Content area
Hersey and Blanchard's (1982) model for situational leadership rests in the following basic assumptions: 1. There is no single all-purpose leadership style. 2. The leader's behavior has 2 independent main components: directive behavior and supportive behavior. The 4 quadrants with the different combinations represent the 4 different leadership styles: directing, coaching, supporting and delegating. In Hersey and Blanchard's model, the follower's maturity is the basis for the choice of leadership style. A modification of Hersey and Blanchard's model is presented. The alternative model follows a different procedure to determine the leadership style based on the follower's qualifications. Factors useful in evaluating the follower's ability to direct his work when performing a certain task include: knowledge of the task, skill in performing the task, ability to plan the work, and ability to meet deadlines.
Background
Hersey and Blanchard's (1982) model for situational leadership has gained widespread acceptance. It has been used in management training, particularly on Blanchard's (1985) version. On the other hand, it has also been subject to criticism, for instance by Nicholls (1985, 1986). The Norwegian Institute of Management (NILA) has used this method in their training, and also found some weaknesses in it. I was therefore asked to develop the following alternative model.
Hersey and Blanchard's model rests on the following basic assumptions:
* There is no single all-purpose leadership style. What is appropriate in each case depends on the follower (or subordinate) and the task to be performed.
* The leader's behaviour has two independent main components: directive behaviour and supportive behaviour.
Directive behaviour is characterized by the leader giving detailed rules and instructions and monitoring closely that they are followed. The leader decides what is to be done, how it is to be done and when.
Supportive behaviour is characterized by the leader listening, communicating, recognizing and encouraging. The behaviour rests on mutual respect and trust, understanding and openness, and close human contact and warmth.
Different degrees of directive and supportive behaviour, as well as combinations, can be depicted as shown in Figure 1. (Figure 1 omitted) The plotted example illustrates high directive and low supportive behaviour.
The four quadrants with their different combinations thus represent the four different leadership styles:
(1) Directing.
(2) Coaching.
(3) Supporting.
(4) Delegating.
It may be appropriate to use different styles with the same follower when she/he is performing different tasks. This is because the follower's qualifications may be more appropriate for some tasks than others. In Hersey and Blanchard's model the follower's maturity is the basis for the choice of leadership style.
Modified model
The basic concept, described above, is also the basis for the following model. However, we follow a different procedure from Hersey and Blanchard to determine the leadership style based on the follower's qualifications.
We want to give the followers as much direction and as much support as they need -- but no more than they need. We wish them to be as self-directed as possible, and as independent of support from the leader as possible. The degree of the leader's directive behaviour is then determined by the follower's ability to direct his own work, while the degree of supportive behaviour is determined by the follower's ability to function without support. This fundamental concept is illustrated in Figure 2. which is best read from the bottom upwards. (Figure 2 omitted) The greater the ability the follower has to direct himself, the lower his need for direction will be. This will determine the division of direction between follower and leader, and thereby the degree of the leader's directive behaviour.
How can we determine the follower's ability to direct his own work, and his ability to function without support?
It is obvious that this determination must be a matter of judgement. But we consider the following factors useful in evaluating the follower's ability to direct his work when performing a certain task, namely: knowledge of the task; skill in performing the task; ability to plan the work; and ability to meet deadlines.
In addition to these four general factors, certain tasks may require the inclusion of additional factors. The factors we evaluate largely concern what the follower can do. We have therefore chosen the word "can" as a simplified catchword for the follower's ability to self-direct a task.
Concerning the follower's ability to perform a task without support from the leader, we have similarly identified four factors as being relevant: motivation for the task; self-confidence to master the task; endurance; and stability. Again some tasks may require additional factors. The listed factors are covered by the keyword "will".
Choice of leadership style
Based on the previous section, the form shown in Figure 3 could be used to determine appropriate leadership style when a follower is performing a certain task. (Figure 3 omitted) Figure 4 shows a simplified version, which may prove sufficient after some experience in evaluating followers. (Figure 4 omitted)
Development of a subordinate
We have mentioned that we want the followers to depend on direction and support from the leader as little as possible. Therefore the leader must take responsibility for developing the followers towards this end. If we illustrate this in our diagram, we should aim at a development indicated by the two arrows in Figure 5. (Figure 5 omitted)
To develop horizontally towards the left, the leader reduces his directive behaviour in relation to the increase in the follower's competence (he "can" do more). Generally this will be a rather slow process, developing through a number of small steps, where in each of them the follower takes over another small part of the direction. The development will mainly go continuously towards the left, since knowledge and skill will remain with the subordinate once acquired.
Development in the vertical direction in Figure 5 means that the follower is less dependent on support. Here it is not certain that the development will go steadily in one direction. It is easy to visualize that a subordinate may need more or less support and encouragement at different times. This may, for instance, be due to a change in motivation in relation to a task or the whole job.
Choice of leadership style in a different perspective
We have discussed how the follower's qualifications determine the appropriate leadership style, but this is only one dimension of the problem. It is obvious that two other factors will influence the style: the leader's personality and background; and the situation where the leadership is exercised. Figure 6 shows some of these other factors that have a bearing on the choice of style. (Figure 6 omitted)
References
Blanchard, K.H. (1985), "SL II. A situational approach to managing people", Facilitator's Guide, Blanchard Training and Development, Inc., Escondid., CA.
Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K.H. (1982), Management of Organizational Behaviour: Utilizing Human Resources, 4th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Nicholls, J.R. (1985), "A new approach to situational leadership", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 6, No. 4, 1985, pp. 2-7.
Nicholls, J.R. (1986), "Congruent leadership," Leadership & Organizational Development Journal, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 27-31.
Copyright MCB University Press Limited 1995