The situational leadership model or theory states that the effectiveness of leadership lies in the rational understanding of the situation in order to provide an appropriate response. Developed by Hersey and Blanchard (1996), situational leadership essentially requires adapting to the various situations that arise due to the fact that situational contingencies determine the style of leadership that is appropriate for the situation (Hersey, Blanchard & Natemeyer, 1979; Kaif et al., 2013). Situational leadership emphasizes that leadership comprises of both a supportive and directive dimension, and that each dimension has to be appropriately applied in a given situation or moment (Kaif et al., 2013). The supportive dimension, on one hand, is relationship-oriented while the directive dimensions, on the other hand, is task-oriented. The model also stresses that leaders are required to be sensitive to their subordinates or followers’ needs, and then adapt their styles to suit the situation (Northouse, 2004). This essay discusses the situational leadership model or theory.
Hersey, Blanchard and Natemeyer (1979) hold that a leader needs to adapt his leadership style based on the maturity levels of his followers (Hersey, Blanchard & Natemeyer, 1979; Kaif et al., 2013). While task-oriented leaders define responsibilities and roles for their subordinates, instruct and create organizational patterns as well as establish the formal channels of communication, relation-oriented leaders, in contrast, show concern for their followers, make attempts to minimize emotional conflicts, pursue harmonious relationships, and encourage equal participation (Hersey & Blanchard, 1996; Kaif et al., 2013). Northouse (2004) states that there are three main competencies of a situational leader are flexibility, diagnosing as well as partnering. In addition, Northouse asserts that flexibility in leadership style is prerequisite for achieving the high levels of leadership effectiveness that different situations require (Northouse, 2004; Kaif et al., 2013).
According to Hersey, Blanchard and Natemeyer (1996), the main factors that impact an individual’s response to leadership is the amount of support as well as direction that the leader offers. Situational leadership styles are divided into four broad categories. These are directing, delegating, coaching and supporting (Hersey, Blanchard & Natemeyer, 1979). The directing or telling style is where the leader gives definitive directions on how certain roles and goals will be accomplished, and closely monitors the performance of the follower in order to give feedback on the outcomes (Kaif et al., 2013). The follower in this case lacks the necessary skills and knowledge to perform a specific task but is interested and ready to learn. It is the leader’s responsibility to explain to the follower how the task is to be accomplished. As Northouse explains, the leader’s role is to ensure that the subordinates or employees have understood what the task requires (Northouse, 2004).
Coaching or selling style is where the leader has to explain, seek for suggestions and appraise behaviors that are geared towards the direct task accomplishment. At this level, the employees or followers have acquired some skills necessary for accomplishing the task but would be frustrated due to some unfulfilled expectations which would result in disillusionment that would affect their levels of commitment (Kaif et al., 2013). It is the leader’s role to coach the follower rather than directing him on what to do since the follower has some competence but is lacking the commitment to accomplish the task assigned. While the leader’s work is to state what is right or wrong, it is morale-boosting to the follower when the leader praises him whenever he does a good job.
The supporting or participating style is where the leader and the subordinate are actively involved in decision-making. The leader’s role is to facilitate, encourage as well as provide support for the follower (Northouse, 2004). Most followers develop a sense of self-doubt at this level and often question whether they have the ability to perform the task on their own. As a result, their commitment fluctuates between insecurity and excitement (Kaif et al., 2013). As a leader, the best style is to involve the follower is making decisions. Lastly, delegating is when the employee is empowered by the leader to act independently and is provided with the necessary resources to accomplish the task. While the leader participates in setting the goal of the task, he does not interfere with the work of the follower or subordinate (Hersey, Blanchard & Natemeyer, 1979). This is due to the fact that, at this level, the follower has mastered the task, is highly motivated and committed to the task accomplishment. As Northouse explains, the follower can eventually become an independent achiever if provided with proper support (Northouse, 2004).
Conclusion
According to situational leadership, there is no single style of leadership that is suitable for all situations. As a result, a leader has to adapt his leadership style according to the demands of a given situation. Situational leadership consists of a combination of both supportive and directive dimensions. Hersey and Blanchard state that the maturity of the followers determines the style of leadership to use. In my own view, I think that besides the followers’ maturity, the complexity of the task and the levels of the followers’ commitment are important factors that should be taken into consideration.