Situational leadership

In plain terms

Situational leadership says that how you should lead depends on who you are leading and what you are asking them to do. A new hire facing an unfamiliar task needs clear instructions. An experienced colleague doing work they know well needs room. The same person can need both on the same day, for two different tasks.

The model asks a leader to do two things: judge how ready the person is for this particular task, then choose the matching mix of direction, which is telling people what to do and how, and support, which is encouraging, listening and involving them.

Where it came from

Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard published Management of Organizational Behavior in 1969 (Hersey & Blanchard, 1969a). The same year they published an application of their leadership theory to managing research and development staff in the journal Research Management (Hersey & Blanchard, 1969b). The Center for Leadership Studies, the firm Hersey founded, says the model was developed by Hersey in 1969 (Center for Leadership Studies, n.d.).

The two authors later offered separate versions. Hersey's Center for Leadership Studies sells Situational Leadership, built around a person's performance readiness (Center for Leadership Studies, n.d.). Blanchard's company sells SLII, built around a person's development level on a goal or task (Blanchard, n.d.). Researchers have also tested more than one version of the theory: a 2009 test in The Leadership Quarterly is titled "Situational leadership theory: A test of three versions" (Thompson & Vecchio, 2009).

How it works

The Center for Leadership Studies describes four styles, each a different mix of task behavior and relationship behavior (Center for Leadership Studies, n.d.):

• S1, directing or guiding (the Center also says telling): for someone with limited experience or skill for the task. The leader gives clear direction, structure and close follow-up.
• S2, coaching (also selling): for someone with limited experience who shows motivation or confidence. The leader gives direction plus explanation, feedback and encouragement.
• S3, collaborating (also participating): for someone who can do the task but lacks confidence or commitment. The leader encourages discussion, involvement and shared problem solving.
• S4, empowering (also delegating): for someone who is capable, confident and motivated. The leader gives autonomy and stays available.

The leader picks the style by diagnosing readiness, which the Center defines as a combination of ability (knowledge, experience and skill) and willingness (confidence, commitment and motivation) for a specific task. Blanchard's SLII uses the same logic with its own terms: leaders assess development level on a goal or task, then adjust the balance of direction and support (Blanchard, n.d.).

Two features matter in practice. The diagnosis is task by task, not person by person. And the style is meant to change as the person changes, so a leader who keeps directing someone who has become able is, on the model's own terms, getting it wrong.

What the research says

The Evidence Library holds no graded test of situational leadership. The Library grades syntheses and trials on leading change, and its search turned up no meta-analysis, randomized trial or quasi-experiment of the model. That does not mean no one has tested it.

Published tests exist outside the Library. Vecchio (1987) studied 303 teachers in 14 high schools, measuring supervisory style, follower maturity, performance, satisfaction with supervision and the quality of the leader-member relationship. Thompson and Vecchio (2009) tested three versions of the theory, and Fernandez and Vecchio (1997) tested an across-jobs perspective. None of these is graded in the Evidence Library, so this page names them as a starting point and does not report what they found.

What the Library does say about adjacent questions. Two findings bear on how situational leadership is usually delivered, as a training program.

• In one large meta-analysis, leadership training programs showed bigger gains on knowledge than on results. Across 83 studies of managerial leadership development, effect sizes were .96 to 1.37 for knowledge and .35 to 1.01 for expertise, and averaged .39 for system outcomes (Collins & Holton, 2004, rated Medium from its abstract). The studies mixed controlled and uncontrolled designs.
• Leader behavior can be changed by training. In a randomized field experiment with employee responses from 463 organizations, training in transformational and transactional leadership changed leadership behavior as employees rated it (Jacobsen et al., 2022, rated High from its abstract). It did not test situational leadership. See transformational vs. transactional leadership.

Where the evidence is thin

1. The core prescription. The model's central claim is that matching style to readiness gives better results than not matching. In the sources reviewed here that claim has no graded test.
2. Which version. There are at least two commercial versions with different terms, and one published test compared three versions. A result for one version does not automatically carry to another.
3. Diagnosis. The model depends on the leader judging readiness accurately. The sources here do not test how well managers make that judgment, or whether training improves it.

How it maps to the Unfrozen Loop

1. Week 0
   Before you start
2. 1
   Surface both ways
3. 2
   Make sense together, top included
4. 3
   Start it close to the work

   Situational leadership starts from the task and the person doing it, not from the leader's preferred style. The Loop's third part asks for the same starting point: begin the change where the work is done.

5. 4
   Review on a rhythm, then hold the pace
6. 5
   The middle’s own weather

   A change can reset readiness. People who were fully able at the old task may need direction and support again at the new one, which can add to what their managers carry.

7. Ring
   Safe to speak, and speaking changes something

Highlighted parts are the ones this idea speaks to. The mapping is my reading, not a tested finding. See the whole Loop and the evidence for each part.

Common misreadings

"Situational leadership means changing your style to suit your mood." The model ties style to the person's readiness for a specific task, not to the leader's preference (Center for Leadership Studies, n.d.).

"Delegating means stepping back completely." The Center describes the empowering style as giving autonomy while staying available for support. It is not the hands-off, laissez-faire leadership that one meta-analysis found to be negatively related to outcomes (Judge & Piccolo, 2004, abstract read).

"Once you have diagnosed someone, you are done." The diagnosis is per task, and the style is meant to shift as people develop. During a change, people who were ready for the old task may not yet be ready for the new one.

Using it well

1. Diagnose the task, not the person. For one person on your team, list three tasks they are doing during the current change. For each, note whether they have done it before and how confident they seem. You will often find they need direction on one and room on another.
2. Say which style you are using. Tell the person why: "This is new, so I will be specific about the steps." Giving the reason takes one sentence.
3. Set a date to step back. When you choose to direct, agree when you will check whether to loosen. The model's value lies in moving along the styles, not in picking one.