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