Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

The situation behind Airman development

by

As a senior non-commissioned officer in the United States Air Force, Airman-development is one of my highest, personal and professional, responsibilities. Ensuring my Airmen are trained, prepared and ready to fight is a matter of life and death. If I fail to motivate, inspire and arm them with the tools and resources they require to succeed, the mission will fail. This is why the study and understanding of leadership is developed within all Airmen from their earliest enlisted professional military education experiences. One of the first leadership models I studied was the Situational Leadership Model, developed by Ken Blanchard and Dr. Paul Hersey, which is based on W. J. Reddin’s 3-D management style theory during 1967 (Northouse, 2016, p. 93).

The study of this model officially began when I was promoted to staff sergeant in 2002 and enrolled in Airman Leadership School. The school is the first enlisted professional military education course young Airmen experience, and lasts about six weeks. There are other schools they attend at various milestones throughout their career, all of which are geared to develop them into the best Airmen possible. While the flow and delivery of the lesson principles has changed over the years, the principles have remained relatively as I remember them. The first block of instruction we encounter is the course foundation. It is within this instruction, within the first days of our entry into our first leadership education experience, that we learn about the Situational Leadership Theory, which is built into the chapter known as “Full Range Leadership Development,” (ALDLC, 2017, p. 138). It is here that the Air Force starts the leadership discussion on how a subordinate’s development level should impact a leader’s approach to the situation. The unfortunate reality is though, that the Air Force has to pack in a ton of content in that six-week period, thus restricting their discussion of Situational Leadership Theory to 263 words and the graphic depicting the model. My hope is that this theory isn’t lost under the weight of all the course content – because it is extremely applicable to the daily lives of Airmen.

One of the key reasons why it is so applicable, is because of it is prescriptive, not descriptive (Northouse, 2016, p. 99). It actually tells you how to lead within situations. This is great for new leaders because situations may be a bit overwhelming and they may not have a robust history full of experience to help guide them. How does this work? As Figure 5.1, taken from Northouse (2016, p. 95) explains, leaderships styles vary amid directive and supportive behaviors. Directive behaviors establish goals, set timelines, define roles, clarify responsibilities, and are often one-way (Northouse, 2016, p. 94). On the other hand, supportive behaviors are often two-way and help folks feel comfortable and show social and emotional support (Northouse, 2016, p. 94).

The degree of each behavior as it relates to the other determines the style of leadership, whether that be directing, coaching, supporting, or delegating. The appropriate style can then be utilized with the follower depending on where they are within the various levels of development. The word “with” is italicized for a very specific reason. As Blanchard Research and Training India LLP (2014) explain, these leadership styles are not something done to followers, but with them as partners [1:00]. This increases transparency and understanding within the relationship and aids in building trust.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDHpyr6nlwQ

One of the most intriguing elements of the situational approach is how the development levels have aligned with my personal experiences of Airman development. It’s important to note that there really is not any substantial research to back up how commitment varies along the situational leadership model, it happens to be one of the main criticisms of the theory itself (Northouse, 2016, p. 101). In any case, in my personal experience, the model reflects the reality I have come to understand over 20 years of service.

After an Airman graduates basic training, they progress onto a technical school. From there, they move to their first duty station, which is where we then take lead on their development. When they first arrive, they really don’t know their jobs well but they are incredibly excited and eager to be great Airmen. In the SLII model, they would fall under “D1,” or low competence and high commitment. At this point, we pretty much have to show and tell them exactly what to do, because they want to do it, they just don’t know how yet. After some time, the Airman begins to understand their jobs and what they really got themselves into. They start to indoctrinate into the military culture and awaken to the realities that surround them – and it is not always positive. Life in the military is really challenging. This oftentimes discourages them and they become disillusioned. They would now be considered in “D2” or low competence, low commitment. It is at this point the coaching style becomes really important. While we still need to set goals and explain the mission, we need to be more supportive on the socioemotional side of the house to help keep their energy up and build their understanding of why we live the way we live and why we do the things we do as a military.

As the Airman continues to develop over the years, their skills begin to sharpen but they may still not be fully indoctrinated into the culture. It has yet to become part of them. They are now “D3,” or high competence, variable commitment. It is here that we transition into the supportive style. We want to start empowering Airmen to accomplish their mission. As The Airman Handbook (2015) explains, “by allowing Airmen flexibility in how they implement the vision, the leader successfully allows others to take ownership of the vision and experience pride in achieving it,” (p. 249). With perseverance and care, Airmen will begin to understand the why behind the military lifestyle and their motivations will align with their confidence and ability to conduct the mission. They have made it to “D4,” or high competence, high commitment. Now, we can truly start to delegate the mission because they are fully competent and able to get the job done.

The one key element to situational leadership is that the approach isn’t determined by the development of the Airman holistically, but of the Airman’s capabilities within specific situations. The Penn State World Campus lesson commentary explained how a coach would treat their teams differently if they were playing a championship team versus a last place team, (p. 10). This is an important distinction. In my current organization, I have a non-commissioned officer who is exceptional at his primary duties, but believes his role in leadership is to direct his subordinates through e-mail alone. He takes no responsibility for development at all. So while I can delegate specific primary duties to him, I am having to continually coach him on how to best lead and manage his people. Being an Airman is much more than primary duties alone. We need to understand that the development of our Airmen is the single-most important responsibility we non-commissioned officers bear. It is our Airmen who accomplish the mission with our leadership and guidance. If we simply sit behind a computer and direct action without properly training them and guiding them along their career trajectory, there is simply no hope they’ll ever reach the highest levels of development. If they never reach them, then we will never sustain the force required to protect our nation. So it is in this way, that refining our ability to lead throughout all situations is a matter of national security.

References
Airman leadership distance learning course: Course foundation (9th ed.). (2017). Maxwell-Gunter Air Force Base, AL: Air University. Retrieved September 23, 2017 from https://goo.gl/n2CN9F
Blanchard Research and Training India LLP (Producer). (2014, September 11). Ken & Scott Blanchard – Situational leadership II [Video file]. Retrieved September 23, 2017 from https://goo.gl/kMVsjW
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: theory and practice (7th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2017). PSYCH 485 Lesson 5: Style and situational approaches. Retrieved September 23, 2017 from https://goo.gl/SNZRqA
The Airman Handbook. (2015). Washington, D.C.: Department of the Air Force. Retrieved September 23, 2017 from https://goo.gl/qLZ6ec

Can Situational Leadership be Useful for Group Instruction?

by

The situational approach to leadership follows the concept that leaders are more effective if they can adapt their leadership style according to the competence and commitment of their followers (Northouse, 2016, p. 94). This approach has been popular among leadership training programs because it is easy to understand and it provides clear direction on how a leader should behave in different situations (Northouse, 2016, p. 99). Given the popularity, it could be assumed that this approach has been accepted as a valid method of providing leadership guidance. However, there is not enough research with empirical data that can prove the actual effectiveness of this approach to leadership (Northouse, 2016, p.101). Although the validity is unclear, I still believe that the situational approach to leadership can provide some useful insight into the effectiveness of situationally adaptive leaders. Albeit, the usefulness of this theory is more applicable to an individual and not to a group.

Using the Situational Leadership® II (SLII®) model created by Blanchard et al. (2003), a leader’s supportive and directive behavior can be matched with the developmental level of their followers (as cited in Northouse, 2016, p. 95). The directed leadership styles in this model are defined in four different categories, which are distinguished by the combination of different levels of supportive and directive behavior (Northouse, 2016, p. 94). The leadership style categories are then matched with the developmental level of the followers, which is also separated into four unique categories. Each of the developmental levels are classified by a varying level of follower commitment and competency (Northouse, 2016, p. 96).

Applying the SLII® model to my current job position will help to highlight the usefulness of this approach. I currently work at an Army aviation training organization. We instruct different aviation courses to different ranking soldiers with different levels of experience, at varying points in their careers. One of the first courses I taught at this training organization was a basic aviation maintenance course. The soldiers in this course were typically within the first few years of their service in the military and had no experience in the aviation field.

At the start of this ten week aviation maintenance course, I would classify most of the soldiers as a level D1 according to the SLII® model. The D1 level describes followers who are new to the task or goal, but have a high level of motivation and interest (Northouse, 2016, p. 96). Matching this follower level to the appropriate leadership style in the SLII® model, I can see that I should mirror the behaviors contained in the S1 style of leadership. The S1 style of leadership directs me to provide a high directive – low supportive role when guiding and instructing the D1 level followers (Northouse, 2016, p.96). When providing instruction to these inexperienced Soldiers, I was required to provide a specific task and explain how each step of the task was to be performed. I would then carefully supervisor each step throughout the completion of the task.

As I expanded my capabilities within the training organization, I began teaching other advanced courses. While instructing the advanced and senior leadership courses for the enlisted Soldiers within the aviation field, I noticed that I needed to take a different approach to instructing. These Soldiers were experienced and held a higher rank then the Soldiers in the basic maintenance course. They were considered experienced in the technical aspects of the job, but typically were unsure of their leadership ability. If I strictly dictated their actions, then they would view me as overbearing and forceful, often taking little interest in the information I provided. To ensure these Soldiers were open and accepting of the information I presented, I needed to take on a more supportive role.

Developing problem solving skills and critical thinking are a key aspect to these leadership courses. To allow this type of development, I needed to provide more social support to the Soldiers while still allowing them to complete a task in their own way. This approach encouraged the Soldiers to take responsibility for their actions, while still allowing me to observe and provide support when necessary.

When comparing this situation to the SLII® model, I can see that most of the followers fit the D3 level, a moderate to high competence and a variable commitment (Northouse, 2016, p. 95). The SLII® model would then direct me to apply an S3 style to my leadership, displaying a high supportive and low directive behavior (Northouse, 2016, p.95). The more supportive and less directive style allowed them to use their own experiences to help develop themselves, while still having the ability to seek the necessary feedback to improve their process.

What I experienced as an instructor demonstrated that using a different style of leadership for varying degrees of experience among followers could be an effective method for development. However, I had to be cognizant of the needs of the soldiers on an individual level. Through the use of end of course critiques, which are feedback reports required by all graduating soldiers, I could see that one style of leadership was not meeting the satisfaction of every soldier in training. Most of the attending soldiers would fit the developmental category that I generalized for each course. However, soldiers with the same rank and relatively same time in service did not equate to the same experience level. Some of the soldiers in the leadership courses did not come with the same advanced level of competence and therefore required more direction than the other individuals in the course. As noted by Northouse (2016), leaders must remain flexible because the developmental level of followers can and will change continuously (p. 98). Following this same principle, I would have to carefully analyze each individual student and adjust my leadership style to his or her unique developmental category.

What I concluded through my duties as a military instructor was that the situational approach to leadership can be useful for identifying effective leadership styles. When instructing different courses, the audience’s developmental levels need to be considered to be effective. However, when applying the situational approach to leadership, it is important to understand that this is most useful when applied to an individual and not to a group as whole.

 

Reference

Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

 

 

Leadership in Group Projects

by

A great leader must be able to bring a team together to reach a common goal through the process of applying skills and behaviors to create a solid group relationship for any given situation.  It seems to be a universal feeling that when you start a new course and the professor mentions there will be group work, everyone tends to get distressed.  Northouse (2016) describes a team as a group of interdependent members working towards a common goal through coordinated activities.

When it comes to team work, establishing a common goal seems to be the easiest part.  These are typically assigned by the instructor of the course, or project manager, who divides you into your designated groups or teams.  This is also the time for you to discover your team.  I have been in a variety of group projects in my schooling and professional careers ranging from committees to essays, and on a variety of different subjects. Every team member has a variety of different ways to contribute to the team, some in more productive ways than others.

Coordinating activities in an academic setting proves to consistently be the difficult part of group work.  In an academic setting, such as World Campus, you have to utilize various communication channels while dealing with individuals all over the country to guide the group towards the established goal.  My experience has nearly always been negative.  Without fail, there is at least one team member who doesn’t communicate or pull their weight, making it difficult for all other members.  I found myself always promoting a highly directive, or task, relationship with my team without overstepping the bounds of supporting their insight into the project, which Northouse (2016) classifies as falling in the realm of coaching or directing leadership styles.  Being directive, I took the lead in establishing “what is to be done, how it is to be done, and who is responsible for doing it.” (Northouse. 2016. p.94)  However, I have always considered myself a good leader in deciding “how much task and how much relationship is required in a given context or situation” (Northouse. 2015. p.109).

Recently, during a group project, I found myself needing to adapt my leadership style.  I was fortunate enough to have a team member who also proved to have strong leadership abilities in our situation.  This individual contributed a different level of skills than I.  Where I tend to excel in human skills, commonly referred to as “people skills” (Northouse, 2016, p.45), this person excelled in the technical skills, which is defined by Northouse (2016) as having “knowledge about and proficiency in a specific type of work or activity” (p. 44).  I was able to adjust my typically directive leadership style for group projects, to accommodate this other individual and assist in leading from a more supportive and less directive role, classified as “supporting” in the situational leadership model (Northouse, 2016, p.95).

For group work, it is important to be able to adjust ones leadership style according to those skills displayed by other individuals in your group.  A great leader must be able to bring the team together to reach their common goal through a process of applying skills and behaviors to create a solid group relationship for the given situation.  Complimenting ones abilities with those of other group members can create and maintain a cohesive and complimentary team environment.

Northouse, P. (2015). Introduction to leadership concepts and practice (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA. SAGE Publications, Inc.

Northouse, P. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage Publications, Inc.

The Situation on Contingency

by

simbaWe have all seen The Lion King at some point in our lives, if not I am sorry, as it is a great story.  I remember watching it for the first time when I was 5 at the theater, I cried a lot.  The story is mainly about a young lion cub named Simba that is born into a den of lions that reigns over all wildlife within a large area (minus the shadows).  Young Simba is thrown into his world exalted as the future king of The Pride Lands and is expected to take up the throne after his father.  We all remember how Simba’s uncle, Scar, has different plans and wants to be the next on the throne.  So Scar exacts his plan into action and becomes the new king after Simba’s father, Mufasa, perishes and Scar makes Simba run away.  Years later Simba is confronted by an old friend and is told about how horrible of a leader Scar is and the he should come back to take over The Pride Lands.  Simba then tries to find out if he really is the leader that is needed and is given some great wisdom from Rafiki, an old spunky baboon that is full of wisdom.  It is believed that Rafiki can see more about Simba than Simba saw himself and informs Simba that based upon his sight he believes Simba has what it takes.  How often does this play out in the corporate world, and how well?

Sometimes, an individual becomes a leader, not from choice but out of situation and necessity.  Some seem to be able to fall into the position and do quite well, maybe they were born for the role (hint hint), but others do not.  Some start of rocky and blossom, some start of great and then plummet to the bottom.  How, can you determine if these individuals will be best suited for the role?  To determine the effectiveness of someone as a potential leader one could use both the Situational Approach and the Contingency Theory.

“The contingency theory is similar to situation theory in that there is an assumption that no simple way is always right. Situation theory, however, focuses more on the behaviors that the leader should use. The contingency theory takes a broader view that includes contingent factors about leader capability and also includes other variables within the situation.” (Encyclopedia of Management, 2009)

Several factors of the Contingency Approach are: (Encyclopedia of Management, 2009):

  • The size of the organization

  • How the firm adapts itself to its environment

  • Differences among resources and operations activities

  • Assumption of managers about employees

  • Strategies

  • Technologies being used

In the case of personal experience I have worked for a very large call center in Maryland.  Over the 3+ years I have worked here I have seen many people, some friends, become supervisors and managers.  I find it most interesting watching someone with no ambition to be a leader suddenly placed into a position of authority.  Many would think its a sink or swim kind of moment, but that’s not true. One case in particular stands out in regards to my current manager.  She was a team lead and she was wonderful at her job, she was one of the best leads I have ever had the pleasure to work under.  She was attentive, knowledgeable, and very friendly.  Shortly after working in the current department she received the news that she was going to have to assume department manager.  She was naturally very nervous as she wasn’t sure if she was right for the job, but upper management said she would do great considering her history as a team lead.  They couldn’t have been farther from the truth.

https://youtu.be/nCSsZrzL1i0

Much like Simba this team lead was given the “lay of the land” and she could only see a small part at one time. My team lead was all for participation but not very upfront enough to tell someone what to do. At first she was optimistic and things seemed okay, but as time went on her smile was worn away into chaotic eyes and a tired face.  She had never been in a management position that also entailed the administrative aspect of an entire department of IT professionals.  Those of us below her began to notice discrepancies in our pay checks from hours not being keyed on time or correctly.  Individuals that requires specific admin access to various software systems seemed to never get the higher level access, all because this team lead would overlook many things.  There is something that could have helped her drastically in her transition to management.  Upper management assumed that because she was very good at her current position that she would be great in a slightly different position with much more responsibility.  If the Contingency Approach had been applied it may have played out that this team lead was not the right fit.

The Contingency Approach is a lot like the Situational Approach in that it looks to study how specific types of leadership or best for which role (PSU WC, 2016, 5.2 p.13) This manager never had her skills, traits, power, authority, and employee relations studied and analyzed.  Because of this an unfair treatment to both her and ourselves occurred which caused many to lose out on pay or vacation time or even faith in this manager’s ability, when they had been high before.  With even trying to determine if she would be a proper fit for the elevated position they tossed her in and she has had quite the time adjusting to her newest role.  If even a brief study of my team lead’s past would have been conducted they would have know that someone else would have been the right fit.

 

“Contingency Approach to Management.” Encyclopedia of Management. 2009. Retrieved February 23, 2016 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3273100055.htm

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2016). Lesson 6: Contingency and path theories: Part 2: Path-Goal Theory. PSYCH485: Leadership in work settings. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp16/psych485/001/content/06_lesson/04_topic/02_page.html.

Situational Leadership: Don’t Sell Your Integrity, Be the Change!

by

I read two really interesting articles this week on situational leadership, the focus of Chapter 5 in Northouse (2013).  The first article, entitled, Leadership is Situational, Integrity is Not, raised one very good point that we must all remember.  While we may need to adjust our leadership styles depending upon our followers and the circumstances we are in, we do not—and must not—adjust our values (Kane, 2014).

This is an important take away.  As leaders, our behaviors must be adaptable.  If we have a certain follower that needs additional help, we must be coaching or directing.  If we have followers that are highly competent, we can be delegating or supporting.  However, we must not change who we are at our core.  According to Kane (2014), integrity is an important trait to keep consistent:  our integrity is not for sale.  Remembering that sticking to our values and principles is paramount; sometimes we have to deal with followers and out-groups that can test our patience and resolve.

The second article, 5 tactics to promote situational leadership skills, describes five techniques that we can use to ensure our followers truly understand situational leadership.  Adjusting styles can be confusing (hence the previous article on modifying behaviors, not values).  However, there are five ways in which a leader can set his/her team up for success when using a situational leadership approach:

  1. Educate your team
  2. Provide structure
  3. Lead by example
  4. Encourage your followers
  5. Give rewards when due

The two most effective ways to reinforce positive situational leadership (in my humble opinion) are leading by example and rewarding your followers.  Walsh (2015) even indicated that the single best way to support adopting situational leadership is leading by example.  This reminds me of the quote, “Be the change you want to see.” Be the situational leadership you want to see!

While I understand that not everyone is motivated by rewards, many people are.  It feels good to know that your leadership is acknowledging your progress and views it as beneficial to the organization.  Rewards don’t have to be monetary in nature, but can be something as simple as a letter demonstrating success, which can then come in handy come promotion time.

What do you think?  Is it tricky to practice situational leadership?  Which method is the most effective?

 

Kane, N. (2014). Leadership is Situational, Integrity is Not. Tech.co [Article]. Retrieved from http://tech.co/leadership-situational-integrity-2014-04.

Walsh, P. (2015). 5 tactics to promote situational leadership skills. Examiner [Article]. Retrieved from http://www.examiner.com/article/5-tactics-to-promote-situational-leadership-skills.

 

Skip to toolbar