SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP THEORY

Situational Leadership Theory

Situational Leadership Theory

Hersey and Blanchard, (2005) based their situational leadership theory on previous studies of leader behavior. They identified four leadership behaviors: telling, selling, participating, and delegating, which are measured by the LEAD (leadership effectiveness and adaptability description) instrument. The theory predicts that the extent to which these behaviors are effective depends upon subordinates' task maturity and subordinates' psychological maturity. Subordinates' task maturity is measured using such factors as ability, education, and experience, whereas subordinates' psychological maturity is measured using such factors as willingness, self-esteem, and motivation.

The idea of the tide leads us to the role of situational factors in leadership. For example, (Schriesheim, Tepper, Tetrault, 2006) suggests that leadership effectiveness is dependent upon structural aspects of the organization. Longitudinal studies of organizational effectiveness provide support for this idea. For example, (Vecchio, 2007) indicated that “If one cannot observe differences when leaders change, then what does it matter who occupies the positions or how they behave?” (p. 33). (Schriesheim, Tepper, Tetrault, 2006) have identified three distinct roles that situational factors play in leadership effectiveness. First, organizational effectiveness is not strictly a result of good leadership practices. Situational factors beyond the control of the leader often affect the outcomes of any group effort.

Whereas leaders, be they navy admirals or football coaches, receive credit or blame for the activities of their followers, success or failure is often the result of external forces: the actions of others, changing technologies, or environmental conditions. Second, situations shape how leaders act. Although much of the literature on leadership has focused on individual differences, social psychologists such as Phil Zimbardo, in his classic Stanford Prison experiment, and Stanley milgram, in his studies of obedience, have demonstrated how important the situation is in determining behavior (Andrew, 2008). Third, situations influence the consequences of leader ...