Traditionally people used to think leadership was an inherent quality and that individuals have their own distinct leadership style. In practice, each style has its own strengths and weaknesses, situations where it excels and others where it is less effective. Therefore, whilst it is natural to have a preferred style that one feels most comfortable with, a good leader should be able to adapt their style depending upon the situation or context, the team or individual being influenced and the task at hand. This is called Situational Leadership.
Situational Leadership is a theory of leadership and influencing developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard. The theory assumes that an individual or team’s maturity is an evolutionary progression from low to high. When individuals approach a task or activity for the first time, they have very little knowledge or skill but these develop over time with education, practice and experience. As an individual or team’s maturity increases, they respond better to less directive influence from a leader or coach and conversely, people with low maturity in a given task respond better to more directive influencing styles.
As an individual or team's maturity increases, they respond better to less directive influence
Tweet this
The idea of maturity as an evolutionary progression is not uncommon and is central to maturity models and popular models in learning theory such as the four stages of competence and the Dreyfus Model of Skill Acquisition. Like Situational Leadership, the Dreyfus Model also supports the idea that different influencing and teaching styles are more effective with teams or individuals at different stages of maturity. For example, ‘Novices’ (the lowest level of maturity in the Dreyfus Model) require close supervision and respond well to clear rules and check-lists to follow, but as they progress towards ‘Experts’ (the highest level of maturity) they become increasingly self-sufficient and typically respond better to non-directive input.
Directive and non-directive styles
Leadership and teaching styles can be broadly categorised into two types: directive and non-directive. With directive styles, the leader is typically the person who defines the solution and then tells the team or individual what to do. With non-directive styles, the leader helps the team or individual arrive at the solution themselves usually by asking guiding questions. Directive and non-directive styles are often referred to as “Push” and “Pull” respectively to reflect the nature of the influence and where the solution is coming from. The diagram below is based upon one by Myles Downey and shows a spectrum of coaching skills and how they are typically associated with push or pull styles.
image: based upon Myles Downey’s Spectrum of Coaching Skills
This diagram shows that a leader can choose different techniques and adapt their style to be more or less directive. Situational Leadership and the Dreyfus Model demonstrate that different techniques tend to be more effective with people at different levels of maturity but there are other reasons a leader or coach might choose certain influencing techniques over others. “Push” and “Pull” techniques can yield very different outcomes. For example, “Push” techniques can be effective in achieving compliance and yielding fast results where as “Pull” techniques tend to take much longer but can be more “sticky”, achieving lasting commitment and behavioural change, empowering people to solve problems themselves and making them more self-sufficient for the future. Pull techniques also tend to be more effective in persuasion and overcoming resistence and can be used to help stimulate critical thinking.