This leadership style is where the leader actually has to plan and synchronize training in order that the small units are able to produce the tactical into the operational action. At the organization level a leader is not in a traditional leadership position when they are directly in charge of soldiers. Leaders in this style are the one whom establish section that develop plans and create orders. When a result is achieved at this level the entire team is responsibility for the outcome. Organizational leaders make decision that affect the long term goal and helps plan the short term mission for their subordinate units.
To determine what is needed in a particular situation, a leader must evaluate her or his followers and assess how competent and committed they are to perform a given goal (Northouse, 2016). As a leader I had to
Situational and Authentic leadership are increasingly important skills to possess in today’s era of technological changes and availability and flow of information we have in this day and age. Leaders today must be able to adjust their leadership styles to the whatever situation arises as well as to the people who they are leading. Leaders are not limited to just use one style in one situation, being able to adapt appropriate styles to different situations will influence and help a leader succeed. A leader’s judgement, intelligence, cultural awareness, and self-control plays major roles in helping them choose the proper style and appropriate technique for the task at hand (Lau & Cronin, 1998).
A follower must show integrity, therefore he must be honest. If a leader is trying to help you and you don’t tell him the truth, whether it be admitting that you don’t know how to do a stationary drill movement or you don’t like his leading style, then you have nothing to gain from him and he can’t help you. A follower must show respect. If an officer or NCO is placed above you then you have to follow his commands and listen to his orders, otherwise the leader-follower team accomplishes nothing. A follower must be willing to volunteer his time. A leader cannot shape his follower if his follower is constantly making excuses as to why he can’t be somewhere. If the follower never sacrifices his time so he can learn from the leader, then the leader’s efforts to teach ultimately fail. Last, a follower must have an extreme level of excellence. A good follower will listen attentively to his leader’s instruction, but a great follower will become his leader’s
Lord, R. G., Brown, D. J., and Freiberg, S. J. (1999). Understanding the dynamics of leadership: The role of follower self-concepts in the leader/follower relationship. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78(3), 167-203.
Effective followership is an essential component of effective leadership in that, without good followers, the leader’s work is difficult and cumbersome. The role of the follower is many times understated. As illustrated by Kelley (1998), “effective followers are thinkers; energetic and assertive, self-starters, independent problem solvers, and carry out their tasks with these characteristics (p. 143). Effective followers also are characterized by their ability to perform tasks with little supervision, their intelligence, and ability to think for themselves. We are all followers, even those who consider themselves leaders; so to encourage this effectiveness in others; we must be role models for those under us, so that they may also be effective at following. Chaleff (2009) observed that “all important social accomplishments require complex
The role of the follower and the quality of the relationship itself are informally negotiated between followers and their leaders over time (Gils, Quaquebeke, & Knippenberg, 2009). Based on the LMX theory, leaders build a special relationship with an inner circle, or “in-group”, of followers, who often get high levels of responsibility and access to resources. The in-group members work harder and are more committed to task objectives. They are also expected to be totally committed and loyal to their leader. Conversely, other followers fall in the “out-group" and are given low levels of choice or influence. Aggression, sarcasm and a self-centered view are qualities seen in the out-group. The quality of the LMX relationship varies and is better when the challenge of the job is extremely high or extremely low (Graen et al., 1982).
Leadership is an important factor within a business environment and often plays a significant role in achievement of organisational success (Landis, Hill & Harvey 2014). However, leadership is an art, therefore there is no simple formula for effective leadership (Hughes, Ginnett & Curphy 2015, p.33) and a leader’s effectiveness can often only be understood in the context of the leader-follower-situation interaction model.
Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory (SLT) asserts that a leader’s effectiveness is dependent upon the readiness, or ability and willingness, of the leader’s followers to complete a task. This leadership style is an amalgamation of task-oriented and relationship-oriented characteristics that are employed depending upon the situation and the followers involved. According to the SLT, as followers increase in readiness the leader’s style is to adapt accordingly (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2009).
In today’s world, leaders are not defined by age, race or gender. They can be a high school basketball coach, the shift supervisor at the local coffee shop, or even the President of the United States of America. In as many ways that leaders can vary by appearance and responsibility, there is also a variance in the ways that they lead. This case study aims to compare three of the more popular theories of leadership. These leadership theories are situational leadership, trait theory and transformational leadership.
The situational leadership model was developed by two authors, Ken Blanchard, and Paul Hersey in the year 1969. These authors based this model on the concept that leadership should adapt to different management practices and approaches to fit different situations and surpass any diversity of their encounters (Lussier & Achua, 2010). In particular, this model provides guidance on how to analyze a situation, choose effaceable strategies and adopt the most appropriate leadership style. Apparently, the two developers of the model researched and found that, given some case, leadership may fail to accomplish some goals due to adopting single
Leadership is about the interaction between the leader, the followers and the situation (Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy (2015, p. 15-26). If a given situation changes, the interaction between the leaders and followers can change dramatically. The leaders who understand well this interaction have a huge advantage because leaders are able to:
Leadership has been a topic that has been researched for a long time in many disciplines. Leadership as a personality focuses on the characteristics of an individual that gives them power to act as leaders. There is leadership as an attribution this approach views leadership as phenomenon that causes group of followers to have outcomes.(Wu et al, 2010, 90).Researchers have used the following approaches to study leadership; they are mainly trait, behavior, power influence, situation and integrative approaches. Trait approaches focuses on the characteristics, values, skill and personality of leaders. Behavior approaches is focused on the leaders behaviors, differentiating between the behavior of ineffective and effective leaders. Integrative approach combines all the approaches to have a holistic picture of the process, outcomes and determinants of leadership. The approach that this paper uses is situational approach that is not leader centered but more on the significance of the context as an influence of leadership. Leaders should be able to choose the leadership quality appropriate to a particular situation.
According to Blank et al. (1990), as leader task and relationship behaviours match follower readiness the “effectiveness” of this behaviour will be established in follower performance and satisfaction with the leader (p. 584). Consequently, an appropriate test of SLT would be to examine matches of leader task and relationship behaviour and follower readiness in “different types of organizations” and at different levels within the organization (Norris and Vecchio, 1992, p. 333). A greater understanding of matches would validate the theory and contribute to the understanding of situational leadership