Situational Leadership Theory - Example

Situational Leadership Theory Introduction Marking the process of organizational change is the presence of leadership, and the role it plays in directing the future of organizations. During change, organizations face uncertainty in emerging processes and the direction to take, which may be eased through by planned change and the role of leadership. The reason is that leadership makes the required plan for change and anticipates objectives, a role that may be well understood by examining leadership theory. The usefulness of theory is in showing the characteristics of individuals in positions of leadership and their traits that makes their ideas successful. This paper examines the situational leadership theory as a change management theory that also highlights specific leadership traits. The paper progresses in four parts, namely understanding situational leadership theory, its strengths, weaknesses, and finally a conclusion on the lessons learnt. The analysis uses instances from organizations to give directions on how situational leadership theory works, and to provide illustrations. Understanding Situational Leadership Theory Situational leadership theory evolved from a task oriented versus people-oriented leadership continuum representing the extent to which the leader focuses on the required task versus focusing on the relationship of the followers. The theory comes from the work of Hersey and Blanchard (1969; 1979; 1996) defining the leader as a personal that fit the maturity of the followers in their actions; for instance, the leader identified tasks that define roles for the followers; they give definite instructions, create organizational patterns, and establish formal communication channels. These descriptions represented a task oriented leader in the leadership continuum. The people oriented leader in contrast shows concern for the welfare of others, attempts to reduce emotional conflicts, seeks to create harmony in relationships, and regulates equal participation. Situational leadership theory acknowledges that leaders can be either task or people oriented, which makes the theory either a behavioral or contingency theory. Whether task or people oriented, the defining characteristic about situational leadership theory is that it proposed effective leadership requires a rational understanding of the situation and an appropriate response (Grint 2011). Situational leadership is not about the ability of the leader to pull a large group of followers as found in charismatic leadership. Instead, it is about persuading following based on the situation and finding an appropriate response that clearly responds to the underlying challenges. The capability of the leader to combine both the situation and the followers creates the possibility of classifying the theory as showing elements of behavioral and contingency theories. For instance, situational leadership theory shows similar traits to those found in approaches such as the autocratic and democratic leadership styles, the Michigan production-oriented versus employee-oriented approaches, and the directive versus participative approach that fall within the behavioral perspective (Bass 2008). On the other hand, it reflects contingency perspective characteristics as found within other theories such as contingency theory, path-goal theory, and normative contingency theory (Glynn & DeJordy 2010). Admitting to both behavioral and contingency-based perspective admits to both task and relation-oriented approaches to theory, which then become dependent perspectives of situational leadership theory rather as exclusive attributes. Situational leadership theory shows a mix of task and people-oriented traits. The curvilinear relationship of the theory as explained by Graeff (1997) is part of the original propositions of the theory made by Hersey and Blanchard (1977), who argued that the theory initiates and considers other variables rather than working within a simple linear relationship. The theory therefore accepts a curvilinear relationship between task and people as well as relationship behavior and maturity. Agreeably, as later explained under the weaknesses, the relationship between task behavior and maturity forms one of the criticisms against situational leadership theory, but it also forms a basic argument in how the theory functions. In their paper on the application of situational leadership theory in health care organizations, Rabarison, Ingram, and Holsinger (2013) support the notion that the applicability of the theory is in how leaders can match their leadership styles to the needs of the agency personnel. The theory suggests that leaders need to adapt their readiness to lead, skills set, and developmental level to that of their team, which requires flexibility in assessing the situation and adapting a leadership style that fits the needs of the followers. This requires the leader to clearly understand the needs of the team members and concertedly work toward meeting them, which brings in the application of the two categories of task behavior and relational behavior. Within task behavior the leader engages the team in clearly identifying duties and responsibilities of the group and individuals, within the group. In the relational behavior, the leader engages the members in communication either in a two-way setting for individuals and multi-way for the group. A situational leader thus finds a way to establish a balance between guidance and direction or task behavior, socio-emotional support or relational behavior, and the readiness level of followers as exhibited in specific tasks (Rabarison et al. 2013). Readiness level is reflective of how well the follower both at group and individual level demonstrates the ability and willingness to accomplish a specific task based on their knowledge, experience, and skills. The individual or group also shows confidence, commitment and motivation toward the activity. Situational leadership may be classified into four categories, namely, directing (style 1), coaching (style 2), participating (style 3), and delegating (style 4) (Rabarison et al. 2013). The first style is characteristic of high task leadership with low relationship behaviors, while the second style focuses on high task with high relationship behaviors. The third style reflects high relationship with low task, while the fourth style reflects low relationship with low task behaviors. The following figure presents the four styles of leadership under situational leadership theory. Leadership Styles in Situational Leadership (developed from Rabarison et al. 2013) High task Low task High relationship Coaching (explaining and persuading) Participating (encouraging, supporting, problem solving) Low relationship Directing (guiding and telling) Delegating (mentoring and observing) Attributes of Leadership Style in Relationship and Task Behaviors (adopted from Rabarison et al. 2013) The above figure from Rabarison et al. (2013) shows the interactions between the four styles based on a task behavior and relationship behavior perspectives, indicating that within each style, a leader will pursue task or people-based attributes. For instance, an S1 leader will show high task behavior and lower relationship behavior tendencies. Reflected within the styles is follower readiness that also reflects low to high behavior as the leadership style has to reflect the readiness level classified in four areas. The first is Readiness 1 (R1) referring to people that may not have the right knowledge or skills to perform a task and are often unwilling to finish the task. Readiness 2 (R2) refers to people that are willing to finish the tasks but may not have the knowledge and skills required. Readiness 3 (R3) refers to people with the right skills and knowledge for a task but lack the willingness to take the responsibility or the willingness to complete the task. Readiness 4 (R4) represents persons with the willingness and capability to take the responsibility and complete the task. These readiness levels also reflect the role of leadership in terms of style types. For instance, members that undergo mentoring in style 4, are more willing, able and confident to handle the position as they are personally directed. Style 3 also promote ability, although not necessarily willing and secure members, while style 2 and 1 serve to promote what the leader wants thus undermining the skills and needs of the members as exhibited in the figure below. Follower Readiness (adopted from Rabarison et al. 2013) The above figure shows that while the leader pursuant to task or relationship behavior is important to the outcomes of the activity, the followers also have a critical role based on their willingness and readiness to perform the task. Situational leadership theory is therefore a curvilinear approach that recognizes different variables influence outcomes rather than a simple linear process that would suggest a certain leadership attribute and ascertained outcome. The development of situational leadership theory has therefore been within a continuum that allows the leader, task, and people to have meaning to the process and the outcome, rather than one taking the center position. The leader embraces the role of balancing the task and the people as appropriate, and responding to arising situation with the appropriate solutions. The leader need also recognize that he or she works with a team with different capabilities, motivation, confidence, and commitment to the task. Within this conceptualization, situational leadership theory has different strengths and weaknesses as explored subsequently. Strengths of Situational Leadership Theory The first strength of the situational leadership theory is found within the approach itself, in which it is a flexible strategy that encourages the leader to identify and weigh the different variables in their workplace and then choose the best approach that fits their goals and situation (McCleskey 2014). The flexibility of the strategy allows for the choice of the four leadership styles, namely, teaching, training, coaching, and mentoring. The flexibility associated with situational leadership makes the approach ideal for organizations seeking to develop people and workgroups, and in turn bringing out the best in the team. Each of the leadership styles presents a benefit to the organization. Appreciatively, flexibility means that the leader assesses the needs of the organization or its people and decides on the style that best fits the circumstances. The chosen style will then present specific benefits. For instance, delegation leadership style means that the leader is working with a people that are self-driven, motivate, willing, able, and confident in accomplishing the task at hand. For this reason, the manager can easily allow the team to take the responsibility of the assigned task with minimal supervision thus allowing for more growth and independence. In illustration, John Terrill of DGI International Technical Services exemplifies the effective use of delegating. When Terrill came into DGI he was given the task of managing its technical services division, which had 20 engineers that were highly paid, and best educated, but least productive (AllPress, Varaei, & Sherchand 2013). His role was to change the situation. He called a meeting with the engineers, showing great concern for their wellbeing, and asked them what the problem was, to which they responded that they felt they wasted too much time writing reports that no one read, and did not perceive report writing as part of their job description. Terrill solution was that he would stay away from the engineers allowing them to do their job, and he would try to keep the management away. He further instructed that they bring the technical reports to him rather than the head office, which no one showed an interest in reading. He later took the reports to the President’s office making him understand that the time of engineers was spent writing reports that no one would read, and suggesting that instead a small monthly report from him would be sufficient. The leadership style used by Terrill may not be directly delegating, but it shows how leaders within this group consider the people, promote a participatory and democratic outlook to work, and involve the team in the leadership process. Delegation style is about empowering followers to work on their tasks including in making decisions about the task. In the case of Terrill, as a manager he gave the engineers the autonomy to complete their tasks without the interference of the management, and came up with a way to satisfy the requirements of the management without interfering with the needs of the engineers. The approach involves mentoring and observing, without interference. Hersey and Blanchard (1988) determined that mature followers with a high level of readiness with find this leadership style beneficial as it acts as a motivator to give their best. For instance, the DGI engineers would be able to now focus on accomplishing their tasks and improving the productivity of the division rather than working on reports that took time without adding value. Delegation is also about empowering the team by giving the members the authority to make decisions that affect the task. Members tend to feel that the manager trusts them and thus work on fostering better teamwork. Delegation thus promotes higher achievement and productivity. To appreciate under the flexibility of situational leadership theory is that it denotes there is no single leadership style, meaning it does not subscribe to a leadership style in which one model fits all. Instead, a leader needs to find the right fit for given situations. Situational leadership style thus recognizes that industries and organizations are different, and teams within are different and will thus react to situations differently. A leader thus that uses situational leadership theory is one that appreciates the unique nature of how the world and organizations function. The second strength of situational leadership theory is understanding team readiness level and needs, and establishing an environment that the members will find comfortable and effective. For example, some members of a team may appreciate a leadership style where they receive directions such as they would receive from a directing manager and a supportive leader. Hawkinson (2016) gives an example of how situational leadership theory offers an opportunity for facilitating team readiness level and responding to their needs using the Miyazu City School District as an example of an organization that has effectively used the approach in the education sector. The author noted that situational leadership theory represented a means for understanding the social dynamics involved in how teachers conduct their classes and how their ideas reflect the behaviors of teams of teachers within and outside the class. In applying the theory to team teaching showed how the four styles including delegating, supporting, coaching, and directing played a part in promoting a more balanced and equal approach to teaching in which every teacher has role. The approach brought about a balanced teaching in which teams supported and shared each other’s workload without one person having much work and another having less responsibility. A mix of the four styles of leadership meant that teachers could identify when it was more appropriate to build the skills of each other and thus promote support, when to delegate, and when to coach or direct. Moreover, it was apparent in the teaching environment that team teachers were able to identify different kinds of teaching environment that they could engage in and analyze the most suitable leadership style based on the learning goals. The illustration shows that situational leadership creates an opportunity in which members build on the experiences of each other and play a complementary role thus allowing the entire system to benefit more from change management rather than when one form of leadership is used. The team members further become more aware of their traits, skills, and the responsibilities they are able to take and complete successfully, and then learn skills that would enable them take on more responsibilities. The strength noted in situational teams is that they become aware of their environment and support each other rather than promoting culture individuality. Weaknesses of Situational Leadership Theory While situational leadership theory has notable strengths that contribute different benefits to organizations using the approach, it also has limitations that managers need to recognize and address when using the theory. Among the weaknesses as noted by Wile (2016) is problem of consistency. Graeff (1997) presents the weaknesses of situational leadership theory based on the evolution of the theory, an element that is useful in understanding how over the course of application the theory has developed with authors and practitioners eliminating identified shortcomings. The author mentions the challenge of consistency as one of those that have continued to affect the theory from its inception. The weakness is that situational leadership theory creates an opportunity in which followers remain unsure of what to expect from their leadership on a daily basis thus creating uncertainty and fear. As Graeff (1997) notes the inconsistencies within the theory include its different contradictory statements such as on the follower involvement. The challenge stems from ambiguity in the model and lack of theoretical explanations or justifications in the development of the components. The ambiguity continues in what the author mentions as multiple versions situational leadership that have developed as the research trends continue in the field. The shortcomings of the theory continue in to the need for high judgment among the leadership in terms of task knowledge and human assessment. Appreciatively, not all leaders hold the vision, character, perception, strength, and tenacity required in every situation, and may thus misdiagnose the ability and willingness of followers to complete a task or can disrupt the progress of a team and undermine follower self-esteem. If the leader either underestimates or overestimates, any of the two can be detrimental to goal achievement and lead to failure of the project. Therefore, it remains important for leaders to be well educated in cognitive and psychological development, be alert to differences among people, and understand how people perceive change and their willingness to pursue the change. The use of situational leadership theory requires managers to appreciate the different elements in their environment. The leader thus needs to be fully aware of follower perception of their leadership style, otherwise they at a risk of losing credibility and trustworthiness with the employees (Wile 2016). For example, as Terrill worked toward providing an environment in which the engineers felt they had the opportunity needed to work on their projects and the management achieved its goals, it was important to ascertain a balance in which the followers do not take absolute control and forgo the role of the management. Retaining credibility and control means understanding the employees and their needs, and their perception of the leader, otherwise the leader risks losing their position as a credible leader. Conclusion The purpose of this analysis was to examine situational leadership theory as a model in change management that explains the role of leaders in achieving the objectives of an organization. The analysis highlights the usefulness of situational leadership theory in providing leaders with an approach that allows for flexibility in leadership based on four approaches including delegating, supporting, coaching and directing. The choice of the leadership style comes from the leaders’ assessment to assess the situation and identify the best approach to fulfill the needs of that situation. Noted in the analysis was however that the assessment of the situation works in tandem with the assessment of the needs of the people. The theory thus pursues as task-based and people-based orientation to action that recognizes the importance of the task as an instrumental of achieving change and the role of people as facilitators of change. The development of the situational leadership theory evolves from the behavioral and contingency perspectives based on the recognition of the curvilinear approach that uses task and people orientation together rather than in a linear application. Notably, the use of both tasks and people behaviors has been instrumental in underscoring the strengths of the theory. For instance, recognition of people ensures that the leader considers readiness and willingness of followers to undertake the responsibilities associated with a task and completes it. Therefore, the leader does not only consider the goals that they need to achieve in a certain task, but whether they have the team to bring the goals into actualization. Although as noted the theory has weaknesses specifically associated with consistency and thus related ambiguity and confusion as well as challenge of follower perception, it emerges in the analysis as a theory for the 21st century organization because of its appreciation of the changing business environment. Furthermore, the theory remains useful based on its diversity of application. As shown in the analysis, it can be used in technical organizations such as engineering and remain relevant to other fields such as teaching. The usefulness of the theory is thus a reflection of how well the leader is able to articulate the different styles of leadership and chose the one most relevant based on the task and the people involved in completing the task. The leader need to be a person capable of recognizing the qualification of the group and willing to develop with mentoring and direction, but this will depend on the task. In conclusion, the situational leadership theory shows usefulness for the modern organization and remains relevant to application today in different types of organizations and industries, although it remains advisable for leaders to work toward eliminating the identified shortcomings. References Allpress, A, Varaei, A, and Sherchand, M. 2013, May 20. Chapter 10: Leading in Organizations. Prezi Bass, BM 2008. The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications (4th ed). Free Press, New York. Glynn, MA and DeJordy, R 2010. Leadership through an organizational behavior lens: A look at the last half century of research. In N. Nohria & R. Khurana (Eds), Handbook of leadership and practice. Havard Business Press, Boston, MA. Graeff, CL 1997. Evolution of situational leadership theory: A critical review. The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 153-170. DOI 10.1016/S1048-9843(97)90014-X Grint, K 2011. A history of leadership. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson, & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds), The SAGE handbook of leadership. Sage, Thousand Oaks, Ca. Hawkinson, E. 2016. Team teaching and situational leadership theory: Adapting and combining frameworks for Japanese English education. U.S. China Education Review A. vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 183-189. DOI: 10.17265/2161-623X/2016.03.004 Hersey, P & Blanchard, KH 1969. Life cycle theory of leadership. Training & Development Journal, vol. 23, no. 5, pp.26. Hersey, P & Blanchard, KH 1979. Life cycle theory of leadership. Training & Development Journal, vol. 33, no. 6, pp.94. Hersey, P & Blanchard, KH 1980. The management of change. Training & Development Journal, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 80. Hersey, P & Blanchard, KH 1981. So you want to know your leadership style? Training & Development Journal, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 34. Hersey, P & Blanchard, KH 1996. Great ideas revisited: Revisiting the life - cycle theory of leadership. Training & Development Journal, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 42. McCleskey, JA 2014. Situational, transformational, and transactional leadership and leadership development. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, vol. 5, no. 4. Robarison, K, Ingram, RC, & Holsinger, JW 2013. Application of situational leadership to the national voluntary public health accreditation process. Front. Public Health. DOI 10.3389/fpbh.2013.00026 Wile, E. 2016. Negatives of a situational leadership style. Houston Chronicle. Read More