situational theory of leadership case study

•  Sign into My Research
•  Create My Research Account
• Company Website
• Our Products
• About Dissertations
• Español (España)
• Support Center

Select language

• Bahasa Indonesia
• Português (Brasil)
• Português (Portugal)

Welcome to My Research!

You may have access to the free features available through My Research. You can save searches, save documents, create alerts and more. Please log in through your library or institution to check if you have access.

Translate this article into 20 different languages!

If you log in through your library or institution you might have access to this article in multiple languages.

Get access to 20+ different citations styles

Styles include MLA, APA, Chicago and many more. This feature may be available for free if you log in through your library or institution.

Looking for a PDF of this document?

You may have access to it for free by logging in through your library or institution.

Want to save this document?

You may have access to different export options including Google Drive and Microsoft OneDrive and citation management tools like RefWorks and EasyBib. Try logging in through your library or institution to get access to these tools.

• Document 1 of 1
• More like this
• Scholarly Journal

Situational, Transformational, and Transactional Leadership and Leadership Development

No items selected.

Please select one or more items.

Select results items first to use the cite, email, save, and export options

In order to advance our knowledge of leadership, it is necessary to understand where the study of leadership has been. McCleskey (2014) argued that the study of leadership spans more than 100 years. This manuscript describes three seminal leadership theories and their development. Analysis of a sampling of recent articles in each theory is included. The manuscript also discusses the concept of leadership development in light of those three seminal theories and offers suggestions for moving forward both the academic study of leadership and the practical application of research findings on the field.

Keywords: Leadership, Situational Leadership, Transactional Leadership, Transformational Leadership, Development, Review

Introduction

This manuscript analyzes three seminal leadership theories: situational leadership, transformational leadership (TL), and transactional leadership. It begins with introductory comments about the academic field of leadership, continues with a look at the three theories including their history and development, and proceeds to a micro-level, examining several recent published studies in each area. It presents a comparison and contrast of the key principles of each. The manuscript also discusses modern leadership challenges and leadership development in the context of all three theories. First, a brief history of leadership follows.

Leadership Theory

One of the earliest studies of leadership, Galton's (1869) Hereditary Genius emphasized a basic concept that informed popular ideas about leadership (Zaccaro, 2007). The idea is that leadership is a characteristic ability of extraordinary individuals. This conception of leadership, known as the great man theory, evolved into the study of leadership traits, only to be supplanted later the theories under discussion here (Glynn & DeJordy, 2010). Before discussing leadership, it is useful to define the term. The question of the correct definition of leadership is a nontrivial matter. Rost (1993) discovered 221 different definitions and conceptions of leadership. Some of those definitions were narrow while others offered broader conceptions. Bass (2000; 2008) argued that the search for a single definition of leadership was pointless. Among multiple definitions and conceptions, the correct definition of leadership depends on the specific aspect of leadership of interest to the individual (Bass, 2008). This manuscript focuses on three specific conceptions of leadership: situational, transformational, and TL. The next section begins with situational leadership.

Situational leadership

Situational leadership theory proposes that effective leadership requires a rational understanding of the situation and an appropriate response, rather than a charismatic leader with a large group of dedicated followers (Graeff, 1997; Grint, 2011). Situational leadership in general and Situational Leadership Theory (SLT) in particular evolved from a task-oriented versus people-oriented leadership continuum (Bass, 2008; Conger, 2010; Graeff, 1997; Lorsch, 2010). The continuum represented the extent that the leader focuses on the required tasks or focuses on their relations with their followers. Originally developed by Hershey and Blanchard (1969; 1979; 1996), SLT described leadership style, and stressed the need to relate the leader's style to the maturity level of the followers. Task-oriented leaders define the roles for followers, give definite instructions, create organizational patterns, and establish formal communication channels (Bass, 2008; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969; 1979; 1996; 1980; 1981). In contrast, relation-oriented leaders practice concern for others, attempt to reduce emotional conflicts, seek harmonious relations, and regulate equal participation (Bass, 2008; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969; 1979; 1996; 1980; 1981; Shin, Heath, & Lee, 2011). Various authors have classified SLT as a behavioral theory (Bass, 2008) or a contingency theory (Yukl, 2011). Both conceptions contain some validity. SLT focuses on leaders' behaviors as either task or people focused. This supports its inclusion as a behavioral approach to leadership, similar to the leadership styles approach (autocratic, democratic, and laissez-faire), the Michigan production-oriented versus employee- oriented approach, the Ohio State initiation versus consideration dichotomy, and the directive versus participative approach (Bass, 2008; Glynn & DeJordy, 2010). It also portrays effective leadership as contingent on follower maturity. This fits with other contingency-based leadership theories including Fiedler's contingency theory, path-goal theory, leadership substitutes theory, and Vroom's normative contingency model (Glynn & DeJordy, 2010; Bass, 2008; Yukl, 2011). Both conceptualizations of SLT admit that task-oriented and relation-oriented behaviors are dependent, rather than mutually exclusive approaches. The effective leader engages in a mix of task and relation behaviors (Cubero, 2007; Graeff, 1997; Shin et al., 2011; Yukl, 2008; 2011; Yukl & Mahsud, 2010). The level of maturity (both job and psychological maturity) of followers determines the correct leadership style and relates to previous education and training interventions (Bass, 2008; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969). Some scholars criticize SLT specifically and situational leadership in general.

Criticisms of situational leadership

SLT was a popular conception of leadership; however, as experience with the original Hersey & Blanchard model accrued, problems with the construct appeared. Nicholls (1985) described three flaws with SLT dealing with its consistency, continuity, and conformity. Bass (2008) agreed, noting lack of internal consistency, conceptual contradictions, and ambiguities. Other scholars suggested additional weaknesses of SLT (Bass, 2008; Glynn & DeJordy, 2010). Research revealed that no particular leadership style was universally effective and behavioral theories relied on abstract leadership types that were difficult to identify (Glynn & DeJordy, 2010). A number of recent studies utilized the situational leadership approach. Next, this manuscript describes two of them.

Research articles on situational leadership

Paul and Elder (2008) presented a guide for the analysis of research articles. Paul and Elder (2008) suggested that the examination of an article explicitly consider the purpose, question, information, concepts, assumptions, inferences, point of view, and implications in the study. Arvidsson, Johansson, Ek, and Akselsson (2007), used a situational leadership framework in the study of air traffic control employees. Arvidsson et al. (2007) set out to investigate how leadership styles and adaptability differ across various situations, conditions, structures, and tasks in the air traffic control arena. The authors asked a variety of research questions about the relationship between leadership adaptability, task-orientation of the leader, leadership style, working situation, operational conditions, organizational structure, and level of leadership experience (Arvidsson et al., 2007). The information contained in the article included a discussion of the literature linking leadership and safety and a relationship between leadership and reduced stress levels. The article described the SLT model, the study, methods, results, and discussion. The specific concepts presented included leadership and SLT. The authors' implicit assumptions included a relationship between effective leadership and workplace safety as well as a relationship between leadership effectiveness and stress and between stress and poor workplace performance. The authors also assumed that differences among coworkers require leaders to exhibit sensitivity to and the ability to diagnose varying levels of maturity or readiness among employees (Arvidsson et al, 2007). The point of view of the article is quantitative, positivist, and objectivist. The authors hypothesize a correlation between independent and dependent variables and then set out to investigate and confirm that relationship (Creswell, 2009). Arvidsson et al. (2007) discussed implications of their work. In particular, despite the fact that previous research indicated that relation-oriented leadership is preferred over task-oriented leadership, task- orientation is suitable in some situations. Assigning tasks and job roles, specifying procedures, and clarifying follower expectations result in increased job satisfaction (Arvidsson et al., 2007). The next section examines another recent study.

Larsson and Vinberg (2010) conducted a study to identify common leadership behaviors at a small group of successful companies and to organize those behaviors into suitable categories to discuss theoretical implications of situational aspects of effective leadership. The study attempted to uncover common leadership behaviors as they related to quality, effectiveness, environment, and health perceptions. The implicit questions included which leadership behaviors relate to outcomes, situational aspects, effectiveness, productivity, quality, and job satisfaction (Larsson & Vinberg, 2010). The information in the article covered situational leadership theories, theoretical constructs of effectiveness, and a description of four case studies of effective organizations. The study addressed the concepts of leadership effectiveness, task orientation, relation orientation, change leadership, and case study methodology. Larsson and Vinberg (2010) started from the position of endorsing the relationship between leadership and organizational success. Then they sought to identify the behaviors common to successful leadership across four subject organizations. Larsson and Vinberg conducted the study from a qualitative, comparative, positivist point of view (2010). The authors discuss the implications as well as the need for additional research. Larsson and Vinberg (2010) conclude that successful leadership includes both universally applicable elements (task-oriented) and contingency elements (relation and change-oriented). The authors suggest additional research in leadership and quality, and in leadership and follower health outcomes (Larsson & Vinberg, 2010). The next section presents the transformational leadership theory.

Transformational leadership (TL)

Over the past 30 years, TL has been "the single most studied and debated i dea with the field of leadership" (Diaz-Saenz, 2011, p. 299). Published studies link TL to CEO success (Jung, Wu, & Chow, 2008), middle manager effectiveness (Singh & Krishnan, 2008), military leadership (Eid, Johnsen, Bartone, & Nissestad, 2008), cross-cultural leadership (Kirkman, Chen, Farh, Chen, & Lowe, 2009), virtual teams (Hambley, O'Neill, & Kline, 2007), personality (Hautala, 2006), emotional intelligence (Barbuto & Burbach, 2006), and a variety of other topics (Diaz-Saenz, 2011). Burns (1978) operationalized the theory of TL as one of two leadership styles represented as a dichotomy: transformational and transactional leadership. While distinct from the concept of charismatic leadership (see Weber, 1924/1947), charisma is an element of TL (Bass, 1985; 1990; 2000; 2008; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Conger, 1999; 2011; Conger & Hunt, 1999; Diaz-Saenz, 2011). Burns (1978) defined a transformational leader as "one who raises the followers' level of consciousness about the importance and value of desired outcomes and the methods of reaching those outcomes" (p. 141). The transformational leader convinced his followers to transcend their self-interest for the sake of the organization, while elevating "the followers' level of need on Maslow's (1954) hierarchy from lower-level concerns for safety and security to higher-level needs for achievement and self-actualization" (Bass, 2008, p. 619). Based on empirical evidence, Bass (1985) modified the original TL construct. Over time, four factors or components of TL emerged. These components include idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. Researchers frequently group the first two components together as charisma (Bass & Riggio, 2006). The transformational leader exhibits each of these four components to varying degrees in order to bring about desired organizational outcomes through their followers (Bass 1985; 1990; 2000; Bass & Riggio, 2006). Idealized influence incorporates two separate aspects of the follower relationship. First, followers attribute the leader with certain qualities that followers wish to emulate. Second, leaders impress followers through their behaviors. Inspirational motivation involves behavior to motivate and inspire followers by providing a shared meaning and a challenge to those followers. Enthusiasm and optimism are key characteristics of inspirational motivation (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Intellectual stimulation allows leaders to increase their followers' efforts at innovation by questioning assumptions, reframing known problems, and applying new frameworks and perspectives to old and established situations and challenges (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Intellectual stimulation requires openness on the part of the leader. Openness without fear of criticism and increased levels of confidence in problem solving situation combine to increase the self-efficacy of followers. Increased self-efficacy leads to increased effectiveness (Bandura, 1977). Individualized consideration involves acting as a coach or mentor in order to assist followers with reaching their full potential. Leaders provide learning opportunities and a supportive climate (Bass & Riggio, 2006). These four components combine to make leaders transformational figures. In spite of significant empirical support, a number of criticisms of TL theory exist.

Criticisms of transformational leadership

Empirical research supports the idea that TL positively influences follower and organizational performance (Diaz-Saenz, 2011). However, a number of scholars criticize TL (Beyer, 1999; Hunt, 1999; Yukl, 1999; 2011). Yukl (1999) took TL to task and many of his criticisms retain their relevance today. He noted that the underlying mechanism of leader influence at work in TL was unclear and that little empirical work existed examining the effect of TL on work groups, teams, or organizations. He joined other authors and noted an overlap between the constructs of idealized influence and inspirational motivation (Hunt, 1999; Yukl, 1999). Yukl suggested that the theory lacked sufficient identification of the impact of situational and context variables on leadership effectiveness (1999; 2011). Despite its critics, an ongoing and vibrant body of research exists on TL and an analysis of two recent articles follows below.

Recent articles on transformational leadership

Gundersen, Hellesoy, and Raeder (2012) studied TL and leadership effectiveness in international project teams facing dynamic work environments. As noted previously, Paul and Elder (2008) presented guidelines for the analysis of research articles. The article presented an examination of the relationship between TL and work adjustment including the mediating role of trust. The research questions created included the relationship between TL and team performance, the mediating role of trust, the moderating role of a dynamic work environment, the relationship between TL and work adjustment, and the relationship between TL and job satisfaction. Information contained in the article included brief reviews of TL, team performance, dynamic work environment, trust, work adjustment, and job satisfaction. The article also discussed the study sample, measures, statistical procedures, limitations, future research suggestions, implications, and overall conclusion. The specific concepts presented included TL, trust, dynamic work environment, team performance, work adjustment, and job satisfaction. The assumptions of the authors included three explicit premises. The suitability of TL varies according to context, the need for additional empirical work on the relationship between TL and team outcomes exists, and no previous empirical studies on work adjustment in international settings as an outcome of leader behaviors exists (Gundersen et al., 2012). The authors write from a quantitative, positivist, objectivist viewpoint with a confirmatory purpose. The authors hypothesized a correlation between independent and dependent variables and then set out to investigate and confirm that relationship (Creswell, 2009). Gundersen et al. (2012) argue that their study increases knowledge of the drivers of organizational effectiveness. Specifically, TL behaviors affect performance on international assignments in a variety of complex projects by contributing to work adjustment and positive outcomes. These implications apply to high-stakes organizational outcomes including selection of organizational leaders. Another TL study follows below.

Hamstra, Yperen, Wisse, and Sassenberg (2011) studied transformational (and transactional) leadership style in relation to followers' preferred regulatory style, workforce stability, and organizational effectiveness. The authors intended to address a gap in the leadership literature by addressing regulatory fit in the context of turnover intentions, while integrating both transformational and transactional leadership and examining both promotion and prevention focused regulatory strategies (Hamstra et al., 2011). The research addressed the relationship between TL and turnover intentions, given a promotion-focused regulatory strategy, given a prevention-focused regulatory strategy; and the relationship between transactional leadership and turnover intentions given a promotion-focused regulatory strategy, and given a prevention-focused regulatory strategy. Information contained in the article included a brief discussion of TL, transactional leadership, workforce turnover intentions, regulatory strategy, participants and procedures, measures used, results, and a general discussion of the research findings. The specific concepts enumerated above include transactional and TL style, and followers' regulatory focus. The authors assumed that leadership influences followers turnover intentions, that a match between followers self-regulatory strategy influences organizational outcomes, and that leadership style preferences may fit with regulatory style preferences. The authors worked from a positivist, objectivist, and confirmatory point of view. The authors hypothesized a correlation between independent and dependent variables and then set out to investigate and confirm that relationship (Creswell, 2009). Hamstra et al. (2011) discussed several implications of the study including the idea that tailoring specific leadership behaviors or styles to followers prefer self-regulatory orientation may improve employee retention, organizational stability, and the engagement of followers. The authors recommended further research on the relationship between leadership style, turnover intention, and follower commitment. The authors also suggested additional research on preferred self-regulatory orientation and other organizational outcomes variables. The next section of the manuscript explores transactional leadership theory.

Transactional leadership

Transactional leadership focuses on the exchanges that occur between leaders and followers (Bass 1985; 1990; 2000; 2008; Burns, 1978). These exchanges allow leaders to accomplish their performance objectives, complete required tasks, maintain the current organizational situation, motivate followers through contractual agreement, direct behavior of followers toward achievement of established goals, emphasize extrinsic rewards, avoid unnecessary risks, and focus on improve organizational efficiency. In turn, transactional leadership allows followers to fulfill their own self-interest, minimize workplace anxiety, and concentrate on clear organizational objectives such as increased quality, customer service, reduced costs, and increased production (Sadeghi & Pihie, 2012). Burns (1978) operationalized the concepts of both transformational and transactional leadership as distinct leadership styles. Transactional leadership theory described by Burns (1978) posited the relationship between leaders and followers as a series of exchanges of gratification designed to maximize organizational and individual gains. Transactional leadership evolved for the marketplace of fast, simple transactions among multiple leaders and followers, each moving from transaction to transaction in search of gratification. The marketplace demands reciprocity, flexibility, adaptability, and real-time cost-benefit analysis (Burns, 1978). Empirical evidence supports the relationship between transactional leadership and effectiveness in some settings (Bass, 1985; 1999; 2000; Bass, Avolio, Jung, & Berson, 2003; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Hater & Bass, 1988; Zhu, Sosik, Riggio, & Yang, 2012). Today, researchers study transactional leadership within the continuum of the full range of leadership model (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Some researchers criticize transactional leadership.

Criticisms of transactional leadership

Burns (1978) argued that transactional leadership practices lead followers to short-term relationships of exchange with the leader. These relationships tend toward shallow, temporary exchanges of gratification and often create resentments between the participants. Additionally, a number of scholars criticize transactional leadership theory because it utilizes a one-size-fits-all universal approach to leadership theory construction that disregards situational and contextual factors related organizational challenges (Beyer, 1999; Yukl, 1999; 2011; Yukl & Mahsud, 2010). Empirical support for transactional leadership typically includes both transactional and transformational behaviors (Gundersen et al., 2012; Liu, Liu, & Zeng, 2011). Next, this manuscript reviews two recent articles featuring transactional leadership theory.

Recent articles on transactional leadership

Liu et al. (2011) looked at the relationship between transactional leadership and team innovativeness. The authors focused on the potential moderating role of emotional labor and examined a mediating role for team efficacy. The authors intended to contribute to the leadership field by closing an identified gap in the literature with the introduction of emotional labor and team efficacy as important factors in the existing relationship between transactional leadership and team innovativeness. The authors predicted a significant negative relationship between transactional leadership and team innovativeness. The article included an overview discussion of teams, innovativeness, transactional leadership, emotional labor, and team efficacy. The authors assumed that transactional leadership could foster team innovativeness in some settings. The authors also assumed that emotional labor was a moderating factor in that relationship. Liu et al. (2011) conducted the study from the quantitative, positivist, objectivist, and confirmatory point of view. The authors hypothesized a correlation between independent and dependent variables and then set out to investigate and confirm that relationship (Creswell, 2009). Liu et al. (2011) discussed several implications of their findings. Emotional labor acts as a boundary condition on the relationship between transactional leadership and team innovativeness. This knowledge helps deepen the understanding of the context in which transactional leadership leads to organizational effectiveness. Liu et al. (2011) recommended additional research on transactional leadership and other positive organizational outcomes, and additional research on other possible boundary conditions. The next section addresses another study on transactional leadership.

Groves and LaRocca (2011) studied both transactional and TL in the context of ethical behavior. In contrast to the full range of leadership model view of transactional leadership as part of a continuum of behaviors, Groves and LaRocca see transactional leadership and TL as distinct constructs underpinned by separate ethical foundations. Specifically, transactional leadership flows from "teleological ethical values (utilitarianism)" and TL flows from "deontological ethical values (altruism, universal rights, Kantian principle, etc.)" (Groves & LaRocca, 2011, p. 511). While an in-depth discussion of ethics is outside the scope of this manuscript, it is noteworthy that other authors (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999; Singh & Krishnan, 2008) also discussed the relationship between ethics and transactional leadership. The concepts presented by Groves and LaRocca (2011) include corporate social responsibility, ethics, TL, transactional leadership, and managerial decision-making. The authors examined ethics in relation to leadership style and its impact on follower values and corporate social responsibility. The point of view presented by the authors is quantitative, positivist, objective, and confirmatory as evidenced by a research design that hypothesizes a correlation between independent and dependent variables and then set out to investigate and confirm that relationship (Creswell, 2009). Liu et al. (2011) confirmed empirical support for their view. Author identified limitations included: results oriented toward leaders description of what they would do rather than actual behavior, omission of measures designed to identify social desirability, and inability to generalize findings to the larger population. Additional limitations mentioned included potential common source and common method bias, lack of longitudinal data, follower response bias, and an inability to separate personal ethics from preferred leadership style (Liu et al., 2011). The authors suggested additional research to address these limitations. Next, this manuscript summarizes the key concepts in situational, transformational, and transactional leadership.

Situational, Transformational, and Transactional Leadership

This manuscript analyzes three seminal leadership theories: situational leadership, TL, and transactional leadership. Situational leadership emphasized leadership behaviors along a continuum between task-orientation in relation-orientation. Situational leadership also emphasized the level of maturity, or readiness of the followers as a contingency or context that leaders need to account for in order to establish the correct fit between the leader and follower (Bass, 2008). In TL, leaders achieve results by employing idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Bass, 2000; 2008; Bass & Riggio, 2006). The transformational leader exhibits each of these four components to varying degrees in order to bring about desired organizational outcomes through their followers (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Transformational leaders share a vision, inspire followers, mentor, coach, respect individuals, foster creativity, and act with integrity (Bass, 1990; 1999; 2008; Bass & Riggio, 2006).

Transactional leadership involves exchanges between leaders and followers designed to provide benefits to both. Leaders influence followers through contingent rewards and negative feedback or corrective coaching. Despite originating as distinct constructs, transactional and TL exist as parts of another leadership model, the full range of leadership model (Bass & Riggio, 2006). One notable difference between these three leadership theories involves the subject of charisma (Conger, 1999; 2011; Conger & Hunt, 1999; Hunt, 1999; Shamir & Howell, 1999).

Many scholars combine idealized influence and inspirational motivation under the heading charismatic-inspirational leadership or simply charismatic leadership (Bass, 2008; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Hunt, 1999; Shamir & Howell, 1999). The concept of charisma in entered the social sciences from religion through the work of Max Weber (1924/1947). In contrast to TL, both situational and transactional leadership theories ignore the role of individual differences between leaders (Bass, 2008). Charisma is a key example of one such individual difference.

Summary of key differences and similarities

As described above, similarities exist between task-oriented leadership and transactional leadership (Bass, 1985; 1990; 1999; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Burns, 1978). Both focus on the exchange between leaders and followers and both emphasize work products or outcomes. Relation-oriented leadership compares to TL (Bass 1985; 1990; 1999; Burns 1978; Conger, 2011), authentic leadership (Avolio, 2010; Bass, 2008; Caza & Jackson, 2011), and servant leadership (Bass, 2008). Relation-oriented leadership is people focused, inspirational, persuasive, and intellectually stimulating (Bass, 2008). Both situational leadership theory and transactional leadership focus on leadership behaviors to the exclusion of leadership traits or individual differences, while TL looks at leadership behaviors and individual differences. Transactional and TL theories involve universal approaches to leadership. TL applies to a wide range of situations and contexts and evidence suggests TL fits a variety of diverse cultural contexts (Den Hartog, House, Hanges, Ruiz-Quintanilla, & Dorfman, 1999; Leong, 2011; Rowold & Rohmann, 2009; Tsai, Chen, & Cheng, 2009; Zhu et al., 2012). In contrast, situational leadership theories and contingent leadership approaches advocate for the right leadership style and behaviors for the context and situation faced by the organization (Bass, 2008; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969; 1979; 1996; Yukl, 1999, 2008; 2011). Transformational and transactional leadership theories, and the corresponding full range of leadership theory, continue to add to an impressive 30-year history of empirical support (Diaz-Saenz, 2011; Gundersen et al., 2012; Hamstra et al., 2011; Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Leong, 2011; Reichard, Riggio, Guerin, Oliver, Gottfried, & Gottfried, 2009; Yukl; 2011). However, 30 years of history does not guarantee that transformational and transactional leadership adequately address the challenges facing the modern field of leadership.

Contemporary Leadership Challenges and the Future of Leadership Development

A vital challenge to the academic leadership field involves the need to develop leaders and leadership. Day (2011) argued that over time, some leaders developed "the erroneous belief that leadership develops mainly in leadership development programs" (p. 37). Historically, leadership development targeted specific skills and competencies, while focusing on diffusion of best practices. For example, leadership development programs target self-management strategies, social competencies, and work facilitation (Day, 2009). Day (2011) suggested a transition in leadership development beyond the best practices orientation. Day argued for a more scientific approach to developing leaders and leadership. Modern leadership requires a new focus on developing leadership expertise (Day, 2009), new perspectives on the role of leader identity (Day & Harrison, 2007), and the development of adaptive leadership capacity (DeRue & Wellman, 2009). Each of the three leadership theories discussed in this manuscript approaches the subject of leadership development differently.

Situational leadership theory advocates matching the leader to the situation if possible or matching the leadership orientation (task versus relation) to the follower maturity (Hersey & Blanchard, 1969; 1979; 1996). Leadership development efforts aimed at improving organizational effectiveness should use instruments designed to gauge the level of task- orientation and relation-orientation of the leader in order to establish a fit with the current level of follower maturity. Existing leaders should receive skills and competency training aimed at developing their task-oriented or relational-oriented skill deficits. Previous empirical research indicated that level of follower maturity related to previous education and training interventions (Bass, 2008; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969; 1979; 1996).

Bass & Riggio (2006) suggested that TL development could not focus on specific, narrow skills. Bass (2008) argued for TL as a reflection of the "whole integrated person and their deeply held values and self-concepts" (p. 1106). Development in TL requires a broadly established educational process. Burns (1978) agreed, advocating for the joint involvement of facilitators and students in an effort to reach "higher stages of moral reasoning" and higher levels of individual judgment (Burns, 1978, p. 449). Based on these recommendations for a broad educational process, targeting the leader's values and self-concepts, aimed at higher stages of moral reasoning, it is reasonable to doubt whether TL development is possible. This represents another key difference between TL and situational leadership.

The extant leadership literature provides little guidance on transactional leadership development. This may stem from the fact that most leaders do not need development to behave transactionally with their followers. Transactional leadership is traditional leadership (Burns, 1978). As Weber (1924/1947) indicated, a system of operation and coordination is called "traditional" if it is part of an existing system of control, and if the leader enjoys authority based on status and on the existence of personal loyalty created through a process of education (p. 341). This process of education is transactional leadership development. Real-world examples, available practice, and on-the-job training opportunities abound for the leader attempting to develop their transactional leadership behaviors. This manuscript closes with a brief description of the future of leadership.

Bass (2008) predicted the continued importance of both personal traits and situations to leadership. Bass argued that large, purely transactional organizations would give way to transformational ones as modern leaders become more innovative, responsive, flexible, and adaptive (Bass, 2008). The study of leadership marches on toward follower-centered approaches (Bligh, 2011), hybrid configurations (Gronn, 2011), complexity theory (Uhl-Bien & Marion, 2011), and a variety of other arenas. The increase in theoretical pluralism, evident since the 90s, continues as the academic field of leadership continues its search for the truth (Bryman, Collinson, Grint, Jackson, & Uhl-Bien, 2011). Leadership scholars must continue to engage in thorough and thoughtful research into the connections between development and efficacy, organizations and outcomes, and between leaders and followers. That is both the future challenge and the historical past of leadership.

Arvidsson, M., Johansson, C. R., Ek, Å., & Akselsson, R. (2007). Situational leadership in air traffic control. Journal of Air Transportation, 12(1), 67-86. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=25644644&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Avolio, B. J. (2010). Pursuing authentic leadership development. In N. Nohria, & R. Khurana (Eds.), Handbook of leadership theory and practice (pp. 739-765). Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership: Good, better, best. Organizational Dynamics, 13(3), 26-40. doi:10.1016/0090-2616(85)90028-2

Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19-31. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=9607211357&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Bass, B. M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 8(1), 9-32. doi:10.1080/135943299398410

Bass, B. M. (2000). The future of leadership in learning organizations. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 7(3), 18-40. doi:10.1177/107179190000700302

Bass, B. M. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, & managerial applications (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.

Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., Jung, D. I., & Berson, Y. (2003). Predicting unit performance by assessing transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 207-218. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.207

Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 181-217. doi:10.1016/S1048- 9843(99)00016-8

Beyer, J. M. (1999). Taming and promoting charisma to change organizations. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 307-330. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00019-3

Bligh, M. C. (2011). Followership and follower-centered approaches. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 425-436). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bryman, A., Collinson, D., Grint, K., Jackson, B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (Eds.). (2011). The SAGE handbook of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

Caza, A., & Jackson, B. (2011). Authentic leadership. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 352-364). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Conger, J. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insider's perspective on these developing streams of research. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 145-179. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00012-0

Conger, J. A. (2011). Charismatic leadership. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 86-102). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Conger, J. A., & Hunt, J. G. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership: Taking stock of the present and future (part i). The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 121-127. doi: 10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00017-X

Creswell, J. H. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Cubero, C. G. (2007). Situational leadership and persons with disabilities. Work, 29(4), 351-356. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=27621294&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Day, D. V. (2009). Executive selection is a process not a decision. Industrial & Organizational Psychology, 2(2), 159-162. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2009.01126.x

Day, D. V. (2011). Leadership development. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 37-50). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Day, D. V., & Harrison, M. M. (2007). A multilevel, identity-based approach to leadership development. Human Resource Management Review, 17(4), 360-373. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2007.08.007

Den Hartog, D. N., House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., & Dorfman, P. W. (1999). Culture specific and cross-culturally generalizable implicit leadership theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally endorsed? The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 219-256. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00018-1

DeRue, D. S., & Wellman, N. (2009). Developing leaders via experience: The role of developmental challenge, learning orientation, and feedback availability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4), 859-875. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=42838422&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Diaz-Saenz, H. R. (2011). Transformational leadership. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 299-310). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Eid, J., Johnsen, B. H., Bartone, P. T., & Nissestad, O. A. (2008). Growing transformational leaders: Exploring the role of personality hardiness. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 29(1), 4-23. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1108/01437730810845270

Glynn, M. A., & 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 (pp. 119-158). Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

Graeff, C. L. (1997). Evolution of situational leadership theory: A critical review. The Leadership Quarterly, 8(2), 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 (pp. 3-14). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gronn, P. (2011). Hybrid configurations of leadership. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 437-454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Groves, K. S., & LaRocca, M. A. (2011). An empirical study of leader ethical values, transformational and transactional leadership, and follower attitudes toward corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(4), 511-528. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1007/s10551-011-0877-y

Gundersen, G., Hellesoy, B. T., & Raeder, S. (2012). Leading international project teams: The effectiveness of transformational leadership in dynamic work environments. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 19(1), 46-57. doi:10.1177/1548051811429573

Hambley, L. A., O'Neill, T. A., & Kline, T. J. B. (2007). Virtual team leadership: The effects of leadership style and communication medium on team interaction styles and outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103(1), 1-20. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.004

Hamstra, M. R. W., Van Yperen, N. W., Wisse, B., & Sassenberg, K. (2011). Transformational- transactional leadership styles and followers' regulatory focus: Fit reduces followers' turnover intentions. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 10(4), 182-186. doi:10.1027/1866- 5888/a000043

Hater, J. J., & Bass, B. M. (1988). Superior's evaluations and subordinates' perceptions of transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(4), 695- 702. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=5111775&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Hautala, T.M. (2006). The relationship between personality and transformational leadership. Journal of Management Development, 25(8), 777-794. doi:10.1108/02621710610684259

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1969). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training & Development Journal, 23(5), 26. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=7465530&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1979). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training & Development Journal, 33(6), 94. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9067469&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1980). The management of change. Training & Development Journal, 34(6), 80. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9072349&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1981). So you want to know your leadership style? Training & Development Journal, 35(6), 34. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.ed u/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=7471134&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1996). Great ideas revisited: Revisiting the life-cycle theory of leadership. Training & Development Journal, 50(1), 42.

Hunt, J. G. (1999). Transformational/charismatic leadership's transformation of the field: An historical essay. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 129-144. doi:10.1016/S1048- 9843(99)00015-6

Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta- analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 755-768. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.755

Jung, D., Wu, A., & Chow, C. W. (2008). Towards understanding the direct and indirect effects of CEOs' transformational leadership on firm innovation. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(5), 582-594. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.07.007

Kirkman, B. L., Chen, G., Farh, J.-L., Chen, Z., & Lowe, K. B. (2009). Individual power distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders: A cross-level, cross-cultural examination. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 744-764. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2009.43669971

Larsson, J., & Vinberg, S. (2010). Leadership behaviour in successful organisations: Universal or situation-dependent? Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 21(3), 317-334. doi:10.1080/14783360903561779

Leong, L. Y. C. (2011). Is transformational leadership universal? A meta-analytical investigation of multifactor leadership questionnaire means across cultures. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(2), 164-174. doi:10.1177/1548051810385003

Liu, J., Liu, X., & Zeng, X. (2011). Does transactional leadership count for team innovativeness? Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24(3), 282-298. doi:10.1108/09534811111132695

Lorsch, J. W. (2010). A contingency theory of leadership. In N. Nohria, & R. Khurana (Eds.), Handbook of leadership theory and practice (pp. 411-432). Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York, NY: Harper.

Nicholls, J. R. (1985). A new approach to situational leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 6(4), 2.

Paul, R. & Elder, L. (2008). The miniature guide to critical thinking. ( No. 520m). www.criticalthinking.org: Foundation for Critical Thinking Press. Retrieved from http://courseroom2.capella.edu/webct/RelativeResourceManager/Template/OM8004/Cour se_Files/cf_Miniature_Guide_to_Critical_Thinking-Concepts_and_Tools.pdf

Reichard, R. J., Riggio, R. E., Guerin, D. W., Oliver, P. H., Gottfried, A. W., & Gottfried, A. E. (2011). A longitudinal analysis of relationships between adolescent personality and intelligence with adult leader emergence and transformational leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(3), 471-481. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.04.005

Rost, J. C. (1993). Leadership development in the new millennium. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 1(1), 91-110. doi:10.1177/107179199300100109

Rowold, J., & Rohmann, A. (2009). Transformational and transactional leadership styles, followers' positive and negative emotions, and performance in German nonprofit orchestras. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 20(1), 41-59. doi:10.1002/nml.240

Sadeghi, A., & Pihie, Z. A. L. (2012). Transformational leadership and its predictive effects on leadership effectiveness. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(7), 186- 197.

Shamir, B., & Howell, J. M. (1999). Organizational and contextual influences on the emergence and effectiveness of charismatic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 257-283. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00014-4

Shin, J., Heath, R. L., & Lee, J. (2011). A contingency explanation of public relations practitioner leadership styles: Situation and culture. Journal of Public Relations Research, 23(2), 167-190. doi:10.1080/1062726X.2010.505121

Singh, N., & Krishnan, V. R. (2008). Self-sacrifice and transformational leadership: Mediating role of altruism. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 29(3), 261-274. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1108/01437730810861317

Tsai, W., Chen, H., & Cheng, J. (2009). Employee positive moods as a mediator linking transformational leadership and employee work outcomes. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(1), 206-219. doi:10.1080/09585190802528714

Uhl-Bien, M., & Marion, R. (2011). Complexity leadership theory. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 468- 482). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization (T. Parsons Trans.). New York, NY: Free Press. (Original work published in 1924)

Yukl, G. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theories. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285-305. doi:10.1016/S1048- 9843(99)00013-2

Yukl, G. (2008). How leaders influence organizational effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(6), 708-722.

Yukl, G. (2011). Contingency theories of effective leadership. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 286- 298). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Yukl, G., & Mahsud, R. (2010). Why flexible and adaptive leadership is essential. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62(2), 81-93. doi:10.1037/a0019835

Zaccaro, S. J. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist, 62(1), 6- 16. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.62.1.6

Zhu, W., Sosik, J.J., Riggio, R.E. & Yang, B. (2012). Relationships between transformational and active transactional leadership and followers' organizational identification: The role of psychological empowerment. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 13(3), 186.

You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer

Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer

Copyright Journal of Business Studies Quarterly (JBSQ) Jun 2014

Suggested sources

• About ProQuest
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy

• go to walkme.com

Situational leadership theory: Definition, features & examples

Situational leadership theory could be the missing element in your leadership vision for the challenges of the coming decade. 

A leading McKinsey report from 2023 explains why. The successful enterprises of the future will require adaptable management teams to become “open, collaborative, and emergent” businesses. In McKinsey’s terms, this is the exciting trend of the “thriving organization.” 

Situational leadership gives useful insights that tools like agile project management miss. It helps to understand staff motivation, respond with appropriate leadership, and then reach goals with high levels of satisfaction. In this article, we’ll explain how. 

This article will:

• Define situational leadership theory 
• Explain the four leadership behavior types in situational leadership theory  
• Explain how situational leadership theory describes motivation through “performance readiness”
• Introduce the major benefits and challenges of situational leadership. 

This is one of many articles we have about leadership development . If situational leadership doesn’t work for you, look for links to other content along the way. 

What is situational leadership theory? 

Situational leadership theory examines the interactions between people, motivation, and leadership choices. It suggests no single “correct” way to give instructions and encourage staff. Rather, managers must effectively handle their interactions with staff to achieve positive organizational outcomes.  

This makes organizations seem complicated. As anyone knows, staff can change their motivation levels from one task to the next, and leaders must learn how to respond appropriately. 

SLT takes another step by showing how to understand staff motivation and how to respond to it. The pioneers of the theory, Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, showed how the “performance readiness” of staff should connect with the “behavior style” of leaders. One of the most famous symbols of situational leadership theory is the “wishbone”-shaped graph, which visually connects these two factors. 

In its time, situational leadership solved a specific problem. Many writers suggested that management was a “universal” science. They thought that we would find a basic template for all organizational behavior (if we just did enough work). 

In their book Management of Organizational Behavior (1969) , Hersey and Blanchard showed that reality is much more complicated. Many leaders today recognize this. However, the lessons of situational leadership are still a provocative and exciting approach. 

After all, it is common to see people arguing for a widespread idea of HR best practices , most notably in Jeffrey Pfeffer’s work. Situational leadership provides a thorough model for context-specific responses to problems and issues. 

Like any leadership practice, situational leadership is not perfect. Scholars like Geir Thompson have carefully evaluated the ideas of situational leadership (see their articles in 2009   and 2018 ). Like any leadership theory, this is a set of ideas that adapt and change over time. 

The four behavior styles of situational leadership 

Situational Leadership Theory introduces four distinct behavior styles that leaders can employ depending on the readiness level of their team members. These styles are:

• Telling 
• Selling 
• Participating 
• Delegating 

These behavior styles balance two important aspects: task behavior and relationship behavior. Task behavior involves giving instructions and guiding the team on what needs to be done.  Relationship behavior focuses on building connections and motivation within the team.

In the rest of this section, we will introduce the four major behavior styles in situational leadership. 

• Telling, directing, or guiding

In this style, the leader provides specific instructions and closely supervises task completion. This style is most appropriate when followers have low readiness levels and need clear guidance and direction. With “telling,” leaders prioritize task behavior. 

Example: A new employee is hired in a manufacturing plant. The supervisor provides detailed instructions on operating a specific machine and closely monitors the employee’s performance during the initial training period.

• Selling, coaching, or explaining

Here, the leader provides both direction and support. They explain decisions, gather input, and encourage questions. This style is effective when followers have moderate readiness levels but still need guidance.

Example: A project manager is leading a team of software developers to create a new application. The manager explains the project’s goals, provides guidance on the development process, and motivates team members by highlighting the importance of their contributions.

• Participating, facilitating, or collaborating

This style involves more delegation and support from the leader. In other words, it prioritizes relationship behavior over task behavior. 

Leaders encourage followers to take initiative and make decisions while providing resources and assistance as needed. This style suits followers with moderate to high readiness levels who may benefit from increased autonomy and empowerment.

Example: A department manager encourages her team members to take ownership of their tasks and make decisions regarding project implementation. She offers resources and assistance as needed but trusts her team to manage their responsibilities autonomously.

• Delegating, empowering, or monitoring

In this style, the leader provides minimal direction and support. They allow their followers to take full responsibility for task completion. The leader still monitors progress but grants followers a high degree of autonomy. This style is most appropriate for followers with high readiness levels who can work independently.

This style is low in both task and relationship behavior. It’s appropriate when there’s a high level of trust and understanding between a leader and their team. 

Example: A business owner delegates the responsibility of managing day-to-day operations to the store manager. The owner provides general guidelines and expectations but allows the manager to make staffing, inventory management, and customer service decisions without constant oversight.

What are the different types of performance readiness in situational leadership theory? 

In Situational Leadership Theory, leadership behaviors align with performance readiness. 

Performance readiness is a measure of motivation that gauges how far staff members are prepared to tackle tasks. 

These readiness levels, termed “maturity levels” in earlier versions of the theory, include: 

• Unable and unwilling 
• Unable but willing

Able but unwilling 

• Able and willing. 

In this section, we will explain the meaning of each one in turn. 

Unable and unwilling

At this level, individuals lack the necessary skills or confidence to perform a task and may be unwilling to take on the responsibility.

Example: A new team member joins a marketing project requiring advanced data analysis skills. However, they lack experience with data analysis software and feel overwhelmed by the task’s complexity, leading to reluctance to take it on.

Unable but willing 

At this level, individuals are motivated and willing to perform the task but lack the necessary skills or knowledge. They may need guidance, training, or support to complete the task successfully.

Example: A software developer volunteers to lead a new project using a programming language they’re unfamiliar with. Despite their enthusiasm, they require support and mentoring from senior team members to grasp the language and meet project requirements.

Here, individuals have the skills and knowledge required to perform the task but lack the motivation or confidence to do so. They may need encouragement, reassurance, or incentives to take responsibility.

Example: An experienced sales representative is hesitant to take on a leadership role in a client presentation despite having the necessary expertise. They require reassurance and support from their manager to overcome self-doubt and step into the leadership role. 

Able and willing 

This is the ideal level of performance readiness, where individuals have both the skills and the motivation to perform the task effectively. They are confident and willing to take on responsibility independently.

Example: A seasoned project manager confidently leads a cross-functional team through a complex project, leveraging their expertise and motivation to guide team members toward successful completion.

What are the benefits of situational leadership theory? 

Situational Leadership Theory has been around for nearly six decades. Yet, it is still vitally important for many leaders. SLT has many distinct benefits that make it very different from other approaches, so it is no surprise that business people keep coming back. The benefits include the following. 

Adaptability to human behavior

SLT recognizes the ever-changing nature of human behavior. It helps leaders to respond without relying on rigid responses or cookie-cutter thinking. It can adapt to many situations. 

Fostering Development

By emphasizing flexibility and responsiveness, the theory promotes a culture of learning. SLT encourages continuous staff training under the guidance of adaptable leadership.

Integration with other approaches

Situational Leadership works well with other leadership methodologies. For instance, its participatory behavior style aligns well with servant leadership principles. It also goes well with empathetic leadership, promoting understanding and support within teams.

Value for agile leaders 

Agile methods benefit significantly from Situational Leadership Theory. Agile allows teams to adapt and innovate. SLT adds to this by helping to define a range of managerial responses when they arise. This collaboration with agile team leadership fosters a dynamic and responsive work environment.

Support from research and case studies

Backed by extensive research and analysis, Situational Leadership Theory offers an academically robust framework supported by a wealth of case studies and examples. This ensures its applicability and effectiveness in addressing real-world challenges.

What are the challenges of situational leadership theory? 

As we’ve seen in this article, situational leadership has a lot of positive benefits. However, it is not perfect. Some of the major problems with situational leadership include the following points.  

Trusting in leaders’ judgment

SLT places significant emphasis on leaders’ judgment when assessing follower readiness levels. However, this skill may be challenging for many leaders to develop. Accurately gauging readiness requires experience, intuition, and insight, which may not come naturally to all leaders.

The complexity of factors in organizational behavior 

Much about SLT “rings true” – it seems like common sense! However, in difficult times, mastering SLT is no small feat. It involves navigating a dynamic landscape of situational factors, individual motivations, and leadership behaviors. 

Reliance on soft skills

SLT assumes a foundation of soft skills, such as communication, empathy, and emotional intelligence, essential for effective leadership. However, not all leaders possess these skills innately. Incorporating SLT into leadership training programs alongside other soft skills development initiatives can address this challenge.

The challenges of empirical evidence

Producing clear-cut empirical evidence to validate SLT can be challenging. As a result, SLT may be better suited as a subjective approach rather than relying solely on empirical evidence.

Potential confusion for teams

 Constantly shifting leadership behaviors based on situational factors may confuse teams and undermine stability. Teams may struggle to understand and adapt to rapidly changing leadership styles, leading to uncertainty and inefficiency.

Navigating these challenges requires leaders to approach SLTs with humility, adaptability, and a commitment to development. 

Why situational leadership is so effective   

Today, Business leaders know they need emotional intelligence (EQ) to match their academic intelligence (IQ). SLT opens doors for a generation of leaders who wear their soft skills on their sleeves. 

The theory can challenge the status quo by addressing the lack of diversity in leadership teams. 

The possibilities of SLT remind us just how far we’ve come from the theories of “scientific management” in the first part of the twentieth century. Businesses, organizations, and people have all changed beyond recognition, and SLT is one of many postmodern leadership theories that address these challenges. 

Like what you are reading?

Sign up for our weekly digest of the latest digital trends and insights delivered straight to your inbox.

By clicking the button, you agree to the Terms and Conditions . Click Here to Read WalkMe's Privacy Policy

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thanks for subscribing to WalkMe’s newsletter!

• Creative & Design
• See all teams

For industries

• Manufacturing
• Professional Services
• Consumer Goods
• Financial Services
• See all industries
• Resource Management
• Project Management
• Workflow Management
• Task Management
• See all use cases

Explore Wrike

• Book a Demo
• Take a Product Tour
• ROI Calculator
• Customer Stories
• Start with Templates
• Gantt Charts
• Custom Item Types
• Project Resource Planning
• Project Views
• Kanban Boards
• Dynamic Request Forms
• Cross-Tagging
• See all features
• Integrations
• Mobile & Desktop Apps
• Resource Hub
• Educational Guides

Upskill and Connect

• Training & Certifications
• Help Center
• Wrike's Community
• Premium Support Packages
• Wrike Professional Services

Implementing the Situational Leadership Theory in Project Management

June 11, 2023 - 10 min read

In the ever-evolving world of project management , effective leadership is a crucial factor in achieving the success of any endeavor. One leadership theory that has gained traction in recent years is the Situational Leadership Theory. This theory recognizes that different situations require different leadership styles and that effective leaders are those who can adapt their approach to suit the needs of their team. In this article, we will explore the basics of Situational Leadership Theory, its importance in project management, steps to implement this theory, real-world case studies, and challenges associated with its implementation.

Understanding the Basics of Situational Leadership Theory

Developed by entrepreneur Paul Hersey and writer Kenneth Blanchard, the Situational Leadership Theory is based on the premise that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to leadership. Instead, it emphasizes the importance of adjusting leadership behaviors based on the maturity level of the team members and the specific task at hand. Leaders who can effectively diagnose the development level of their team members and apply the appropriate leadership style are more likely to achieve positive outcomes.

The Four Leadership Styles in Situational Leadership Theory

Based on the staff's development level, leaders can adopt one of four leadership styles: directing, coaching, supporting, or delegating. Each style is tailored to the specific needs of the team members, ensuring that their growth and success are maximized.

• Directing: Appropriate when team members are low on both competence and commitment. In such situations, leaders take a more hands-on approach, providing explicit instructions and closely monitoring progress. 
• Coaching: Suitable when team members have low competence but high commitment. In this style, leaders focus on both task accomplishment and personal development. They provide guidance and support, offering constructive feedback and helping team members enhance their skills. 
• Supporting: Perfect for team members with high competence but low commitment. In this style, leaders facilitate and empower the team, providing support and encouragement. 
• Delegating: For team members who have high competence and high commitment. In this style, leaders allow the team to take ownership and make decisions autonomously. 

The Importance of Situational Leadership in Project Management

Effective project management relies on leaders who can maximize team performance, facilitate effective communication, and promote flexibility and adaptability. 

Enhancing Team Performance

By adapting leadership styles based on the development level of team members, project managers can provide the necessary guidance and support for individuals to reach their full potential. This approach boosts team performance by tailoring leadership behaviors to the specific needs of each team member.

Let's consider a project manager who has a team consisting of both experienced professionals and new recruits. The experienced professionals may require less direction and guidance, as they have a high level of competence and commitment. On the other hand, the new recruits may need more support and clear instructions to build their skills and confidence. By using situational leadership, the project manager can adjust their leadership style accordingly, providing the appropriate level of guidance to each team member. This not only helps the new recruits develop their skills but also allows the experienced professionals to work autonomously, leading to improved overall team performance.

Facilitating Effective Communication

Communication is paramount in project management. Situational Leadership Theory encourages leaders to adjust their communication style to align with the competence and commitment of team members. By doing so, leaders can see to it that messages are conveyed effectively and understood by all team members, resulting in improved collaboration and productivity.

Consider a project manager who is leading a team with members from different cultural backgrounds. Each team member may have different communication preferences and styles. Some may prefer direct and concise communication, while others may prefer more detailed and contextualized information. By using situational leadership, the project manager can adapt their communication style to meet the needs of each team member, so that information is effectively transmitted and understood by all. This fosters a positive and inclusive team environment, where everyone feels heard and valued, leading to enhanced team collaboration and ultimately, project success.

Promoting Flexibility and Adaptability

Projects often encounter unexpected challenges and changes. Leaders who embrace Situational Leadership Theory are better equipped to adapt their approach and guide their team through turbulent times. This flexibility ensures that projects remain on track and objectives are met, ultimately leading to project success.

Imagine a project manager who is leading a team working on a complex software development project. Midway through the project, a critical software bug is discovered, requiring immediate attention and a change in the project plan. A project manager who practices situational leadership can quickly assess the situation, gather input from team members, and adapt the project plan accordingly. They may assign additional resources to fix the bug, rearrange priorities, or modify timelines to accommodate the change. By being flexible and adaptable, the project manager can effectively navigate through unexpected challenges, so that the project remains on track and objectives are met.

Steps to Implement Situational Leadership Theory in Project Management

Below are several key steps:

Assessing the Team's Competence and Commitment

To effectively apply Situational Leadership Theory, project managers need to assess the competence and commitment levels of their team members. This assessment can be done through various methods, such as individual interviews, skills assessments, and feedback sessions.

During individual interviews, project managers can have one-on-one conversations with team members to understand their strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement. They can conduct skills assessments to objectively measure the technical abilities of team members via tests, simulations, or practical exercises. Lastly, feedback sessions provide an opportunity for project managers to gather insights from team members about their level of commitment and motivation, through open discussions, surveys, or anonymous feedback forms.

Identifying the Appropriate Leadership Style

Once the team's competence and commitment levels have been evaluated, project managers can determine the most suitable leadership style for each team member. The goal is to match the leadership style to the development level of the individual, so that the team member receives the necessary guidance and support to succeed. There are four main leadership styles in Situational Leadership Theory: directing, coaching, supporting, and delegating. They are described above, in the section titled The Four Leadership Styles in Situational Leadership Theory .

Applying the Chosen Leadership Style

After identifying the appropriate leadership style, project managers must implement it effectively. This involves communicating expectations, providing resources and support, and monitoring progress. Regular feedback and coaching sessions can also help team members develop and grow.

When applying the chosen leadership style, project managers need to clearly communicate their expectations to team members. This includes defining project goals, outlining roles and responsibilities, and setting performance standards. Managers must also provide the necessary resources and support to enable team members to succeed. This can include providing access to training and development opportunities, allocating sufficient time and budget for project tasks, and offering guidance and assistance when needed. Lastly, project managers should regularly monitor the progress of team members and provide feedback to help them improve. This can be done through performance evaluations, progress reports, or informal check-ins. 

Case Studies of Situational Leadership in Project Management

Here are two case studies that illustrate the inclusion of situational leadership in project management.

Case Study 1: Tech Industry

In a technology company, a project manager utilized Situational Leadership Theory to manage a team of software developers. By identifying the competence and commitment levels of each team member, the project manager was able to adjust their leadership style accordingly. This resulted in increased collaboration, improved technical skills, and higher motivation among team members, leading to the successful completion of the project within the specified time frame.

Case Study 2: Construction Industry

In a construction project, a project manager applied Situational Leadership Theory to effectively guide a diverse team of skilled laborers. By recognizing the development level of each individual and adapting the leadership style accordingly, the project manager made sure that all team members understood their roles and responsibilities. This created a positive working environment, increased productivity, and minimized rework, resulting in the timely completion of the project and high client satisfaction.

Challenges and Solutions in Implementing Situational Leadership

Here are several obstacles in implementing situational leadership, along with tactics to overcome them.

Common Obstacles in Applying Situational Leadership

Implementing Situational Leadership Theory may encounter a few challenges. Some team members may resist changes to their preferred leadership style, or there may be a lack of understanding or awareness about the theory. Additionally, time constraints and resource limitations can pose obstacles to the effective implementation of Situational Leadership Theory in project management.

Effective Strategies to Overcome Challenges

To overcome these challenges, project managers can invest in training and development programs for both leaders and team members, promoting a shared understanding of Situational Leadership Theory. Clear communication and regular feedback can help address resistance and build trust among team members. Additionally, project managers can allocate sufficient time and resources to confirm that the theory is implemented effectively and seamlessly.

Ultimately, implementing the Situational Leadership Theory in project management can greatly enhance team performance, facilitate effective communication, and promote flexibility and adaptability. By understanding the basics of this theory, recognizing its importance, and following the steps to implementation, project managers can create a supportive and productive environment that drives project success. While challenges may arise, with effective strategies, these challenges can be overcome, and the benefits of Situational Leadership Theory can be realized.

Enhance your project management skills by effectively implementing the situational leadership theory with Wrike. Start a free trial and lead your team with adaptability and sensitivity. Note: This article was created with the assistance of an AI engine. It has been reviewed and revised by our team of experts to ensure accuracy and quality.

Occasionally we write blog posts where multiple people contribute. Since our idea of having a gladiator arena where contributors would fight to the death to win total authorship wasn’t approved by HR, this was the compromise.

Related articles

4 Steps to More Effective Project Management

Effective project management is crucial for businesses who are working remotely and prioritizing client satisfaction. Wrike helps teams achieve PM efficiency.

A Guide to Project Portfolio Management

Improve your project portfolio management process to increase the bottom line, and boost ROI. Wrike’s project portfolio management software can help.

7 Easy Ways To Improve PMO Team Efficiency

Project management office (PMO) teams play a vital role in managing complex projects. However, inefficiencies can arise from ineffective communication channels, inefficient processes, and poor collaboration among team members. In this article, we’ve outlined seven easy ways to improve PMO team efficiency and boost productivity.   Try Wrike for free 1. Streamline Communication Channels Clear communication is critical for the success of any project. PMO teams can streamline their communication channels and promote a culture of openness and transparency using these techniques: Implementing a centralized communication platform: A single platform like Slack or Microsoft Teams allows team members to communicate in real time, share files and documents, and reduce the need for meetings. This not only saves time but also ensures that everyone has access to the same information and can collaborate more effectively. Encouraging open and transparent conversations: Create a safe space for team members to share their ideas, ask questions, and share feedback via regular team meetings, check-ins, and one-on-one sessions. When employees feel comfortable sharing their thoughts and concerns, it leads to better collaboration, problem-solving, and decision-making. Scheduling regular team meetings and check-ins: Weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly team meetings are beneficial for promoting team cohesion, discussing project progress, and identifying potential roadblocks in advance. Check-ins can be done individually to discuss specific concerns and serve as a discussion forum to ask questions and get clarification on any tasks or responsibilities. Using visual aids to enhance communication: Charts, graphs, and diagrams simplify complex information and can perfectly illustrate project timelines, progress, and milestones. They highlight key data points and trends, making it easier to identify areas that require attention. Providing regular project updates: Regular project updates keep stakeholders informed about the project's progress and any changes that may impact them and are a great way to build trust and credibility. These updates can be done through email, newsletters, or project management software.  2. Optimize Project Management Tools and Processes Effective project management is crucial for the success of any organization. Project Management Office (PMO) teams must optimize project management tools and processes by evaluating the current tools and processes and implementing new ones where necessary.  Evaluate and Select the Right PMO Software Evaluate various software options and select the one that best suits your company’s needs. The software should be user-friendly, have the necessary features, and be compatible with other tools that your team may require. It should also be scalable and able to accommodate the needs of the organization as it grows. Standardize Project Management Methodologies PMO teams need to work with project managers to develop a methodology that works for the organization and is tailored to the specific needs of each project. The methodology should be documented and communicated to all team members so that everyone is on the same page. Automate Routine Tasks and Reporting By automating routine tasks such as reporting and data collection, team members can free up more time to focus on other important project-related tasks. Automation tools and software can also help to reduce errors and confirm that data is accurate and up-to-date. 3. Enhance Collaboration Among Team Members Effective collaboration is not just about working together, but it is about doing so efficiently, effectively, and cohesively. In a world where remote work is becoming the norm, collaboration is more important than ever. PMO teams can improve collaboration by: Fostering a collaborative team culture: Promote teamwork, create a sense of shared purpose, and acknowledge each team member's contribution and expertise. When team members feel valued and respected, they are more likely to work together seamlessly, resulting in a more productive and efficient team. Utilizing collaboration tools and techniques: Try Trello, Wrike, or Kanban boards, as these tools help teams to stay on the same page, track progress, and collaborate effectively. Encouraging cross-functional teamwork: Encouraging team members from different departments or areas of expertise to work together on projects can tap into a broader range of skills and expertise. This helps to improve collaboration and leads to better problem-solving and decision-making. When team members from different backgrounds come together, they bring unique perspectives and ideas that can lead to innovative solutions. Providing adequate training: PMO teams can provide training to their team members on effective communication, conflict resolution, and teamwork. This will help employees to work together more efficiently, leading to better collaboration and project outcomes. Creating a safe environment for collaboration: PMO teams can create a safe environment for collaboration by encouraging open communication, being receptive to feedback, and promoting a culture of trust. When team members feel safe to express their opinions and ideas, they are more likely to collaborate effectively. 4. Invest in Continuous Learning and Development Continuous learning and development are a must-have for the success of any organization, and it is especially true for a Project Management Office (PMO). Here are some ways to invest in continuous learning: Identify Skill Gaps and Training Needs Conducting regular assessments to identify skills gaps and training needs within the team will allow you to effectively customize training programs to address the gaps. Moreover, your staff will be able to acquire new skills and knowledge and stay up-to-date with the latest industry trends.   Try Wrike for free Offer Professional Development Opportunities Workshops, courses, or certification programs can assist your employees in staying up-to-date with new technologies and industry trends. These opportunities can also help your team members to develop new skills and gain valuable experience that they can apply to their work. Promote a Growth Mindset A growth mindset involves a willingness to learn, try new approaches, and embrace challenges. By promoting this, you can create a culture of continuous learning and improvement within your PMO team. 5. Develop Effective Change Management Processes PMO teams often have to navigate multiple stakeholders, conflicting priorities, and changing requirements when managing complex projects. Therefore, developing a robust change management process can help your team handle these challenges and avoid project delays and rework. In this section, we will discuss some key steps to develop an effective change management process. Develop a Change Management Plan Outline how changes will be requested, evaluated, and implemented within a project. Also, include guidelines for stakeholder communication and risk management. The goal is to have everybody be on the same page when it comes to managing changes. When developing a change management plan, consider the following: What types of changes will be allowed? What is the process for requesting a change? Who is responsible for evaluating change requests? How will changes be communicated to stakeholders? What is the process for implementing changes? How will changes be monitored and evaluated? Establish a Change Control Board A change control board is responsible for assessing change requests and verifying that they align with the project's overall goals and objectives. The board should be made up of key stakeholders, including project managers, business analysts, and subject matter experts. It should also meet regularly to review change requests and make decisions about whether to approve or reject them. When establishing a change control board, consider the following: Who should be on the board? How often should the board meet? What criteria will be used to evaluate change requests? What is the process for communicating decisions to stakeholders? Communicate Changes Effectively Effective communication allows you to manage change successfully. Create a communication plan to share information about changes with everyone affected by them. The plan should include details about who will be responsible for communicating these shifts, what information will be shared, and how often updates will be provided. When communicating changes, consider the following: Who needs to be informed about the change? What information do stakeholders need to know? How will the information be communicated? How often will updates be provided? Monitor and Evaluate Changes Monitoring and evaluating changes are essential for measuring the effectiveness of your change management process and identifying areas for improvement. Regularly review the change management process to be able to flag any issues or bottlenecks. Then, make adjustments as needed. When monitoring and evaluating changes, look at: What metrics will be used to measure the effectiveness of the change management process? How often will the process be reviewed? What is the process for making changes to the change management process? 6. Embrace Agile Project Management Agile project management is a flexible and iterative approach to managing projects. It involves breaking down complex projects into smaller, more manageable tasks and delivering them incrementally. Agile methods can help PMO teams improve project outcomes by: Allowing for flexibility and adaptability: The ability to pivot quickly and adapt to changing project requirements, stakeholder feedback, or unforeseen circumstances is instrumental in delivering a successful project. Incorporating continuous feedback: Receiving and applying ongoing feedback from stakeholders will keep project outcomes aligned with the original goals and objectives. Enhancing collaboration and communication: Frequent communication and collaboration among team members promotes teamwork and knowledge-sharing. 7. Measure and Analyze Team Performance Regularly measuring and analyzing team performance is necessary for identifying areas of improvement and ensuring that project outcomes align with overall business goals and objectives. Here are some ways to measure and analyze team performance: Establish key performance indicators (KPIs): KPIs let PMO teams measure progress toward specific project goals and objectives. Select KPIs that align with your project's priorities and overall business objectives.  Use performance dashboards: Be able to visualize and track team performance data over time. You will be able to notice trends, make data-driven decisions, and communicate progress to stakeholders.  Analyze team performance data: Use data analytics tools and software to analyze team performance data, identify areas of improvement, and develop strategies to address them. Conclusion Improving PMO team efficiency requires a multifaceted approach that involves streamlining communication channels, optimizing project management tools and processes, enhancing collaboration and learning opportunities, embracing change management, adopting Agile methodologies, and measuring and analyzing team performance regularly. By implementing these seven easy ways, PMO teams can boost project productivity, reduce rework, and deliver successful outcomes that align with overall business goals and objectives.  Improve your PMO team efficiency effortlessly with our seven tips and Wrike's comprehensive project management tools. Start a free trial today to elevate your project management office operations.   Try Wrike for free   Note: This article was created with the assistance of an AI engine. It has been reviewed and revised by our team of experts to ensure accuracy and quality.

Get weekly updates in your inbox!

You are now subscribed to wrike news and updates.

Let us know what marketing emails you are interested in by updating your email preferences here .

Sorry, this content is unavailable due to your privacy settings. To view this content, click the “Cookie Preferences” button and accept Advertising Cookies there.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Public Health

Application of Situational Leadership to the National Voluntary Public Health Accreditation Process

Kristina rabarison.

1 College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA

Richard C. Ingram

James w. holsinger, jr.

Successful navigation through the accreditation process developed by the Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB) requires strong and effective leadership. Situational leadership, a contingency theory of leadership, frequently taught in the public health classroom, has utility for leading a public health agency through this process. As a public health agency pursues accreditation, staff members progress from being uncertain and unfamiliar with the process to being knowledgeable and confident in their ability to fulfill the accreditation requirements. Situational leadership provides a framework that allows leaders to match their leadership styles to the needs of agency personnel. In this paper, the application of situational leadership to accreditation is demonstrated by tracking the process at a progressive Kentucky county public health agency that served as a PHAB beta test site.

Introduction

The mission of public health, as identified by the 1988 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report, The Future of Public Health , is “assuring conditions in which people can be healthy” ( 1 ). A strong infrastructure is central to the mission of public health, since it supports the delivery of key public health services. The critical role infrastructure plays in assuring public health is underscored in a 2003 IOM follow up report that identified strengthening governmental public health institutions as an essential area of action for the twenty-first century. The 2003 report highlighted the key role that leadership plays in maintaining a strong public health system through the development of a competent public health workforce. It also identified the importance of leadership in such specific recommendations as making “leadership training, support, and development” a high priority for all governmental public health agencies, schools of public health, and the other entities within the public health system ( 2 ).

Successful leadership is contingent upon developing a clear mission and executing a vision to guide progress ( 3 ). Various frameworks have been developed to guide public health leaders in developing a mission and vision, including the three Core Functions of Public Health and the 10 Essential Public Health Services (EPHS) ( 4 ). While these frameworks are useful, they are macro-contextual, and may be disconnected from the day to day operations of a public health agency. The accreditation standards and measures developed by The Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB) provide specific benchmarks to be utilized by agencies as a framework to guide their activities. While PHAB’s standards and measures can be used to guide organizational leadership, the changes associated with accreditation require strong leadership and an immediate short-term strategic plan and long-term vision based on effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability.

Academic public health programs, as part of their curricula, educate students in leadership theories and models, and often include skill training at both the masters and doctoral levels. Students of public health rarely are provided the opportunity to practice the leadership skills developed in the classroom or to test leadership theories in real world situations prior to degree completion. This article discusses one opportunity to transfer leadership theory and practice from the classroom to the practice setting. In this instance, practice based field experience provided a public health doctoral student the opportunity to utilize concepts learned in the classroom in a practice setting, and develop a case study, based on initial and follow up interviews with public health agency personnel, focused on leadership in the context of preparing for participation in a Beta Test of the PHAB pilot standards and measures.

Situational Leadership

Situational leadership theory suggests that leaders should adapt their leadership styles based on the readiness, current skills, and developmental level of team members ( 5 ). It provides the leader with the flexibility to assess the situation and adopt a leadership style that best fits the needs of the follower. It is particularly well suited to leading public health agencies through the accreditation process as will be demonstrated.

Utilizing Situational Leadership requires leaders to be aware of the perceptions of their followers. What leaders say they do is one thing; what followers say they want and how well their leaders meet their expectations is another ( 6 ). Given the novelty of accreditation, and the potential anxiety engendered during the different phases of the process, public health leaders need to be aware of and adapt their leadership styles to match the readiness, current skills, and developmental status of the team members engaged in accreditation, allowing the agency to successfully navigate this intricate process.

Situational leadership is based on two behavioral categories: task behavior and relational behavior. Task behavior is “the extent to which the leader engages in spelling out the duties and responsibilities of an individual or group” ( 7 ). Relational behavior is “the extent to which the leader engages in two-way or multi-way communication if there is more than one person” ( 7 ). Thus, situational leadership provides a balance between (1) guidance and direction (task behavior), (2) socio-emotional support (relational behavior), and (3) the readiness level followers exhibit for a specific task ( 5 ). The leadership styles of situational leadership include:

• Style 1 (S1) “Directing” characterized by “high task and low relationship” behaviors;
• Style 2 (S2) “Coaching” characterized by “high task and high relationship” behaviors;
• Style 3 (S3) “Participating” characterized by “high relationship and low task” behaviors;

Situational leadership and public health accreditation . Adapted from Ref. ( 5 ).

In situational leadership, readiness is defined as “the extent to which a follower demonstrates the ability and willingness to accomplish a specific task” ( 5 ). The major components of readiness are ability defined as “the knowledge, experience, and skill that an individual or a group brings to a particular task or activity,” and willingness is defined as “the extent to which an individual or a group has the confidence, commitment, and motivation to accomplish a specific task” ( 5 ). As seen in Figure ​ Figure1, 1 , follower readiness is a continuum from low to high as followers develop ability and willingness. Leaders match their leadership style to the readiness level of their followers as follows:

• Level 1 (R1) occurs when the follower is “unable and unwilling” to perform the task and lacks confidence, motivation, and commitment;
• Level 2 (R2) occurs when the follower is “unable but willing” to perform the task and requires some guidance;
• Level 3 (R3) occurs when the follower is “able but unwilling” to complete the task, possibly because of insecurity; and
• Level 4 (R4) occurs when the follower is “willing and able” to accomplish the task with confidence ( 5 ) (see Figure ​ Figure1 1 ).

Situational Leadership and Public Health Accreditation: A Local Health Agency Case Study

While accreditation is not a new concept in the American health sector [initiatives such as The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) have been a part of the health care system for decades], it is a new phenomenon in public health practice in the United States. Informal discussions concerning the accreditation of public health agencies have occurred for some time; however, accreditation received a significant boost from The Future of the Public’s Health in the Twenty-First Century , which stated that “despite the controversies concerning accreditation, greater accountability is needed on the part of state and local health agencies with regard to the performance of the core public health functions of assessment, assurance, and policy development and the EPHS” ( 8 ). This report led to the creation of the Exploring Accreditation project in 2004, the creation of PHAB in 2007, and ultimately the release of PHAB’s standards and measures for voluntary national accreditation in 2011.

Accreditation is a useful tool for improving the quality of services provided to the public by setting standards and evaluating performance against those standards, and has been shown to be associated with higher performing health systems. In a working paper for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), Mays demonstrated that clinical quality measures for care of myocardial infarctions were lower and mortality rates higher in hospitals not participating in JCAHO accreditation when compared to JCAHO accredited healthcare facilities ( 9 ). It may be postulated that accreditation of public health agencies will have a similar effect. PHAB states that its program is intended to develop and maintain “a high-performing governmental public health system that will make us the healthiest nation.” Thus, PHAB “is dedicated to promote, improve, and protect the health of the public by advancing the quality and performance of state, local, tribal, and territorial public health departments in the United States” ( 10 ).

The PHAB accreditation process has seven steps; Pre-application, Application, Documentation Selection and Submission, Site Visit, Accreditation Decision, Reports, and Reaccreditation; and was developed after extensive review and revision, including a beta test of the process, which included 30 state, tribal, and local public health agencies ( 10 , 11 ). Following an interview with the director of a local public health agency regarding the agency’s experience as a beta test site, the authors noted that the agency’s accreditation experience closely matched the four situational leadership styles in relationship to the stages of follower readiness displayed in Figure ​ Figure1. 1 . As a result, a follow up interview was completed to confirm these findings, and to further discuss the application of situational leadership to the accreditation process.

The agency was well prepared for accreditation given its previous commitment to continuous quality improvement, as evidenced by its application to be a beta test site. In addition, the agency director was a member of the Kentucky Department of Public Health Quality Improvement Team prior to accepting her current position ( 12 ). This agency is also committed to performance measurement and management, having completed in 2008 a local public health system performance assessment that demonstrated a relatively high (69%) score in the overall performance of the EPHS ( 12 ).

During the initial interview with the agency director, it was apparent that leadership was viewed as a key element to accreditation success. Fostering complete organizational commitment to the process was of particular importance, including high commitment from contract and part time employes, as well as members of the local board of health.

Early in the accreditation process, particularly during the pre-application and application stages, and partially during document submission, the agency staff was relatively unfamiliar with the accreditation process (R1 follower readiness level as depicted in Figure ​ Figure1), 1 ), necessitating that the agency director engage in leader directed activities, primarily those shown in the S1 area in Figure ​ Figure1. 1 . Such actions involved informing the agency staff of the requirements and processes of accreditation and directing them through the process with high task behaviors answering the question: what is public health accreditation? She utilized a directing style of leadership dealing with questions such as who, what, when, where, and how.

As agency staff members developed an understanding of the value of accreditation and gained some confidence through identifying their roles in the process and the documents necessary for review, they transitioned to an R2 stage of follower readiness as depicted in Figure ​ Figure1, 1 , resulting in the director continuing highly directive behavior while adding high relationship behavior as well. A coaching, persuading, and/or explaining leadership style (S2 quadrant of the diagram) became important. While the leadership style was still high task, moving from direction to explanation occurred in order to answer the question, “Why is accreditation important to our agency?”.

By the time the agency was ready for document submission its personnel had sufficient confidence to transition fully to the R2 stage of readiness. There were still gaps in knowledge and ability related to the accreditation process, thus necessitating a continuation of the S2 leadership style, including coaching, explaining, and continuously persuading public health agency staff members of the value of accreditation and the importance of each individual’s role in the agency’s effort.

By the time the agency reached the PHAB’s beta test site visit phase, it had reached an R3 stage of readiness as depicted in Figure ​ Figure1. 1 . As a result, leadership style was based on high relationship, low task behaviors characterized by quadrant S3. These follower-directed behaviors revolved primarily around encouraging and championing the efforts of a highly participatory agency staff, with agency leaders assuming the role of problem solvers instead of being more highly task oriented.

By the conclusion of the PHAB beta test experience, when mock accreditation feedback was provided, the agency staff members had developed to an R4 stage of readiness. The agency staff was able, willing, and confident with respect to accreditation. As a result, the leader’s style had shifted to a low task and low relational behavior approach as described by quadrant S4. The director successfully delegated the accreditation coordination task to an accreditation coordinator, thus serving as an engaged mentor.

The PHAB beta test experience allowed the agency to further develop its quality improvement, performance measurement, and management infrastructure. The agency had successfully completed the three prerequisites of PHAB accreditation by developing a community health assessment, a community health improvement plan, and a refined strategic plan with clear mission and vision statements that were ready to be adopted. In addition, a 12 member accreditation team had been formed, being led by the full time accreditation coordinator.

As a result of the commitment and intense preparation exhibited by the staff, on February 28, 2013, the agency was awarded 5-year accreditation status by PHAB. 1 Accreditation of the agency was a direct result of the leadership exhibited by the agency’s senior leadership. The accreditation result was based on the development of a high-performing team founded on full collaboration between staff members and leaders. The use of a situational leadership approach contributed to team development. Conflict resolution was more readily accomplished by the leaders’ understanding of the needs of the staff members and the leaders’ ability to utilize an appropriate leadership style to meet the staff members’ needs. Due to the nature of the PHAB accrediting process, no ethical issues were raised by staff members during the beta test experience.

Situational leadership theory and skills learned in the classroom were effective in understanding the leadership required to effectively guide a public health agency through the process of preparing for PHAB accreditation. This theory of leadership is an appropriate approach for leading the accreditation process due to its flexibility as a follower driven model of leadership. Given the novelty and the complexity of the accreditation process, a highly functioning team is required and situational leadership provides a framework for public health agency leaders to successfully guide their teams through the process. Use of situational leadership will ensure that public health agencies successfully develop an ongoing quality improvement and performance standards plan throughout the accreditation process. Thus, a classroom leadership theory was found to be useful as an approach to being faithful to public health’s mission to “assure conditions in which people can be healthy” ( 1 ).

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

1 http://www.phaboard.org/news-room/accredited-health-departments

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Sweepstakes
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

Situational Leadership Theory

Verywell / Nez Riaz

Situational Leadership II

Elements of situational leadership theory, frequently asked questions.

Situational leadership theory suggests that no single leadership style is best. Instead, it depends on which type of leadership and strategies are best suited to the task.

According to this theory, the most effective leaders are those that are able to adapt their style to the situation and look at cues such as the type of task, the nature of the group, and other factors that might contribute to getting the job done.

Situational leadership theory is often referred to as the Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory, after its developers, Dr. Paul Hersey, author of "The Situational Leader," and Kenneth Blanchard, author of "One-Minute Manager."

Leadership Styles

Hersey and Blanchard suggested that there are four primary leadership styles:

• Telling (S1) : In this leadership style, the leader tells people what to do and how to do it.
• Selling (S2) : This style involves more back-and-forth between leaders and followers . Leaders "sell" their ideas and message to get group members to buy into the process.
• Participating (S3) : In this approach, the leader offers less direction and allows members of the group to take a more active role in coming up with ideas and making decisions.
• Delegating (S4) : This style is characterized by a less involved, hands-off approach to leadership . Group members tend to make most of the decisions and take most of the responsibility for what happens.

Maturity Levels

The right style of leadership depends greatly on the maturity level (i.e., the level of knowledge and competence) of the individuals or group.

Hersey and Blanchard's theory identifies four different levels of maturity, including:

• M1 : Group members lack the knowledge, skills, and willingness to complete the task.
• M2 : Group members are willing and enthusiastic, but lack the ability.
• M3 : Group members have the skills and capability to complete the task, but are unwilling to take responsibility.
• M4 : Group members are highly skilled and willing to complete the task.

Matching Styles and Levels

Leadership styles may be matched with maturity levels. The Hersey-Blanchard model suggests that the following leadership styles are the most appropriate for these maturity levels:

• Low Maturity (M1)—Telling (S1)
• Medium Maturity (M2)—Selling (S2)
• Medium Maturity (M3)—Participating (S3)
• High Maturity (M4)—Delegating (S4)

How It Works

A more "telling" style may be necessary at the beginning of a project when followers lack the responsibility or knowledge to work on their own. As subordinates become more experienced and knowledgeable, however, the leader may want to shift into a more delegating approach.

This situational model of leadership focuses on flexibility so that leaders are able to adapt according to the needs of their followers and the demands of the situation.

The situational approach to leadership also avoids the pitfalls of the single-style approach by recognizing that there are many different ways of dealing with a problem and that leaders need to be able to assess a situation and the maturity levels of subordinates in order to determine what approach will be the most effective at any given moment.

Situational theories , therefore, give greater consideration to the complexity of dynamic social situations and the many individuals acting in different roles who will ultimately contribute to the outcome.

The Situational Leadership II (or SLII model) was developed by Kenneth Blanchard and builds on Blanchard and Hersey's original theory. According to the revised version of the theory, effective leaders must base their behavior on the developmental level of group members for specific tasks.

Competence and Commitment

The developmental level is determined by each individual's level of competence and commitment. These levels include:

• Enthusiastic beginner (D1) : High commitment, low competence
• Disillusioned learner (D2) : Some competence, but setbacks have led to low commitment
• Capable but cautious performer (D3) : Competence is growing, but the level of commitment varies
• Self-reliant achiever (D4) : High competence and commitment

SLII Leadership Styles

SLII also suggests that effective leadership is dependent on two key behaviors: supporting and directing. Directing behaviors include giving specific directions and instructions and attempting to control the behavior of group members. Supporting behaviors include actions such as encouraging subordinates, listening, and offering recognition and feedback.

The theory identifies four situational leadership styles:

• Directing (S1) : High on directing behaviors, low on supporting behaviors
• Coaching (S2) : High on both directing and supporting behaviors
• Supporting (S3) : Low on directing behavior and high on supporting behaviors
• Delegating (S4) : Low on both directing and supporting behaviors

The main point of SLII theory is that not one of these four leadership styles is best. Instead, an effective leader will match their behavior to the developmental skill of each subordinate for the task at hand.

Experts suggest that there are four key contextual factors that leaders must be aware of when making an assessment of the situation.

Consider the Relationship

Leaders need to consider the relationship between the leaders and the members of the group. Social and interpersonal factors can play a role in determining which approach is best.

For example, a group that lacks efficiency and productivity might benefit from a style that emphasizes order, rules, and clearly defined roles. A productive group of highly skilled workers, on the other hand, might benefit from a more democratic style that allows group members to work independently and have input in organizational decisions.

Consider the Task

The leader needs to consider the task itself. Tasks can range from simple to complex, but the leader needs to have a clear idea of exactly what the task entails in order to determine if it has been successfully and competently accomplished.

Consider the Level of Authority

The level of authority the leader has over group members should also be considered. Some leaders have power conferred by the position itself, such as the capacity to fire, hire, reward, or reprimand subordinates.

Other leaders gain power through relationships with employees, often by gaining respect from them, offering support to them, and helping them feel included in the decision-making process .

Consider the Level of Maturity

As the Hersey-Blanchard model suggests, leaders need to consider the level of maturity of each individual group member. The maturity level is a measure of an individual's ability to complete a task, as well as their willingness to complete the task . Assigning a job to a member who is willing but lacks the ability is a recipe for failure.

Being able to pinpoint each employee's level of maturity allows the leader to choose the best leadership approach to help employees accomplish their goals.

An example of situational leadership would be a leader adapting their approach based on the needs of their team members. One team member might be less experienced and require more oversight, while another might be more knowledgable and capable of working independently.

In order to lead effectively, the three skills needed to utilize situational leadership are diagnosis, flexibility, and communication. Leaders must be able to evaluate the situation, adapt as needed, and communicate their expectations with members of the group.

Important elements of situational leadership theory are the styles of leadership that are used, the developmental level of team members, the adaptability of the leader, communication with group members, and the attainment of the group's goals.

• DuBrin AJ. Leadership: Research, Findings, Practice, and Skills. Mason, OH: South-Western, Cengage Learning; 2013.
• Gill R. Theory and Practice of Leadership. London: Sage Publications; 2011.
• Hersey P, Blanchard KH.  Management of Organizational Behavior — Utilizing Human Resources . New Jersey/Prentice Hall; 1969.
• Hersey P, Blanchard KH. Life Cycle Theory of Leadership. Training and Development Journal.  1969;23(5):26–34.
• Nevarez C, Wood JL, Penrose R. Leadership Theory and the Community College: Applying Theory to Practice. Sterling, Virginia: Stylus Publishing; 2013.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Situational Leadership Theory: An Extension and a Test of Global Organizational Prescriptions

• First Online: 17 June 2023

Cite this chapter

• Rajesh Ranjan Mahapatra 2 &
• Ajay K. Jain 2  

656 Accesses

1 Citations

Hersey and Blanchard’s situational leadership theory (SLT) is among the most popular and cited leadership theories in both academia and executive training programs. While it has been very popular due to its widespread application, its application under different organizational contingencies remains under-researched. Hersey and Blanchard have explained the role of follower’s maturity in adopting the most appropriate leadership style. However, this chapter is aimed at exploring the conceptual linkages of situational leadership theory with three key organizational contingencies, namely, stages of organizational growth, organizational structure, and organizational culture, and suggests an appropriate leadership style depending on these organizational contingencies. Thus, the authors have suggested that further research and empirical tests can be carried out to validate these propositions, following which this new updated version of SLT can be applied in the organizational context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Organizational Leadership Decision Making in Asia: The Chinese Ways

Julius Nyerere: Leadership Insights for Contemporary Challenges

An Organization’s Success and a Three-Factor Model of Leadership: Evidence from Harvard University

Ahmed, S. (1999). Home and away. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 2 (3), 329–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/136787799900200303

Article   Google Scholar  

Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. (1989). Managing across borders: The transnational solution . Harvard Business School Press.

Google Scholar  

Birley, S., & Westhead, P. (1990). Growth and performance contrasts between ‘types’ of small firms. Strategic Management Journal, 11 (7), 535–557. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250110705

Blanchard, K. H., Zigarmi, D., & Nelson, R. B. (1993). Situational leadership® after 25 years: A retrospective. Journal of Leadership Studies, 1 (1), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/107179199300100104

Daft, R. B. L. (2009). Organization theory and design (10th ed.). South-Western College Pub.

Doz, Y. L., Santos, J., & Williamson, P. (2001). From global to metanational: How companies win in the knowledge economy (1st ed.). Harvard Business Review Press.

Goffee, R., & Jones, G. (1996). What holds the modern company together. Harvard Business Review, 74 , 133–148.

Ghoshal, S., & Westney, D. E. (eds). (1993). Organization theory and the multinational corporation.

Gordon, G. G., & DiTomaso, N. (1992). Predicting corporate performance from organizational culture. Journal of Management Studies, 29 (6), 783–798. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1992.tb00689.x

Greiner, L. E. (1998). Evolution and revolution as organizations grow. Harvard Business Review, 76 (3), 55.

Hedlund, G. (2007). A model of knowledge management and the N-form corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 15 (S2), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250151006

Hennan. (1979). Multinational organization development. David A. Heenan, Professor, University of Hawaii, and Howard V. Perlmutter, University of Pennsylvania. Reading (Mass.): Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1979, 194 p. The International Executive, 21 (2), 21–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.5060210213

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1969). Life-cycle theory of leadership. Training, and Development Journal, 2 (2), 6–34.

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1982). Management and organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources (4th ed.). Prentice-Hall.

Kates, A., & Galbraith, J. (2007). Designing your organization using the STAR model to solve 5 critical design challenges . Jossey-Bass.

Lynch, B. M., McCormack, B., & McCancet. (2011). Development of a model of situational leadership in residential care for older people. Journal of Nursing Management, 19 (8), 1058–1069. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2011.01275.x

Nohria, N., & Ghoshal, S. (1994). Differentiated fit and shared values: Alternatives for managing headquarters-subsidiary relations. Strategic Management Journal, 15 (6), 491–502. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250150606

Porter, M. E. (1986). Competition in global industries: A conceptual framework. In M. E. Porter (Ed.), Competition in global industries (pp. 15–60). Harvard Business School Press.

Prahalad, C. K., & Doz, Y. L. (1987). The multinational mission: Balancing local demands and global vision . The Free Press.

Rawley, E. (2010). Diversification, coordination costs, and organizational rigidity: Evidence from microdata. Strategic Management Journal . https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.838

Rumelt, R. P. (1982). Diversification strategy and profitability. Strategic Management Journal, 3 (4), 359–369. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250030407

Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership . Jossey-Bass. https://doi.org/10.1604/9781555424879

Book   Google Scholar  

Stopford, J. M., & Wells, L. T. (1972). Managing the multinational enterprise . Prentice Hall Press.

White, R., & Poynter, T. (1984). Strategies for foreign-owned subsidiaries in Canada. Business Quarterly, 48 (4), 59–69.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Management Development Institute - Gurgaon, Gurugram, Haryana, India

Rajesh Ranjan Mahapatra & Ajay K. Jain

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ajay K. Jain .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

IR Globe Cross-Cultural Inc, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Adebowale Akande

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Mahapatra, R.R., Jain, A.K. (2023). Situational Leadership Theory: An Extension and a Test of Global Organizational Prescriptions. In: Akande, A. (eds) Globalization, Human Rights and Populism. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17203-8_30

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17203-8_30

Published : 17 June 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-17202-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-17203-8

eBook Packages : Political Science and International Studies Political Science and International Studies (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Situational Leadership Explained: Key Principles and Applications

August 6, 2024

Explore Situational Leadership Theory, a dynamic model that adapts leadership styles to meet the evolving needs of team members for optimal performance.

In any workplace, the ability to adapt your leadership style is crucial for success. Situational leadership serves as a framework that empowers leaders to adjust their approaches based on the specific circumstances and the needs of their team members. This adaptability fosters a more effective leadership dynamic that can resonate with diverse teams in real-world applications.

Situational leadership is rooted in the understanding that no single leadership style is universally effective; instead, it emphasizes the importance of flexibility and active listening. By discerning their followers' maturity levels and adjusting their approaches accordingly, leaders can create more engaged and productive work environments. This methodology underscores the relationship between leader and follower, revealing the intricate dynamics that drive team performance.

This article will delve into the key principles and applications of situational leadership, exploring its various styles and the importance of understanding follower maturity levels. Additionally, we will examine real-world case studies and discuss critiques and limitations of this leadership approach, providing a comprehensive overview of how situational leadership can enhance team effectiveness.

What is Situational Leadership?

Situational Leadership is an adaptive leadership model that centers on the premise that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to leadership. Recognizing that different situations demand different kinds of leadership, this theory requires leaders to assess their followers' developmental levels—essentially their competence and commitment—and adapt their management style accordingly.

Developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, the framework of Situational Leadership outlines four primary styles of leadership:

• Telling (Directive behavior)
• Selling (Supportive behavior)
• Participating

Each style aligns with specific follower maturity levels and situational demands. The telling style, for example, is more effective with novices needing clear guidance, while the delegating style suits experienced team members who require less supervision.

In essence, Situaltional Leadership rejects a rigid, one-size-fits-all management approach, promoting instead a flexible and dynamic style. This accord between leadership behavior and the subordinate's Performance Readiness is key to fostering an environment of effective leadership and sustained follower development. Consequently, an effective leader under this model is someone who can skilfully navigate through these situational leadership styles, continually adapting to the evolving needs of their team members.

Key Principles of Situational Leadership

Situational Leadership is a model of effective leadership that is predicated on the belief that successful leaders must be able to adjust their style to the circumstances at hand. Key principles underpinning this approach are centered around influence, adaptability, and the personal growth of team members. The essence lies in creating a supportive and trusting environment where authority stems not from power or position, but through the ability to positively influence others. This concept encourages a servant leadership mindset where the leader's core purpose is to foster the development of their employees, rather than seeking personal acclaim.

Leaders practicing Situational Leadership view their role as serving others, responding proactively to the needs of the team to ensure that all members can contribute effectively. This is achieved by examining and responding to two critical dimensions: directive behavior (task behavior) and supportive behavior (relationship behavior). Within this framework, the objective is to adapt to the readiness level of followers, providing socio-emotional support while guiding them through their tasks. This dynamic approach allows leaders to act as coaches who nurture their team through learning and opportunities, rather than directing from a distance.

Adaptability in Leadership

Adaptability is a cornerstone of the Situational Leadership model. Leaders who employ this style are adept at varying their management behaviors in response to the evolving landscape of their business and the individual needs of their employees. The four primary styles of leadership—Telling, Selling, Participating, and Delegating—empower leaders to finely tune their approach to suit the developmental level and Performance Readiness® of their followers. It is this flexibility that enables effective situational leaders to become task-relevant, appropriately adjusting their style not just to the person or team, but also according to the specific goals that need to be achieved.

Statistics suggest that a significant number of leaders tend to over-rely on a single leadership style, which can result in suboptimal outcomes. Such leaders risk applying an ill-suited approach in various scenarios, effectively impeding progress. This demonstrates why the acquisition of a versatile management style is imperative for success, particularly in dynamic environments where change is constant.

Importance of Flexibility

The ability to adjust leadership approaches in real-time is indispensable in today's fast-paced work environment. Flexibility in leadership ensures that leaders can tailor their styles to align with the diverse Performance Readiness levels of their employees. The situational leadership model underlines flexibility as the key to identifying which leadership style is most fitting for each unique set of circumstances. It rejects the idea that a single leadership approach can be equally effective across all situations, instead advocating for a spectrum of strategies that can be deployed as necessary.

By evaluating their employees' development levels, leaders can determine the most suitable mix of direction and support to help them excel. This not only empowers employees but also maximizes productivity and efficiency within the organization. Moreover, situational leaders adept at shifting between directive and supportive roles can orchestrate their team's efforts more effectively, aligning them with the organization's objectives and fostering success in a variety of conditions.

Active Listening as a Tool

Active listening is an integral aspect of Situational Leadership. By fully engaging with team members—concentrating, understanding, and responding thoughtfully—leaders can create an inclusive and supportive working environment. Active listening fosters improved communication, helping to ensure leaders accurately understand the perspectives and insights of their team members. Moreover, recognizing team achievements through active listening can bolster morale and encourage continuous motivation .

An atmosphere that cultivates open dialogue means that employees feel comfortable sharing their views, contributing to more collaborative decision-making processes. For leaders, active listening is a crucial tool for gauging team members' competencies and readiness levels, which aids in effective delegation and enhances the overall decision-making capacity. By consistently engaging in active listening, leaders can more precisely assess when to offer guidance, when to provide support, and when to step back and delegate, thereby optimizing their leadership effectiveness.

Adaptability in leadership is a critical determinant of effective leadership. Leaders face dynamic challenges and diverse team members, necessitating a flexible approach to leadership—enter the Situational Leadership Theory. Developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, this theory emphasizes that there is no one-size-fits-all leadership style. Instead, it advocates for adjusting the management style to match the developmental level of employees and the demands of the task at hand.

The Situational Leadership Model outlines four leadership styles: Telling, Selling, Participating, and Delegating, each applicable to corresponding development levels and Performance Readiness® of team members. This model helps leaders to exhibit the right balance of directive behavior and supportive behavior.

However, adopting a situational approach to leadership is not prevalent among all leaders. Studies indicate that 54% of leaders favor a single style of leadership. This lack of adaptability can result in inappropriate management styles in nearly half of their professional encounters. To be an effective leader, it's essential to understand and practice switching between the situational leadership styles and tailor leadership behavior to the intricacies of each unique scenario.

Flexibility is a critical component in the toolkit of any leader striving for effective leadership. Recognizing that a one-size-fits-all approach to leadership is seldom effective, the situational leadership model, developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, advocates for leaders to be adaptable, adjusting their management style to suit the development levels of their team members.

When weighing the Performance Readiness of employees, an effective leader gauges the maturity levels of the followers to select an appropriate leadership style. This flexibility ensures that directives and support are personalized, maximizing individual and team productivity. Adapting leadership styles to the diverse and evolving needs of the workforce is not just a leadership skill; it’s pivotal in empowering employees and improving outcomes.

Situational leaders navigate between being directive and offering supportive behavior seamlessly. This ability to switch roles ensures that the approach to leadership is congruent with the followers' needs, bridging gaps in abilities and fostering progress. The situational approach to leadership thus becomes an essential strategy to face changing conditions, drive organizational performance, and bolster the growth of leadership abilities within the team.

Active listening is an essential tool in the repertoire of an effective leader. Its significance is underscored by the fact that it enables leaders to concentrate fully, understand deeply, and respond to their team members thoughtfully. This practice doesn't just foster a supportive environment; it is also pivotal to enhancing the effectiveness of communication within a team.

Utilizing active listening, leaders acknowledge team members' input and contributions, which not only ensures accurate understanding but also bolsters motivation through recognition of achievements. This form of recognition can lead to reinforcement of positive behavior, encouraging team members to strive for further accomplishments.

Moreover, creating a work atmosphere that promotes active listening also invites open expression of ideas and opinions. This openness can ultimately culminate in more collaborative and effective decision-making processes. Additionally, through active listening, leaders are able to gain insights into their team members' unique skills and abilities. This knowledge is invaluable for effective delegation, ensuring that tasks are matched with the appropriate individual's competencies.

In conclusion, active listening serves not just as an approach for effective communication, but as a strategic component for leadership, enhancing group collaboration, decision-making, and the optimal assignment of tasks.

Leadership Styles in Situational Leadership

Situational Leadership is a dynamic and adaptive model that encompasses varying leadership styles to suit the demands of different situations. This model, developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, identifies four primary leadership styles—Telling, Selling, Participating, and Delegating. Each style represents a distinct approach to leadership and is matched to the current developmental level and maturity of team members. In the process of applying these styles, leaders must be flexible, transitioning from one style to another as per the evolving competencies and commitment levels of their followers. Situational Leadership proposes that there isn't a one-size-fits-all approach; instead, effective leadership is contingent upon the task, context, and individuals involved.

The interplay between directive behavior, which covers the tasks and roles set by the leader, and supportive behavior, which relates to the socio-emotional and relational support offered, is crucial across all four styles. The crux of this theory is adaptability—an effective leader assesses a situation, gauges the maturity levels of followers, and skilfully adjusts their management style to meet the needs of the moment.

Telling Style

The Telling leadership style (S1) is characterized by a high level of task direction coupled with a low level of relationship behavior. In this model, the leader is chiefly directive, providing specific instructions and closely supervising team activities. This style is particularly suitable for followers with low maturity—those who may be motivated but lack the required knowledge or skills for the task at hand. It ensures that they receive the necessary guidance and directives to achieve the set objectives.

Employing a Telling style is favorable in situations that demand quick and decisive actions, such as during a crisis or to accomplish routine and predictable tasks. The leader adopting this style makes decisions independently and expects subordinates to follow through without question, creating a structured and organized environment. The Telling style serves as a starting point in the situational leadership model, aiming to catalyze movement and establish clarity for teams that require a high degree of support and direction.

Selling Style

Transitioning to the Selling style (S2), leaders maintain a high level of task direction but pair it with high relationship behavior, thus encouraging a more interactive and persuasive communication with followers. This leadership style is advantageous when working with team members of moderate maturity levels—individuals who are enthusiastic and willing but still developing in their roles.

In the Selling style, leaders focus on 'selling' their decisions and actions to team members to foster understanding and motivation. By offering rationale and benefits behind tasks, the leader seeks to gain buy-in from the team. Unlike the Telling style, this approach hinges on a two-way communication and promotes a level of collaboration, allowing leaders to guide teams through justification and clarification, rather than outright direction.

Participating Style

With the Participating style (S3), leaders significantly reduce the amount of task direction and instead amplify relationship behavior. This style is fitting for followers who display a moderate to high level of maturity—those who have the requisite skill set but may lack the confidence or motivation to take full responsibility for their work.

Leaders who adopt the Participating style encourage involvement and share decision-making responsibilities, facilitating a democratic environment. This approach is beneficial for empowering team members, bolstering their self-esteem, and securing their commitment to the tasks. Participation is key here; the leader acts as a facilitator rather than a director, fostering a supportive and inclusive atmosphere where team members' contributions are both encouraged and valued.

Delegating Style

Finally, the Delegating style (S4) is characterized by minimal task direction and relationship behavior. This hands-off approach is optimal for high-maturity individuals—team members who demonstrate both the ability and the confidence to work independently.

Leaders who employ the Delegating style place a high level of trust in their team members, providing them with autonomy over their work. The role of the leader here is more about overseeing from a distance and being available to support if necessary, rather than guiding each step of the process. This style reflects a mature and developed team capable of setting their pace and direction, aligning their actions with the organization's goals while exercising a high degree of self-sufficiency.

Understanding Follower Maturity Levels

In the realm of situational leadership theories, one of the most nuanced aspects is the calibration of leadership based on the maturity levels of followers, which is essential in identifying the most suitable approach to leadership. The concept of maturity refers to the follower's specific competencies—including their skills, experience, and psychological mindsets—that vary depending on the task at hand. Due to this variation, an individual may be classified within different maturity levels for different tasks.

Originally, Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard introduced the term "Maturity Levels" in their Situational Leadership Theory. However, to better reflect an individual’s readiness for a specific task, the term was refined to "Follower Readiness." Further revisions led to the concept being renamed as "Performance Readiness," emphasizing that this readiness is dynamic and closely tied to both the individual and the context of the situation.

The modern iteration of the Situational Leadership Theory, known as SLT-II, outlines four levels of follower development, ranging from “enthusiastic beginner” to “self-reliant achiever.” Each of these developmental levels is paired with a recommended leadership style that is most likely to be effective in that context. It is crucial to understand that competence and commitment are the key dimensions that underpin readiness or maturity. Unlike in the original model where these dimensions were viewed additively, SLT-II considers these factors as separate contributors to the individual’s developmental level.

Low Maturity Level

At the low end of the maturity spectrum, individuals exhibit a combination of low competence and commitment. This means that they lack the necessary skills, knowledge, and often the motivation required to effectively carry out tasks. Such individuals might also demonstrate a reluctance to take on responsibility or ownership of the assignments given to them.

The original situational leadership model prescribes a leadership style for low maturity followers that involves a high level of directive behavior—clear instruction and closer supervision are deemed necessary to ensure task completion. Empirical studies support the notion that when appropriate leadership behavior is enacted, individuals at this developmental level show improvement in both performance and attitude. However, it's important to note that the initial version of the theory has received criticism for its limited empirical backing, particularly concerning low maturity circumstances, hence the advancements in the theory to better address these challenges.

Moderate Maturity Level

Moderate maturity characterizes individuals who have some degree of ability and confidence, yet may still be prey to doubts or a lack of full commitment to execution without supplemental assistance. This intermediate category within Performance Readiness requires a leader's discernment to ascertain the precise dosage of guidance and direction necessary.

In scenarios involving team members at a moderate maturity level, leaders might need to adapt to a more participating or coaching style of leadership . This aims to bolster the individual's self-confidence and fortify their willingness to tackle tasks without needing constant oversight. A supportive behavior from the leader, coupled with appropriate recognition and feedback, can facilitate the growth of team members in terms of both competence and commitment, aligning them more closely with organizational objectives and instilling them with a greater sense of empowerment.

High Maturity Level

The high maturity level is indicative of individuals who are highly skilled, experienced, and exhibit a strong sense of confidence and autonomy. These individuals demonstrate a readiness to execute tasks independently and typically require less oversight.

Leaders can effectively employ a delegating leadership style for followers at this level, allowing for a greater sense of ownership and responsibility over tasks and decisions. Such team members are adept at operating with initial instructions and less frequent intervention. Recognizing their developmental stage and applying a situational leadership style that reduces direct supervision while maintaining open channels of communication is paramount. This approach encourages a leadership behavior that trusts in the abilities and judgement of the team members, fostering an environment conducive to their further growth and the accomplishment of team and organizational objectives.

Real-world Applications of Situational Leadership

The concept of Situational Leadership has gained substantial traction in the realm of effective leadership as it moves away from a static, one-size-fits-all approach to a more dynamic and responsive leadership behavior. This approach to leadership, deeply rooted in the situational theories espoused by thinkers such as Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, encourages leaders to be adept at adjusting their management style to align with the maturity levels and willingness of team members.

When applied effectively, Situational Leadership equips managers to respond with agility to the ever-evolving demands of the modern business environment. Adopting varying management styles based on specific situations, projects, or even phases of a project allows teams to operate optimally. For instance, a directive behavior could be essential at the initiation of a complex project when the team is unfamiliar with the tasks at hand; over time, a more supportive and delegating approach can be taken as team members gain competence and confidence.

Leaders practicing Situational Leadership are characteristically strong in diagnosis, flexibility, and communication. They invest time in evaluating the developmental levels of their teams and the complexities of tasks, strategically nurturing a supportive and trust-filled workplace. This structured, adaptive approach helps in charting a clear path towards achieving organizational goals, taking into account the diverse backgrounds and learning styles of team members.

In the practical business landscape, recognizing individual differences and tailoring leadership approaches play an essential role in fostering growth, promoting development, and enhancing overall team performance. This makes the situational approach to leadership not just a theory, but a practical toolkit that effective leaders can employ across diverse scenarios.

Case Study: Phil Jackson

Phil Jackson's tenure as an NBA coach offers insightful lessons in applying situational leadership styles to real-world settings. Known for his thoughtful consideration of each player as an individual, Jackson meticulously analyzed the strengths and growth areas of his team to optimize performance. With Michael Jordan, known for his high developmental level and leadership abilities, Jackson employed a delegating leadership style, emphasizing trust and independence — a clear reflection of understanding the player's high maturity level.

In contrast, Jackson recognized the need to adopt a directive style with other players, such as Shaquille O’Neal. Acknowledging O'Neal's need for a more structured and hands-on approach, he provided additional guidance, which included challenging the athlete to engage fully for 48 minutes of the game, aiming to elevate his performance readiness. Jackson’s situational leadership revealed his capacity to assess the unique needs of his players and tailor his strategies—demonstrating the power of adaptability in fostering successful teamwork.

Case Study: Steve Jobs

Steve Jobs' tenure at Apple highlighted a dynamic and mercurial approach to leadership that fit well within the situational leadership framework. Not easily pigeonholed into a singular leadership style, Jobs exhibited the capability to adjust his management approach according to the scenario at hand and the individuals involved. A blend of inspirational and occasionally volatile emotional displays characterized his personal style, but his keen awareness of how to communicate with his team members varied based on the business context.

Notoriously direct, Jobs sometimes employed a telling leadership style, coupled with blunt communication, to drive home his vision, which proved effective in certain high-stakes situations. Yet, the essence of his approach lay in empowering smart individuals to make decisions, a core principle of situational leadership theory. By recognizing when to direct and when to delegate, Jobs illustrated an innate understanding of leadership flexibility, choosing the best leadership style based on a myriad of situational factors.

These case studies highlight that there is no one leadership model that encapsulates the complexities of human behavior and organizational dynamics. The effective leader, as seen with Jackson and Jobs, is one who continuously diagnoses, adapts, and evolves his or her leadership approach to meet the needs of the team and the demands of the environment. Situational leadership thus stands as a testament to leadership that is as varied as it is dependent on context, focusing on the requirements for performance readiness and supportive behavior to achieve success.

Elements of Situational Leadership

Situational Leadership® is a leadership model that recognizes the need for leaders to be adaptable and flexible in their management style. This framework suggests that no single leadership style is effective in all situations, and leaders must tailor their approach to the unique needs of their team or individual members for optimal results. The situational leadership theory revolves around three major elements: the nature of the work to be accomplished, the follower's task-specific ability and willingness, and the leader's style or approach to facilitate desired outcomes.

Developed by Paul Hersey in 1969, situational leadership has a rich background with over half a century of research in leadership development and organizational behavior. This evidences its elemental significance in the field of effective leadership. The primary goal of the Situational Leadership model is to promote the growth and development of followers, with leaders taking on a coaching role , guiding team members through learning and development opportunities.

One of the defining features of situational leadership is a leader’s capacity to adjust their leadership behavior in response to followers’ maturity levels, which can vary significantly. From those with low level maturity, who may require more guidance and directive behavior, to high level maturity individuals who might benefit from a more delegating leadership approach, situational leadership stresses the dynamic and ever-changing nature of leading a team effectively.

Task Considerations

When applying situational leadership, it's essential for leaders to have a comprehensive understanding of the tasks at hand. Recognizing whether tasks have been completed successfully and competently is key to effective leadership. Task complexity is another consideration; tasks range from simple routine procedures to intricate long-term projects, and the leader's approach must adapt accordingly.

Additionally, leaders ought to evaluate their level of authority in relation to the tasks performed, as it significantly influences the way in which they guide their team. Team dynamics are also a factor that can affect task performance and productivity. For instance, tasks might necessitate different leadership styles—from a democratic to a more directive approach—depending on the proficiency and skill level of the group.

Leader-Follower Relationship Dynamics

Beyond just task considerations, situational leadership places a significant emphasis on understanding and adapting to the relationship dynamics between leaders and their followers. This element goes deeper than just examining the traits of a leader; it acknowledges the importance of a leader's behaviors and their adaptability to meet the specific needs and development levels of their followers.

Leaders are expected to modify their style from being directive to coaching , supportive, or even delegating, corresponding to the varying degrees of follower maturity—from the enthusiastic beginner to the self-reliant achiever. These situational leadership styles are framed within two key dimensions—Task Behavior and Relationship Behavior—that can help leaders deliver the right mix of direction and support.

Continuous assessment and adjustments are vital, as these ensure that the leadership style remains effective and that it suits the follower's current Performance Readiness. Such dynamic leadership behavior is instrumental not only in maintaining effective leader-follower interactions but also in achieving successful task outcomes.

By recognizing the variables in tasks and relationships and by leveraging situational leadership styles accordingly, leaders can create an environment that nurtures developmental growth and encourages higher performance levels across various situations.

Leaders play a pivotal role in ensuring tasks are completed effectively. A clear understanding of task specifics is crucial as the nature of the task informs the leadership style. Tasks range from simple to complex, prompting leaders to alter their management style accordingly. Simple tasks may require less intervention, whereas complex tasks demand more guidance.

Additionally, the leader’s level of authority is a significant factor in task execution, directly influencing the manner in which team members are directed. This understanding is vital when determining an effective approach to leadership.

The dynamic amongst team members also plays a critical role. Positive relationships can enhance efficiency, while strained ones might impede productivity. Thus, considering team dynamics is essential for successful task completion.

Finally, the efficiency and skill level of the group being led may necessitate different leadership approaches—for instance, a more democratic style for skilled and motivated teams and a more directive leadership style when the developmental levels require closer supervision.

The Situational Leadership Theory, developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, posits that effective leadership is highly dependent on contextual factors—specifically, the dynamics between leaders and followers. This approach stands in contrast to the one-size-fits-all paradigm, recognizing that leadership behavior must be fluid to accommodate varying developmental levels among followers.

Leaders are called to exhibit flexibility, constantly evaluating the maturity levels of their team members and adjusting their management style accordingly. They navigate through four distinct styles of leadership: directive, coaching, supportive, and delegating, to match the development levels of followers, ranging from the "enthusiastic beginner" to the "self-reliant achiever."

Two critical dimensions define the situational leadership model—Directive Behavior and Supportive Behavior. Effective leaders oscillate along these axes, providing the balance of guidance and encouragement that aligns with their followers’ Performance Readiness.

Critiques and Limitations of Situational Leadership

Situational Leadership, a concept developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, advocates for the adaptability in leadership styles, but it comes with notable critiques and limitations. First, the burden on managers is considerable. This style of leadership mandates a high level of agility in decision-making which directly influences team performance. Poor judgments can have significant adverse effects, heightening the pressure on managers to consistently perform flawlessly.

Diverse work environments may also present a challenge to the efficacy of Situational Leadership. Its principles might not translate equally well across different industries, cultures, or sectors, questioning its universal applicability and potentially restricting its effectiveness in certain settings.

Moreover, the model's strong focus on immediate, task-related problems can overshadow an organization's long-term objectives. This emphasis on the short-term could lead to frustration among team members who are more invested in strategic, long-lasting outcomes.

The Situational Leadership approach concentrates on short-term problem-solving and may neglect the essentials of long-term strategic planning. Consequently, leaders might fail to consider the broader vision, aiming instead for quick fixes rather than sustainable solutions.

Finally, it may inadvertently sideline certain members of the team, particularly those less experienced. Input from all team members is vital for a holistic approach to leadership, but Situaltional Leadership can sometimes lead to a one-size-fits-all mentality that overlooks individual contributions from newer voices.

In summary, while Situational Leadership offers a flexible approach to leadership, its effectiveness is not without questions and is influenced by a range of situational variables.

Key Reading on the Theory of Situational Leadership

The following studies collectively highlight the ongoing debate over the efficacy of situational leadership theory. They emphasize the need for further research to validate the theory and its application in various contexts, considering the interaction between inherent traits, personality traits , and situational factors.

1. Blank, W., Green, S., & Weitzel, J. R. (1990). A test of the situational leadership theory. Personnel Psychology, 43, 579-597.

Summary : This study examines Hersey and Blanchard's situational leadership theory , analyzing the interaction between leader behaviors and follower maturity. Findings do not support the theory’s assumptions, suggesting limited empirical validation. The study calls for further research on the theory's conceptual and practical applications, particularly regarding inherent traits and personality traits in leaders.

2. Johansen, B. P. (1990). Situational leadership : A review of the research. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 1, 73-85.

Summary : This review critically examines the situational leadership theory, focusing on its conceptual validity and practical implications. Despite mixed empirical support, the theory remains popular due to its intuitive appeal and emphasis on matching leadership styles to follower maturity. The study underscores the need for more robust research to validate the theory’s efficacy in organizational behavior.

3. Vecchio, R., Bullis, R. C., & Brazil, D. M. (2006). The utility of situational leadership theory. Small Group Research, 37, 407-424.

Summary : This research evaluates the practical utility of situational leadership theory within a military context. Results indicate that the theory may have limited practical value, with regression analyses failing to show clear interactions between leader style and follower attributes. The study highlights the importance of considering personality traits and situational factors in leadership effectiveness.

4. Graeff, C. L. (1983). The situational leadership theory: A critical view. Academy of Management Review, 8, 285-291.

Summary : Graeff's critical review discusses the theoretical issues and limitations of situational leadership theory, including conceptual ambiguity and practical application challenges. The study questions the robustness of the theory’s prescriptive model and calls for revisions to enhance its relevance in management of organizational behavior.

5. Norris, W. R., & Vecchio, R. (1992). Situational leadership theory. Group & Organization Management, 17, 331-342.

Summary : This study tests situational leadership theory within a nursing context, finding only directional support in low- and moderate-maturity conditions. Results suggest that while the theory has intuitive appeal, its empirical support is limited, necessitating further research to address its conceptual and practical shortcomings.

Enhance Learner Outcomes Across Your School

Download an Overview of our Support and Resources

We'll send it over now.

Please fill in the details so we can send over the resources.

What type of school are you?

We'll get you the right resource

Is your school involved in any staff development projects?

Are your colleagues running any research projects or courses?

Do you have any immediate school priorities?

Please check the ones that apply.

Download your resource

Thanks for taking the time to complete this form, submit the form to get the tool.

PERSPECTIVE article

Application of situational leadership to the national voluntary public health accreditation process.

• College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA

Successful navigation through the accreditation process developed by the Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB) requires strong and effective leadership. Situational leadership, a contingency theory of leadership, frequently taught in the public health classroom, has utility for leading a public health agency through this process. As a public health agency pursues accreditation, staff members progress from being uncertain and unfamiliar with the process to being knowledgeable and confident in their ability to fulfill the accreditation requirements. Situational leadership provides a framework that allows leaders to match their leadership styles to the needs of agency personnel. In this paper, the application of situational leadership to accreditation is demonstrated by tracking the process at a progressive Kentucky county public health agency that served as a PHAB beta test site.

Introduction

The mission of public health, as identified by the 1988 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report, The Future of Public Health , is “assuring conditions in which people can be healthy” ( 1 ). A strong infrastructure is central to the mission of public health, since it supports the delivery of key public health services. The critical role infrastructure plays in assuring public health is underscored in a 2003 IOM follow up report that identified strengthening governmental public health institutions as an essential area of action for the twenty-first century. The 2003 report highlighted the key role that leadership plays in maintaining a strong public health system through the development of a competent public health workforce. It also identified the importance of leadership in such specific recommendations as making “leadership training, support, and development” a high priority for all governmental public health agencies, schools of public health, and the other entities within the public health system ( 2 ).

Successful leadership is contingent upon developing a clear mission and executing a vision to guide progress ( 3 ). Various frameworks have been developed to guide public health leaders in developing a mission and vision, including the three Core Functions of Public Health and the 10 Essential Public Health Services (EPHS) ( 4 ). While these frameworks are useful, they are macro-contextual, and may be disconnected from the day to day operations of a public health agency. The accreditation standards and measures developed by The Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB) provide specific benchmarks to be utilized by agencies as a framework to guide their activities. While PHAB’s standards and measures can be used to guide organizational leadership, the changes associated with accreditation require strong leadership and an immediate short-term strategic plan and long-term vision based on effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability.

Academic public health programs, as part of their curricula, educate students in leadership theories and models, and often include skill training at both the masters and doctoral levels. Students of public health rarely are provided the opportunity to practice the leadership skills developed in the classroom or to test leadership theories in real world situations prior to degree completion. This article discusses one opportunity to transfer leadership theory and practice from the classroom to the practice setting. In this instance, practice based field experience provided a public health doctoral student the opportunity to utilize concepts learned in the classroom in a practice setting, and develop a case study, based on initial and follow up interviews with public health agency personnel, focused on leadership in the context of preparing for participation in a Beta Test of the PHAB pilot standards and measures.

Situational Leadership

Situational leadership theory suggests that leaders should adapt their leadership styles based on the readiness, current skills, and developmental level of team members ( 5 ). It provides the leader with the flexibility to assess the situation and adopt a leadership style that best fits the needs of the follower. It is particularly well suited to leading public health agencies through the accreditation process as will be demonstrated.

Utilizing Situational Leadership requires leaders to be aware of the perceptions of their followers. What leaders say they do is one thing; what followers say they want and how well their leaders meet their expectations is another ( 6 ). Given the novelty of accreditation, and the potential anxiety engendered during the different phases of the process, public health leaders need to be aware of and adapt their leadership styles to match the readiness, current skills, and developmental status of the team members engaged in accreditation, allowing the agency to successfully navigate this intricate process.

Situational leadership is based on two behavioral categories: task behavior and relational behavior. Task behavior is “the extent to which the leader engages in spelling out the duties and responsibilities of an individual or group” ( 7 ). Relational behavior is “the extent to which the leader engages in two-way or multi-way communication if there is more than one person” ( 7 ). Thus, situational leadership provides a balance between (1) guidance and direction (task behavior), (2) socio-emotional support (relational behavior), and (3) the readiness level followers exhibit for a specific task ( 5 ). The leadership styles of situational leadership include:

1. Style 1 (S1) “Directing” characterized by “high task and low relationship” behaviors;

2. Style 2 (S2) “Coaching” characterized by “high task and high relationship” behaviors;

3. Style 3 (S3) “Participating” characterized by “high relationship and low task” behaviors;

4. Style 4 (S4) “Delegating” characterized by “low relationship and low task” behavior ( 5 ) (see Figure 1 ).

Figure 1. Situational leadership and public health accreditation . Adapted from Ref. ( 5 ).

In situational leadership, readiness is defined as “the extent to which a follower demonstrates the ability and willingness to accomplish a specific task” ( 5 ). The major components of readiness are ability defined as “the knowledge, experience, and skill that an individual or a group brings to a particular task or activity,” and willingness is defined as “the extent to which an individual or a group has the confidence, commitment, and motivation to accomplish a specific task” ( 5 ). As seen in Figure 1 , follower readiness is a continuum from low to high as followers develop ability and willingness. Leaders match their leadership style to the readiness level of their followers as follows:

1. Level 1 (R1) occurs when the follower is “unable and unwilling” to perform the task and lacks confidence, motivation, and commitment;

2. Level 2 (R2) occurs when the follower is “unable but willing” to perform the task and requires some guidance;

3. Level 3 (R3) occurs when the follower is “able but unwilling” to complete the task, possibly because of insecurity; and

4. Level 4 (R4) occurs when the follower is “willing and able” to accomplish the task with confidence ( 5 ) (see Figure 1 ).

Situational Leadership and Public Health Accreditation: A Local Health Agency Case Study

While accreditation is not a new concept in the American health sector [initiatives such as The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) have been a part of the health care system for decades], it is a new phenomenon in public health practice in the United States. Informal discussions concerning the accreditation of public health agencies have occurred for some time; however, accreditation received a significant boost from The Future of the Public’s Health in the Twenty-First Century , which stated that “despite the controversies concerning accreditation, greater accountability is needed on the part of state and local health agencies with regard to the performance of the core public health functions of assessment, assurance, and policy development and the EPHS” ( 8 ). This report led to the creation of the Exploring Accreditation project in 2004, the creation of PHAB in 2007, and ultimately the release of PHAB’s standards and measures for voluntary national accreditation in 2011.

Accreditation is a useful tool for improving the quality of services provided to the public by setting standards and evaluating performance against those standards, and has been shown to be associated with higher performing health systems. In a working paper for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), Mays demonstrated that clinical quality measures for care of myocardial infarctions were lower and mortality rates higher in hospitals not participating in JCAHO accreditation when compared to JCAHO accredited healthcare facilities ( 9 ). It may be postulated that accreditation of public health agencies will have a similar effect. PHAB states that its program is intended to develop and maintain “a high-performing governmental public health system that will make us the healthiest nation.” Thus, PHAB “is dedicated to promote, improve, and protect the health of the public by advancing the quality and performance of state, local, tribal, and territorial public health departments in the United States” ( 10 ).

The PHAB accreditation process has seven steps; Pre-application, Application, Documentation Selection and Submission, Site Visit, Accreditation Decision, Reports, and Reaccreditation; and was developed after extensive review and revision, including a beta test of the process, which included 30 state, tribal, and local public health agencies ( 10 , 11 ). Following an interview with the director of a local public health agency regarding the agency’s experience as a beta test site, the authors noted that the agency’s accreditation experience closely matched the four situational leadership styles in relationship to the stages of follower readiness displayed in Figure 1 . As a result, a follow up interview was completed to confirm these findings, and to further discuss the application of situational leadership to the accreditation process.

The agency was well prepared for accreditation given its previous commitment to continuous quality improvement, as evidenced by its application to be a beta test site. In addition, the agency director was a member of the Kentucky Department of Public Health Quality Improvement Team prior to accepting her current position ( 12 ). This agency is also committed to performance measurement and management, having completed in 2008 a local public health system performance assessment that demonstrated a relatively high (69%) score in the overall performance of the EPHS ( 12 ).

During the initial interview with the agency director, it was apparent that leadership was viewed as a key element to accreditation success. Fostering complete organizational commitment to the process was of particular importance, including high commitment from contract and part time employes, as well as members of the local board of health.

Early in the accreditation process, particularly during the pre-application and application stages, and partially during document submission, the agency staff was relatively unfamiliar with the accreditation process (R1 follower readiness level as depicted in Figure 1 ), necessitating that the agency director engage in leader directed activities, primarily those shown in the S1 area in Figure 1 . Such actions involved informing the agency staff of the requirements and processes of accreditation and directing them through the process with high task behaviors answering the question: what is public health accreditation? She utilized a directing style of leadership dealing with questions such as who, what, when, where, and how.

As agency staff members developed an understanding of the value of accreditation and gained some confidence through identifying their roles in the process and the documents necessary for review, they transitioned to an R2 stage of follower readiness as depicted in Figure 1 , resulting in the director continuing highly directive behavior while adding high relationship behavior as well. A coaching, persuading, and/or explaining leadership style (S2 quadrant of the diagram) became important. While the leadership style was still high task, moving from direction to explanation occurred in order to answer the question, “Why is accreditation important to our agency?”.

By the time the agency was ready for document submission its personnel had sufficient confidence to transition fully to the R2 stage of readiness. There were still gaps in knowledge and ability related to the accreditation process, thus necessitating a continuation of the S2 leadership style, including coaching, explaining, and continuously persuading public health agency staff members of the value of accreditation and the importance of each individual’s role in the agency’s effort.

By the time the agency reached the PHAB’s beta test site visit phase, it had reached an R3 stage of readiness as depicted in Figure 1 . As a result, leadership style was based on high relationship, low task behaviors characterized by quadrant S3. These follower-directed behaviors revolved primarily around encouraging and championing the efforts of a highly participatory agency staff, with agency leaders assuming the role of problem solvers instead of being more highly task oriented.

By the conclusion of the PHAB beta test experience, when mock accreditation feedback was provided, the agency staff members had developed to an R4 stage of readiness. The agency staff was able, willing, and confident with respect to accreditation. As a result, the leader’s style had shifted to a low task and low relational behavior approach as described by quadrant S4. The director successfully delegated the accreditation coordination task to an accreditation coordinator, thus serving as an engaged mentor.

The PHAB beta test experience allowed the agency to further develop its quality improvement, performance measurement, and management infrastructure. The agency had successfully completed the three prerequisites of PHAB accreditation by developing a community health assessment, a community health improvement plan, and a refined strategic plan with clear mission and vision statements that were ready to be adopted. In addition, a 12 member accreditation team had been formed, being led by the full time accreditation coordinator.

As a result of the commitment and intense preparation exhibited by the staff, on February 28, 2013, the agency was awarded 5-year accreditation status by PHAB. 1 Accreditation of the agency was a direct result of the leadership exhibited by the agency’s senior leadership. The accreditation result was based on the development of a high-performing team founded on full collaboration between staff members and leaders. The use of a situational leadership approach contributed to team development. Conflict resolution was more readily accomplished by the leaders’ understanding of the needs of the staff members and the leaders’ ability to utilize an appropriate leadership style to meet the staff members’ needs. Due to the nature of the PHAB accrediting process, no ethical issues were raised by staff members during the beta test experience.

Situational leadership theory and skills learned in the classroom were effective in understanding the leadership required to effectively guide a public health agency through the process of preparing for PHAB accreditation. This theory of leadership is an appropriate approach for leading the accreditation process due to its flexibility as a follower driven model of leadership. Given the novelty and the complexity of the accreditation process, a highly functioning team is required and situational leadership provides a framework for public health agency leaders to successfully guide their teams through the process. Use of situational leadership will ensure that public health agencies successfully develop an ongoing quality improvement and performance standards plan throughout the accreditation process. Thus, a classroom leadership theory was found to be useful as an approach to being faithful to public health’s mission to “assure conditions in which people can be healthy” ( 1 ).

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

• ^ http://www.phaboard.org/news-room/accredited-health-departments

1. Institute of Medicine Committee on the Study for the Future of Public Health. The Future of Public Health . Washington, DC: National Academy Press (1988).

2. Institute of Medicine Committee on Assuring the Health of the Public in the 21st Century. The Future of the Public’s Health in the 21st Century . Washington, DC: National Academies Press (2003).

3. Jaques E. Requisite Organization: A Total System for Effective Managerial Organization and Managerial Leadership for the 21st Century . Arlington, VA: Cason Hall (1998).

4. The Core Public Health Functions Steering Committee. 10 Essential Public Health Services. (1994). Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/nphpsp/essentialservices.html

5. Hersey P, Blanchard KH, Johnson DE. Management of Organizationl Behavior – Leading Human Resources. 9th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall (2008).

6. Kouzes JM, Posner BZ. Follower-oriented leadership. In: Goethals GR, Sorenson GJ, Burns JM, editors. Encyclopedia of Leadership . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications (2004). p. 494–8.

7. Hersey P. The Situational Leader – The Other 59 Minutes . New York: Warner Books (1984).

8. Mays GP. Can accreditation work in public health? Lessons from other service industries. Working Paper Prepared for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation ; 2004 Nov 30. New Jersey: Princeton (2004).

9. Public Health Accreditation Board. Public Health Board Guide to National Accreditation Public Health Accreditation Board – Version 1.0 . Alexandria, VA: PHAB (2011). Available from: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12758866/PHAB%20Guide%20to%20National%20Public% 20Health%20Department%20Accreditation%20Version%201.0.pdf.

10. Public Health Accreditation Board. Evaluation of the Public Health Accreditation Board Beta Test . Alexandria, VA: PHAB (2011). Available from: http://www.phaboard.org/wp-content/uploads/EvaluationofthePHABBetaTestBriefReportAugust2011.pdf

11. Rabarison K. Conversation with Health Director . Frankfort, KY: Franklin County Health Department (2011).

12. Franklin County Health Department. Local Public Health System Performance Assessment – Report of Results . Frankfort, KY: Franklin County Health Department (2008). Available from: http://www.fchd.org/Portals/60/NPHPSP%20results%20.pdf

Keywords: situational leadership, public health accreditation, accreditation, leadership, student training

Citation: Rabarison K, Ingram RC and Holsinger JW Jr (2013) Application of situational leadership to the national voluntary public health accreditation process. Front. Public Health 1 :26. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2013.00026

Received: 05 June 2013; Accepted: 31 July 2013; Published online: 12 August 2013.

Reviewed by:

Copyright: © 2013 Rabarison, Ingram and Holsinger. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: James W. Holsinger Jr, College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, 111 Washington Avenue, Lexington, KY 40536-0003, USA e-mail: jwh@uky.edu

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.