From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Hersey-Blanchard situational theory, is a situational leadership theory developed by Paul Hersey, a professor who wrote a well known book "Situational Leader" and Ken Blanchard, the management guru who later became famous for his "One Minute Manager" series. They created a model of situational leadership in the late 1960s in their work Management of Organizational Behavior (now in its 9th edition) that allows one to analyze the needs of the situation, then adopt the most appropriate leadership style. It has been proven popular with managers over the years because it is simple to understand, and it works in most environments for most people.
The model rests on two fundamental concepts; leadership style, and development level.
[edit] Leadership styles
Hersey and Blanchard characterized leadership style in terms of the amount of direction and support that the leader provides to their followers. They categorized all leadership styles into four behavior types, which they named S1 to S4:
- S2: Coaching/Selling Leaders still define roles and tasks, but seek ideas and suggestions from the follower. Decisions remain the leader's prerogative, but communication is much more two-way.
- S3: Supporting/Participating Leaders pass day-to-day decisions, such as task allocation and processes, to the follower. The leader facilitates and takes part in decisions, but control is with the follower.
- S4: Delegating Leaders are still involved in decisions and problem-solving, but control is with the follower. The follower decides when and how the leader will be involved.
Of these, no one style is considered optimal or desired for all leaders to possess. Effective leaders need to be flexible, and must adapt themselves according to the situation. However, each leader tends to have a natural style, and in applying situational leadership he must know his intrinsic style.
[edit] Development levels
The right leadership style will depend on the person being led - the follower. Blanchard and Hersey extended their model to include the Development Level of the follower. They stated that the leader's chosen style should be based on the competence and commitment of his followers. They categorized the possible development of followers into four levels, which they named D1 to D4:
- D1: Low Competence, High Commitment - They generally lack the specific skills required for the job in hand. However, they are eager to learn and willing to take direction.
- D2: Some Competence, Low Commitment - They may have some relevant skills, but won't be able to do the job without help. The task or the situation may be new to them.
- D3: High Competence, Variable Commitment - They are experienced and capable, but may lack the confidence to go it alone, or the motivation to do it well or quickly.
- D4: High Competence, High Commitment - They are experienced at the job, and comfortable with their own ability to do it well. They may even be more skilled than the leader.
Development Levels are also situational. A person might be generally skilled, confident and motivated in their job, but would still drop into Level D1 when faced, say, with a task requiring skills they don't possess. For example, many managers are D4 when dealing with the day-to-day running of their department, but move to D1 or D2 when dealing with a sensitive employee "issue"
The development level is now called the performance readiness level (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2008). It is based on the Development levels and adapted from Hersey's Situational Selling. Ron Campbell of the Center for Leadership Studies has expanded the continuum of follower performance to include behavioral indicators of each readiness level.
- R1: Unable and Insecure or Unwilling - Follower is unable and insecure and lacks confidence or the follower lacks commitment and motivation to complete tasks.
- R2: Unable but Confident or Willing - Follower is unable to complete tasks but has the confidence as long as the leader provides guidance, or the follower lacks the ability but is motivated and making an effort.
- R3: Able but Insecure or Unwilling - Follower has the ability to complete tasks but is apprehensive about doing it alone or the follower is not willing to use that ability.
- R4: Able and Confident and Willing - Follower has the ability to perform and is confident about doing so and is committed.
[edit] Leadership and development matching
Hersey and Blanchard said that the leadership style (S1 - S4) of the leader must correspond to the development level (D1 - D4) of the follower. Furthermore it is the leader who must adapt, not the follower. To get the most of situational leadership, a leader should be trained in how to operate effectively in various leadership styles, and how to determine the development level of others.
For an example of a mismatch, imagine the following scenario. A new person joins your team and you're asked to help him through the first few days. You sit him in front of a PC, show him a pile of invoices that need to be processed today and then excuse yourself to a meeting. He is at level D1, and you've adopted S4, an obvious mismatch. Everyone loses because the new person feels helpless and demotivated and you don't get the invoices processed.
For another example of a mismatch, imagine you're handing over your duties to an experienced colleague before you leave for a holiday. You've listed all the tasks that need to be done and given him a detailed set of instructions on how to carry out each one. He is at level D4, and you've adopted S1. The work will probably get done, but your colleague will despise you for treating him like an idiot.
But leave detailed instructions and a checklist for the new person, and they'll thank you for it. Give your colleague a quick chat and a few notes before you go on holiday, and everything will be fine. By adopting the right style to suit the follower's development level, work gets done, relationships are built, and most importantly, the follower's development level will rise, to everyone's benefit.
In 1979 Ken Blanchard and wife, Marjorie Blanchard formed a separate company now called The Ken Blanchard Companies where they and a group of founding associates continue to work on further refinements to the original Situational Leadership Model. The development of Situational Leadership® II has been the collaborative work of Blanchard associates over the years (Ken Blanchard, Margie Blanchard, Don Carew, Eunice Parisi-Carew, Fred Finch, Laurie Hawkins, Drea Zigarmi, and Patricia Zigarmi).
The work of Drs. Don Carew and Eunice Parisi-Carew with Group Development theory was the initial impetus to change the original model. In particular, the Carews cited the extensive research of Lacousiere, who found there is a sequence to the stages of development that groups and teams go through over time. The initial stage is orientation (Stage 1), when group members first come together and are eager to participate, but are unsure of how to work together. Next comes the seemingly inevitable occurrence of dissatisfaction (Stage 2), as working together turns out to be more difficult than anticipated. If the group is able to work through this dissatisfaction, it moves into resolution or integration (Stage 3), where members learn how to work together. If interactions continue to improve, the group reaches the final stage of production (Stage 4). The Carews were able to show that the leadership styles needed to move a group through these stages correspond to the flow of the four leadership styles of Situational Leadership® II.
Style 1, Directing, is appropriate for orientation, where goals have to be made clear and roles defined. Style 2, Coaching, is necessary to move through the dissatisfaction stage, since the group still needs direction but now also needs support, encouragement, and listening behaviors. Once a group gets to the resolution or integration stage, the leader’s role could change to Style 3, Supporting, as a facilitator is needed. Now direction is provided by the group. Finally, in the production stage, an outside observer would not be able to determine the designated leader. Here, Style 4, Delegating, is appropriate.
The research influenced changes in the original model. The belief being that it is preferred to hire either winners—people who are experienced and already developed in a particular job and can operate effectively with an S3 or S4 style—or else potential winners who need to be trained. Potential winners, are often low in competence (knowledge and skills), but are high on commitment because of their initial motivation and eagerness to learn this particular job and their confidence in their learning capacity. Thus the second level of development/maturity should be “unable and unwilling” (some to low competence/low commitment) to correspond with the dissatisfaction stage of group development.
Again, consistent with the stages of group development. When people take on a new task where they are inexperienced, after a while disillusionment sets in. They are often frustrated and overwhelmed—the task is much harder than they thought it would be because they need more time and energy to gain competence than they had anticipated. When that occurs, while they have some competence (more than they had in the beginning) their motivation and confidence drops. The new thinking required reconstructing the representation of the stages of development in order to depict individual growth that moved from an enthusiastic beginner to a disillusioned learner, on to a capable but cautious performer, and finally to a self-directed achiever. The result was a continuum from “developing” to “developed.” However, a fully "developed" person can backtrack development levels if they become bored or otherwise uninterested in the task at hand.
< 教練之路 Way with a Coach ---- 衛詩米的世界 >
