Situational Leadership Theory - Situational Leadership II

Situational Leadership II

Hersey and Blanchard continued to iterate on the original theory until 1977 when they mutually agreed to run their respective companies. In the late 1970s, Hersey changed the name from Situational Leadership® Theory to Situational Leadership® and Blanchard offered Situational Leadership® Theory as A Situational Approach to Managing People. Blanchard and his colleagues continued to iterate and revise A Situational Approach to Managing People, and in 1985 introduced Situational Leadership® II (SLII®).

In 1979, Ken Blanchard founded Blanchard Training & Development, Inc., (later The Ken Blanchard Companies) together with his wife Margie Blanchard and a board of founding associates. Over time, this group made changes to the concepts of the original Situational Leadership® Theory in several key areas, which included the research base, the leadership style labels, and the individual’s development level continuum.

Research
The Situational Leadership® II (SLII®) Model acknowledged the existing research of the Situational Leadership® Theory and revised the concepts based on feedback from clients, practicing managers, and the work of several leading researchers in the field of group development.

The primary sources included:

• Malcolm Knowles’ research in the area of adult learning theory and individual development stages, where he asserted that learning and growth are based on changes in self-concept, experience, readiness to learn, and orientation to learning.
• Kanfer and Ackerman’s study of motivation and cognitive abilities and the difference between commitment and confidence, task knowledge and transferable skills.
• Bruce Tuckman’s research in the field of group development, which compiled the results of 50 studies on group development and identified four stages of development: Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing. Tuckman’s later work identified a fifth stage of development called “Termination.” Tuckman found that when individuals are new to the team or task they are motivated but are usually relatively uninformed of the issues and objectives of the team. Tuckman felt that in the initial stage (Forming) supervisors of the team need to be directive. Stage two, Storming, is characterized by conflict and polarization around interpersonal issues and how best to approach the task. These behaviors serve as resistance to group influence and task requirements and can cause performance to drop. As the team moves through the stages of development, performance and productivity increase. Lacoursiere’s research in the 1980s, which synthesized the findings from 238 groups. Until Lacoursiere’s work in 1980, most research had studied non-work groups; Lacoursiere’s work validated the findings produced by Tuckman in regard to the five stages of group development.
• Susan Wheelan’s 10-year study, published in 1990 and titled Creating Effective Teams, which confirmed the five stages of group development in Tuckman’s work.

Development Levels
Blanchard’s Situational Leadership® II Model uses the terms “competence” (ability, knowledge, and skill) and “commitment” (confidence and motivation) to describe different levels of development.

The Situational Leadership® II Model tends to view development as an evolutionary progression meaning that when individuals approach a new task for the first time, they start out with little or no knowledge, ability or skills, but with high enthusiasm, motivation, and commitment. Blanchard views development as a process as the individual moves from developing to developed, in this viewpoint it is still incumbent upon the leader to diagnose development level and then use the appropriate leadership style.

In the Blanchard SLII Model, the belief is that an individual comes to a new task or role with low competence (knowledge and transferable skills) but high commitment. As the individual gains experience and is appropriately supported and directed by their leader they reach Development Level 2 and gain some competence, but their commitment drops because the task may be more complex than the individual had originally perceived when they began the task. With the direction and support of their leader, the individual moves to Development Level 3 where competence can still be variable—fluctuating between moderate to high knowledge, ability and transferable skills and variable commitment as they continue to gain mastery of the task or role. Finally, the individual moves to Development Level 4 where competence and commitment are high.