay more attention to the overall pattern of leadership behavior rather than examining each type of behavior separately. Effective leaders use behaviors that are complementary and mutually enhancing (Kaplan, 1988). More than one pattern of specific behaviors may be equally effective in the same situation. It is essential for leaders to find a good balance between competing objectives, such as controlling versus empowering, strategic versus onerational nhiertives. and concern for neonle versus concern for task performance (Honiihero. 650Task commitment: members strive to attain a high level of performance and show a high degree of personal commitment to unit task objectives. Ability and role clarity: members understand their individual job responsibilities, know what to do, and have the skills to do it. Organization of the work: effective performance strategies are used and the work is organized to ensure efficient utilization of personnel, equipment, and facilities. Cooperation and mutual trust: members trust each other, share information and ideas, help each other, and identify with the work unit. Resources and support: the group has budgetary funds, tools, equipment, supplies, personnel, facilities, information, and assistance needed to do the work. External coordination: the activities of the group are synchronized with the interdependent activities in other subunits and organizations (e.g., suppliers, clients). The mediating variables interact with each other to determine the effectiveness of a group or organizational subunit. A serious deficiency in one mediating variable may lower group effectiveness, even though the other mediating variables are not deficient. The greater the relative importance of a particular mediating variable, the more group performance will be reduced by a deficiency in this variable. The relative importance of the mediating variables depends on the type of work unit and other aspects of the situation. 61Evaluation of Research on the Contingency Theories Review articles and meta-analyses describe relevant research on path-goal theory (Ayman & Lauritsen, 2018; Osborn et al., 2014; Podsakoff, Mackenzie, Ahearne, & Bommer, 1995; Wofford & Liska, 1993), and leadership substitutes theory (Ayman & Lauritsen, 2018; Dionne, Yammarino, Atwater, & James, 2002; Osborn et al., 2014; Podsakoff, Mackenzie, & Bommer, 1996a; Podsakoff et al., 1993; Podsakoff et al., 1995; Wu, 2010; Xu, Zhong, & Wang, 2013). Several research methods have been used to test the multiple-linkage model, but no studies have directly tested all aspects of the model (e.g., Peterson & Van Fleet, 2008; Yukl & Van Fleet, 1982; Yukl, 2012). The evidence supporting contingency theories of effective leadership is limited, and the findings are difficult to interpret. The complexity, ambiguity, and conceptual problems in the theories make them more difficult to test. The lack of strong and consistent results is probably due in part to overreliance on weak research methods, such as survey studies with convenience samples and data for all variables obtained from the same respondents (Dionne et al., 2002; Podsakoff et al., 1996a; Schriesheim & Kerr, 1974; Wu, 2010; Xu et al., 2013; Yukl, 1989; Yukl, 2012). It is desirable to make more use of other relevant research methods, including comparative field studies of effective and ineffective leaders in different situations, longitudinal studies of how well leaders adapt to changes in the situation over time, field experiments with leaders trained to diagnose the 65Multiple-Linkage Model The multiple-linkage model (Yukl, 1981, 1989) describes how specific types of leader behavior and situational variables jointly influence performance by individual subordinates and by the leader's work unit. The broadly defined behaviors used in most earlier contingency theories were replaced with specific types of leader behaviors. The model includes a larger number of mediating variables that explain the effects of leader behaviors and situational variables, and there is more explicit description of group-level processes. However, the model does not deal directly with organizational processes involving adaptive leadership by top management to threats and opportunities in the external environment of the organization, and that subject is discussed in Chapter 120. The four types of variables in the multiple-linkage model include leader behaviors, explanatory mediating variables, outcome variables, and situational variables. Mediating Variables The mediating variables in the model are based on earlier research and theory on determinants of individual and group performance (e.g., Hackman, Brousseau, & Weiss, 1976; Likert, 1967; McGrath, 1984; Porter & Lawler, 1968), but they are defined primarily at the group level, as with theories of team leadership (see Chapter 110). 61