FOLLOW THE LEADER

The next major step in our understanding of leadership occurred when Blake and Mouton developed the Managerial Grid (1964). They suggested that to be an effective leader, we had to balance both our concern for productivity and our concern for people. The managerial grid (see diagram) proposed four managerial or leadership styles which represented various degrees of concern for people and concern for production.

Although those of us working as managers during this time recognized the significant step forward achieved by the managerial grid, we often wondered whether our followers always required consistently high concern for people and high concern for production. We recognized that our followers had different needs for direction and support, but we felt we were not being team leaders if we gave more attention to people than production or vice versa.

What we were recognizing was not only that the needs of our followers were different but that they differed according to the situation in which the followers found themselves.

Situational Leadership, a concept developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard (1977), identified four leadership styles which respond to the developmental needs of our followers. Our goal is to maximize our resources in an effective and efficient manner.

As managers, we quickly recognize that our most important asset is our people and that only when we can motivate our staff to attain their highest performance potential can we be the most efficient and effective.

There are two significant ways in which we can develop our staff. First, we can help them acquire the skills they need to accomplish their tasks satisfactorily. We will refer to this type of leadership behavior that is focused on skill development or developing competence as “directive” behavior. The other significant way we can help our staff develop is to build their confidence and commitment. We refer to this leadership behavior as “supportive” behavior.

By placing directive behavior on one axis and supportive behavior on the other, we create a leadership matrix with four leadership styles (as illustrated by the accompanying diagram):

* High Directive and Low Supportive, which we shall refer to as the “Directing” style;

* High Directive and High Supportive, which we shall refer to as the “Coaching” style;

* Low Directive and High Supportive, which we shall refer to as the “Supportive” style; and

* Low Directive and Low Supportive, which we shall refer to as the “Delegating” style.

To identify which leadership style is most appropriate for the situation, we need to consider the competence and confidence of our followers. Studies of follower development in the workplace indicate that four levels can be identified. The Enthusiastic Beginner

Generally, the followers in this level are new to the situation and, often, to the organization. They are enthusiastic and confident that they can be successful, but they lack the specific skills required by the task. We could say that they are high in confidence but low in competence.

Our leadership style in this situation should be “Directing.” The Disillusioned Learner

As the followers face the challenge of successfully completing the task and realize how difficult the task really is, they tend to lose confidence in their ability to be successful. Our leadership style in this situation is “Coaching.” The Reluctant Contributor

The followers’ competence continues to grow, but the complexity of the various tasks that they are asked to perform continues to create uncertainty in their confidence. Our leadership style is now “Supporting.” The Peak Performer

With continued success the followers’ confidence increases and they become both confident and competent. They are self-initiating with regard to the situation and require a minimal amount of direction and support from the leader. Our leadership style is “Delegating.” Summary

Today, we realize that a leadership style primarily based on formal authority is inadequate. The benefits of participatory and team-like leadership styles have been extolled, but we have realized that in some cases they are ineffective. As we enter the 1990s, the challenge is to develop both our directive and supportive skills and to use them in a manner which will encourage each of our staff to make a significant contribution to our organization. Wayne Hanna is a principal in Coopers & Lybrands’s Toronto/Vancouver human resources practice. William Stanley is director of mine services for the company.

]]>