Situational leadership focuses on leadership in situations, and that different situations need different kind of leadership (Northouse, 2016, p. 93). Situational leadership believes that leadership has both directive and supportive dimensions (Northouse, 2016, p. 93). Leaders that use a situational style change how they lead to meet the needs of their followers. Last year my work revamped their safety policies to reduce employee injury. Management decided on what policies to changes and how then they held training for all supervisors and mentors. The training taught what had changed and how to support our coworkers with these changes. The training not only taught us about the policies but also to be able to see how best to help our coworkers with the change. A lot of what was taught followed the SLII model of situational leadership. Among other things, we were taught to recognize where our coworkers were at with commitment to the policy change and understanding of what to do. We did this by asking questions about the policies, viewing them performing the tasks, among other things. Once we could recognize where our coworkers are at then, we can change what we do in response. Some responses included going over the policy changes again and how to do them, encourage them, getting their input on the effectiveness of the changes, and once they are comfortable and competent enough, letting them take over the safety monitoring on a day to day basis.
In the SLII model of situational leadership, there are four distinct categories of leadership styles (Northouse, 2016, p. 94). The style that a leader uses depends on the needs the follower has. The first style is called a directing style (Northouse, 2016, p. 94). Leaders use this approach that focuses on what and how goals are to be achieved by followers (Northouse, 2016, p. 94). After the goals are chosen, then leaders supervise followers closely to ensure goals are being met (Northouse, 2016, p. 94). This approach is best used with followers that are low in competence and high commitment (Northouse, 2016, p. 96). In this case, competency is how well they understood the new policies and what they should do. Commitment means how committed they are to achieving the goal of making a safe workplace for all employees. When the new safety program was established, almost all of our stuff fit into this style. Even though our staff was committed to our organization and improving safety for our workers, we were not competent in the new program yet. The second style is one of coaching; it is a style where leaders are highly directive and highly supportive (Northouse, 2016, p. 94). Leaders are involved with followers and give encouragement and seek input from the followers (Northouse, 2016, p. 94). Even though leaders seek input from followers, they are still making the final decision on what and how the goal is accomplished (Northouse, 2016, p. 94). This style is best used with followers who have some competence but low commitment (Northouse, 2016 p. 96). The workers at my work needed this kind of support once the new safety program had been established for a while but still found it easier to go back to older, less safe ways of doing things. Leaders were trained to recognize staff that understood the new policies on how to do things but needed encouragement to keep using them. The third style of leadership is a supportive approach (Northouse, 2016, p. 95). In this style, leaders listen to their followers and gain their input and let them make day to day decisions while providing feedback (Northouse, 2016, p. 95). After a period of time, when most of the staff became comfortable with our new policies, management asked how they were going. They also left it up to employees to make sure the policies were being followed. The fourth style of situational leadership is a delegating approach (Northouse, 2016, p. 95). In this, the approach has the leader provides less goal input and social support (Northouse, 2016, p. 95). Followers that are highly competent and have a high degree of commitment work well under this style (Northouse, 2016 p. 97). In the case of my work, leaders used this style with mentors. Once mentors understood the policy changes and had the confidence in themselves, they were used to train and supervise new employees in these new safety policies. Management was still available for clarification if needed.
Situational leadership worked well for my company and our policy change. It allowed leaders to meet the needs of the workers by meeting the needs they had at depending on their needs. Followers can go from one level to another and back again, depending on the situation(Northouse, 2016, p. 97). Even though situational leadership worked well, in this case, it is not always the best leadership approach as it can be confusing for some. It has many steps and parts that need to be learned (Northouse, 2016, p. 112). It also can be hard for an organization to use instead of as on a one to one basis (Northouse, 2016, p.112).
References
Northouse, P. (2016). Leadership Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage.