Coach Knight's Contingency Model Paper
Fiedler 's Contingency Model Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the leadership styles of Coach Krzyzewski and Coach Knight using Fiedler’s Contingency Model. The author will also state a personal opinion regarding whether the coaches were effective based on this theory. Coach K
“Coach K was named ‘America’s Best Coach’ in 2001 by Time magazine and CNN, and earned nearly every award imaginable” (Snook, Perlow, & Delacey, 2005, p. 1). Mr. Fiedler would probably disagree. Coach K has been described as a family man “first and foremost, being a coach comes in third after teaching” (The Sporting News, 1992). Based …show more content…
1). Coach Knight in his own words “A coach has to be a tyrant, a benign benefactor, a parent. There’s a lot about coaching that’s like an actor. You’ve got to make yourself into different things at different times. Sometimes what you see is not really what you are” (Snook et al., 2005, p. 4). Fiedler would be pleased with Coach Knight’s self-assessment. “Fiedler suggested that leaders may act differently in different situations” ("Fiedler’s Contingency Theory" 2013, p. 1). This author would assess Coach Knight’s behavior and assume he was not relationship oriented. By throwing chairs, kicking objects, yelling and grabbing players, he appears to have an anger management problem. He was an extremely successful coach because he was task oriented. He was rigid with his discipline and had no problem sitting players on the bench, including his own son. Coach Knight would be expected, per his behavior, to describe his least liked co-worker in terms that were negative. Coach Knight would disagree. He was not concerned with being liked but he had great passion for basketball and each one of the young men he coached. His desire was to make each player the best they could be. Fiedler’s Model would assess Coach Knight as a strong leader in unfavorable conditions. He leads with power and authority.
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the leadership styles of Coach Krzyzewski and Coach Knight using Fiedler’s Contingency Model. The author will also state a personal opinion regarding whether the coaches were effective based on this theory. Coach K
“Coach K was named ‘America’s Best Coach’ in 2001 by Time magazine and CNN, and earned nearly every award imaginable” (Snook, Perlow, & Delacey, 2005, p. 1). Mr. Fiedler would probably disagree. Coach K has been described as a family man “first and foremost, being a coach comes in third after teaching” (The Sporting News, 1992). Based …show more content…
1). Coach Knight in his own words “A coach has to be a tyrant, a benign benefactor, a parent. There’s a lot about coaching that’s like an actor. You’ve got to make yourself into different things at different times. Sometimes what you see is not really what you are” (Snook et al., 2005, p. 4). Fiedler would be pleased with Coach Knight’s self-assessment. “Fiedler suggested that leaders may act differently in different situations” ("Fiedler’s Contingency Theory" 2013, p. 1). This author would assess Coach Knight’s behavior and assume he was not relationship oriented. By throwing chairs, kicking objects, yelling and grabbing players, he appears to have an anger management problem. He was an extremely successful coach because he was task oriented. He was rigid with his discipline and had no problem sitting players on the bench, including his own son. Coach Knight would be expected, per his behavior, to describe his least liked co-worker in terms that were negative. Coach Knight would disagree. He was not concerned with being liked but he had great passion for basketball and each one of the young men he coached. His desire was to make each player the best they could be. Fiedler’s Model would assess Coach Knight as a strong leader in unfavorable conditions. He leads with power and authority.