SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP There is currently a consensus among social and behavioural scientists that leadership skills and competencies are not inherited from one’s ancestors, that they do not magically appear when a person is assigned to a leadership position, and that the same set of competencies will not provide adequate leadership in every situation. Different situations require different approaches to leadership. The following provides what we consider to be one of the major and dominate theories that explores the dynamics of leadership styles and adaptation. The Theory of Situational Leadership was developed by Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard (1977) where they concluded that they can classify most of the activities of leaders into two distinct behavioural dimensions: initiation of structure (task actions) and considerations of group members (relationships of maintenance actions). They defined task behaviour as the extent to which a leader engages in one-way communication by explaining what each follower is to do as well as when, where, and how tasks are to be accomplished. They define relationship behaviour as the extent to which a leader engages in tow-way communication by providing emotional support and facilitating behaviours. The research has discovered that some people are strong in one area and neglect the other, others are well balanced and some neglect both leadership dimensions. It is however important to recognize the equal importance of all roles within each dimension to optimal ream or group management. FOUR LEADERSHIP STYLES Ken Blanchard's situational leadership model outlines 4 different leadership styles that can be adopted depending on the situation or task. (High) Low Willingness High Competence Low Willingness Low Competence SUPPORTIVE BEHAVIOUR S3 - Supporting S2 - Coaching S4 - Delegating S1 - Directing High Willingness High Competence (Low) High Willingness Low Competence DIRECTIVE BEHAVIOUR (High) Maturity & Situational Leadership Another important definition for understanding the situational leadership model is that of maturity. They define maturity as the capacity to set high but attainable goals (achievement motivation), willingness and ability to take responsibility, and the education or experience of the group members. Maturity is determined only in relation to a specific task performed. On one task, a member may have high maturity; on another, low maturity. Mature Immature HIGH MODERATE MODERATE LOW M4 M3 M2 M1 Maturity of Follower(s) Competence versus Commitment (Skill vs Will) 1. The leader assesses the development level of the “follower” with regard to completing a specific task. The leader assesses the follower’s level of competence and commitment in that situation and correctly matches their leadership style with the development level of the follower. An effective leader is able to move fluidly between each leadership style, recognising that a follower will have different development levels for different tasks. (D1) Low Competence, Low Commitment – low skill level i.e. no training, understanding of how to complete the task, previous experience and lacks motivation or confidence to complete the task. (D2) Low Competence, High Commitment – has desire or incentive to complete task but low skill level. (D3) High Competence, Low/Variable Commitment – can competently complete task but lacks confidence or perceives task as high risk (D4) High Competence, High Commitment – experienced and motivated to complete task independently. Leadership (S) Style (S1) Directing – one-way communication where leader tells and shows follower what to do, and closely supervises them doing it. (S2) Coaching – two-way communication where leader directs what needs to be done, seeking ideas and suggestions from the follower. (S3) Supporting – leader focuses on motivation and confidence issues and leaves task decisions to follower. (S4) Delegating – leader provides high-level direction only and further involvement and decision making is controlled by follower. Situational Leadership Continued The essence of Hersey and Blanchard’s theory is that when group members have low maturity in terms of accomplishing a specific task, the leader should engage in high-task and low-relationship behaviours (see diagram on page one). When members are moderately mature, the leader moves to high-task and highrelationship behaviours and then to high-relationship and low-task behaviours. When group members are highly mature in terms of accomplishing a specific task, then low-task and low-relationship behaviours are needed. Hersey and Blanchard refer to high-task-low-relationship leadership as directing (S1), because it is characterized by one-way communication in which the leader defines the roles of the group members and tells them how, when, and where to do various tasks. As the members’ experience and understanding of the task goes up, so does their task maturity. High-task-high-relationship leadership behaviour is referred to as coaching (S2), because while providing clear direction as to role responsibilities, the leader also attempts, through two-way communication and social-emotional support, to get the group members to psychologically buy into decisions that have to be made. As group members’ commitment to the task increases, so does their maturity. Low-task-high-relationship leadership behaviour is referred to as supporting (S3), because the leader and group members share in decision making through two-way communication and considerable facilitating behaviour from the leader, since the group members have the ability and knowledge to complete the task. Finally, low-task-low-relationship behaviour is referred to as delegating (S4), because the leader allows group members considerable autonomy in completing the task, since they are both willing and able to take responsibility for directing their own task behaviour. In closing, not all workers are ready and willing to step into the role as “leader.” They vary in their abilities and in their willingness to do jobs. Looking at personnel records will tell you something about the worker’s skill level. Taking time to talk with employees about their hopes, interests, and past experiences will help you decide who to delegate to and/or what other strategy you may need to take. Unfortunately, employees who are both able and willing are not always available. You can’t give the job to the same worker all the time. This means you must make as effort to increase the willingness and skills of your workers. If you want to use the full capabilities of people, job enlargement or job enrichment should be a concern for all managers. It will help employee morale and make for more able workers. You should also try to increase workers’ willingness to accept task. One good way is to find out what they like to do, and what they are good at - then delegate that. Another way is to let them help set goals. Having ownership of goals will increase their willingness to work towards reaching the goal. Copyright © 2004, Peak Experiences - The Learning Company, All Rights Reserved