Contingency Theory: Blanchard's Situational Leadership

Blanchard’s model indicates that there are 4 different approaches to leading that can be used, depending on the followers of the leader and what the situation calls for. Telling requires the most involvement from the leader. This is used when the followers have little to no knowledge about the task they need to accomplish, or they are unwilling to do the task. I kind of see this as the leader needing to somewhat micromanage the team so that they get the job done. Selling is the second style, and is used by the leader when the followers have little knowledge about what the task, but, unlike with telling, the followers are willing to take on the task. Selling involves more participation from the followers, but it is still clear that the leader is leading the task. The third style is participating. Participating can be used when the followers have the competence to complete the task, but do not think that they can do it. In participating behavior, the leader shares decision making with the rest of the group, making the system more democratic. The leader shifts the focus from accomplishing a goal to more improving relations with the team. The last style is delegating. This style can be used when the group is ready, willing, and able to do the task; therefor it requires the least involvement from the group. The leader shows that they trust in the followers’ ability to get the job done, so they will give the followers the task and let them do it more on their own. The leader still monitors the group, but is less involved in the process.

The hardest part of using Blanchard’s theory is focusing on the followers and the situation rather than yourself as a leader. For some, it is not effective to use Blanchard’s method because they do not pay as much attention to the situation or the abilities of the followers as they should in order to be effective. For example, I had a leader at one point that very consistently used the Telling style. She would give me a task, but then basically sit and watch over my shoulder or check in with me every few minutes to make sure I was still on track. For me, this was very frustrating. I had been in the position for a few years and the task was something I handled on a regular basis, so I knew what to do and how to do it. And she would do this with everything she gave me, most of which were tasks I usually handled anyway. It was extremely frustrating to me. I felt like she was constantly micromanaging me and that she didn’t trust me to get even the most basic of tasks completed. Her style did not improve my work at all, in fact, it made me reluctant to complete the tasks she was giving me, and even made it so I really didn’t enjoy my job anymore. This kind of mismatching happens more than you would think. It is not easy for leaders to step outside of the style they are most comfortable in and into another that would better suit the needs of the team. In the long run, a mismatch like this can decrease productivity of the group and harm morale, which is the opposite of what most leaders are trying to accomplish.