Situational Leadership Theory (SLT)

Helena Mladenovski, Spring 2023

This article is based on the Situational Leadership model developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard while they wrote “Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources.”

OBS: A revised model, also called the SLII model, was published by Blanchard in 1979. In order to reflect state of the art, the glossary in this article is based on this most recent version; SLII.

Abstract

Having a managing role in projects is not just about ensuring that the given project objectives are met, but also about leading the people involved. In more recent years, it has become clear that there is no such thing as the “right” leadership style.

The Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership model, first published in 1969, suggests that no specific leadership style is better than the other, but rather that the leader should adjust their style according to those they lead (followers) and their ability level (maturity). To achieve this, it requires the leaders to analyze the given scenario and the maturity level of the follower. Blanchard revised the model and published a new version in 1979, although being very similar to the original. The main idea of the revised model; the SLII model, is however based on the original 1969 version.

The model is three-dimensional, as it (1) relies on the maturity level of the followers, (2) the amount of direction (task behavior) needed from the leader, as well as (3) the amount of socio-emotional support (relationship behavior) provided by the leader. The given leadership styles take the personal development of the individual into consideration and thus follows four phases; Directing, Coaching, Supporting, Delegating.

This article aims to highlight the fact that the theory can be adopted in various fields and on different levels, including project, program and portfolio management. The Situational Leadership Model can act as a guideline for managers to make decisions about resource allocation, prioritization, risk management and leadership style. There are however different limitations to the model and different suggestions have therefore been provided in order to view the Situational Leadership model in a broader context.

Quick-start guide to SLT

- Insert guide (will be done in the end) + graph that shortly summarizes what needs to be done

The three-dimensional Situational Leadership model

The purpose of the Situational Leadership Model (SLM) is to facilitate an efficient relationship between the leader and the individuals. This is done by focusing on conversations about the performance and development of the individual, as the use of the model eventually seeks to enhance the level of them. These conversations are relevant for every leader, whether it is a project, program or portfolio level, as individuals might have very different competencies and commitment levels.

The reason for why the Situational Leadership Model is three-dimensional is the three different verticals that are assessed; the maturity of the individual, the supportive behavior needed from the leader, as well as the directive behavior needed from the leader.

Dividing the individuals into maturity level

The first vertical; maturity, constitutes the underlying fundament of the SLM. The maturity can be divided into four different levels ranging from developed to developing. The essential goal of the maturity levels is for the individuals to become the most self-motivated and self-directed, thereby working towards 'developed'.

The development level is a combination of competence and commitment and is task specific, seen in the way that an individual might achieve different development levels according to the maturity they have regarding the task. Competence is the acquired knowledge and skills that the individual holds, while commitment is the level of motivation and drive that the individual holds in relation to that task. In order to place the individual in one of the maturity levels as seen below, the leader needs to analyze and conclude on the individual’s task knowledge, skills, motivation, and confidence.

There are four stages of development, ranging from D4-D3-D2-D1, as seen in the figure below.

D4 – Self-Reliant Achiever: Described as expert in the field, trusts their own ability to work independently on the task, but is consequently asked to do a lot.

D3 – Capable, but Cautious, Performer: An individual that not always holds a lot of confidence that they will be able to achieve the task, even though they might contribute with good inputs. They need opportunities to test ideas with others.

D2 – Disillusioned Learner: This level describes unreliable individuals, who might become discouraged and frustrated, even though they have some knowledge and skills they can contribute with.

D1 – Enthusiastic beginner: An individual who is eager and proactive in taking on the task, even though they might be quite inexperienced to complete the task.

Figure 1: The four maturity levels ranging from D1 to D4.

The four leadership styles

As the maturity level has been assessed, the time has now come to bring the final dimensions of the SLM into play. The coordinate system is based on two axes; the amount of directive behavior and the amount of supportive behavior needed from the leader. As seen in Figure 2, the idea is to match the maturity level to the right leadership style, as this constitutes effective leadership. When this has been done, the leader can start to channel the style.

Figure 2: The four leadership styles, ranging from S1 to S4.

S4 - Delegating

This style requires a both low directive and supportive behavior as these followers have the ability and drive to work independently, without any significant support from the leader. This leadership behavior is therefore the least interferring and holds a lot of trust between leader and individual.

S3 - Supporting

Supporting leadership is suited for those that have competences but lacks the motivation or drive to complete the task. In this role, it is important that the leader is there to boost their confidence, as the individual do possess the required direction to complete the task. (

S2 - Coaching

This style also goes under the name ‘Selling’ and is for individuals who has some expertise, but lacks both overall commitment and competence to complete the task. Typically, these individuals need direction and supervision, as well as support to build their self-esteem in order for them to progress to the next level.

S1 - Directing

This style is appropriate for individuals who often are very new to a project/task. This means that they lack the overall competences to complete the task, but are very motivated and driven to complete it. The leader should therefore spend energy introducing the individual to workflows, tasks and in general build the individual's expertise.

Requirements of the leader

In order for the leader to first assess the right maturity level of the individuals and then be able to apply the appropriate leadership style, it requires ongoing analysis and knowledge of the individuals. This analytical mindset should not be undermined, as it is key to assess the individual's need for direction and support. Additionally, flexibility is crucial as the leader needs to be comfortable jumping from different leadership styles.

Clear communication is also vital as there needs to be agreements on what the leader and the individual can expect from each other. In general, the ability to communicate is tied to the ability to engage the individuals, which is another important skill for a leader. This does not only concern maturing the individual, but also promoting the vision and the common north star that the team is working towards.

Application

First, the maturity level of the followers might be determined, then the leadership style channeled and monitored…

- Mismatched style example with a lot of direction for experienced person. o People will not feel good about this behvior. o Other APPPM examples of mismatched styles and what it does to both the leader and the individual - Bridge to the different levels on project, programme and portfolio mgmt., how they are related.. o Project < Program < Portfolio o Source: PMBOOK

Situational Leadership on project level

Example: A new person has joined your project. It would not be appropriate to leave them be with a delegating manor.

- Effective leadership = project success and positive outcomes, o Recognizing the need of the leader to adapt not only to individuals, but also situations - Drives of project – how it is done effectively. - Source: PMBOOK

Ref test

Ref test no 2

Situational Leadership on program level

Example: A team that is experienced and highly skilled might need less direction and support.

- Helping program managers to determine most effective approach to use with different project teams or stakeholders - Multiple projects might be interrelated and aligned towards a common goal. o The SLT provides flexibility and an adaptive framework - Utilizing D1, D2, D3, D4 levels to asses maturity of projects within the program o Larger perspective management than project mgmt.. o Analyze and assess projects at the same stage within the program  Interdependencies and goal setting

Situational Leadership on portfolio level

Example: Very complex program might require more directive leadership style than a more mature program. - Used to allocate resources effectively, prioritize project/programs and risk mgmt. o Seizing opportunities o Who are the stakeholders?  Sponsors, leaders, project teams and so on. - Team level assessment in relation to the program and so on o More high level than program o Are they developing?

Limitations

Applied at over 400 Fortune 500 companies. Sets the tone for the rest. The good thing is that ist show that the model is not limiting - but does it then have enough dept in it? (Fernandez & Vecchio, 1997)

Maturing the readiness level: (Hersey & Blanchard, n.d.). Can also happen that it moves backwards, person crises/stress/family situation. Then leader needs to monitor and be aware..

- Predicts how the relationship is going to be, o puts people into boxes o Behavior vs. attitude (Hersey & Blanchard, 1982). - Lack of strong empirical support for the theory o A fourth study of SLT in a military setting (Vecchio, Bullis, & Brazil, 2006) o Situational leadership model built on the back of research. - The perception of a leaders power. Power is the leaders influence potential. o the leadership style does not reflect the appropriate power base, it may not maximize the probability of success. (IMPACT OF POWER ref)

[the leader can start to channel the right leadership style]. - suggests that an individual is following the four phases chronologically - maybe not the case.

Suggestions and other relevant models

Suggestions and other relevant models in the same context (link to other relevant tools): What tool could this be applied with? And why would it go well with those.

Blake-Mouton's Managerial Grid and SLT

• GRID: Situational behavior describes observed behavior, while the Managerial Grid describe attitudes or predispositions towards production and people. (Hersey & Blanchard, 1982) This grid maximizes both productivity and personal development - however claiming that there is a single best way to manage it.

Grow's Staged Self-Directed Learning Model and SLT

• SSDL: Effects: Based on situational leadership model, the stages Self-directed Learning model proposes that learners advance through stages of increasing self-direction and that teachers can help or hinder that development. Based on key concepts from SLM. Problems arrive when there is a mismatch between teacher and learner, some of these mismatches are severe. Can act as supporting media for the SLT, matrix like model here. (SELF-DIRECTED ref)

Annotated bibliography

Situational Leadership Theory: A test of three versions. Thompson, G., & Vecchio, R. P. (2009), p. 837-848.

This article summarizes a study which searched to stresstest the different versions of the Situational Leadership Model. This concerned (1) the original from 1972, (2) the revised from 2007, and (3) an alternative statement of the theory. The study was conducted by gathering survey data from 10 Norwegian financial institutions, which was analyzed for predicted interactions. Findings included that the 2007 version was a poorer predictor of performance and attitude than the original version.

Situational leadership theory revisited: A test of an across-jobs perspective. Fernandez, C. F., & Vecchio, R. P. (1997), p. 67–84.

In a replication and extension of prior studies of Situational Leadership Theory (Hersey & Blanchard, 1993), data from 332 university employees and 32 supervisors were collected on dimensions of leader behavior and follower maturity in order to test predictions for the outcomes of employee performance, satisfaction, and quality of leader-member exchange. The primary goals of the analyses were a replication of prior tests of a within-jobs view of the theory, and an across-jobs test of the theory wherein job level was used as a predictor of optimal leadership style. Evidence demonstrated that the theory, as originally formulated, has little descriptive utility. However, further analyses suggested that supervisory monitoring and consideration may interact with job level such that monitoring has a positive impact for lower level employees, while consideration has a more positive impact for higher level employees. The interaction suggests that some of the intuitively-appealing aspects of the theory may be correct, but that couching these processes in terms of readiness/maturity and the Ohio State dimensions of initiation structure and consideration is incorrect.