Behavioral and Situational Theories

Behavioral theory earned attention in the mid-20^th century after the publication of an article for the Harvard Business Review. This theory was created with the opinion that leadership can be learned. It is a consensus that certain behaviors or skills are more necessary than others for effective leadership. This is what separates leaders from non-leaders. During research on this theory, it was determined that there were three skills that pervaded all of the studies and which were shown to be indicators of good leadership. The three determinants of effective leadership are: technical skills, human skills and conceptual skills. Technical skills are the skills that are needed to get the job done. Human skills are abilities to relate to other people and develop good interpersonal relationships. Conceptual skills are skills concerning the ability to visualize and make fantasies become realities. After the class discussed these things, we were given a scenario in which we needed to pick who we would nominate to be a leader. Persons B, C and E were the most picked, if my memory is serving me well. I do not think it was a coincidence that they all happened to be experienced in all three different skill levels. I think that the class considered those with experience in all three skill levels as more qualified to be leaders. The nice thing about this theory is that it suggests that there is more than one type of behavior or set of skills that leads to effective leadership. It also emphasizes the behavioral assets of others. This theory demands that leaders change their styles in response to different situations. Leaders have to take a chameleon-like approach to leading. A leader has to be willing to adjust to differences in whatever environment he or she is working in. This is referred to as the “situational theory” and it consists of two dimensions: directive and supportive leadership. “Directing” is, as the name implies, high directive. However, the supportive aspect is low. This style is concerned with giving roles to members and initiating problem-solving and decision-making. “Coaching” is high supportive and high directive. This approach sounds like it could be exhausting. There is a lot of communication with the coaching style implemented. The “supporting” approach is kind of like taking the role of the cheerleader of the group. There is a lot of recognition of members and active listening. Lastly, there is the “delegating” approach. This is low directive and low supportive. This is taking a laissez faire approach and letting members run the show. A friend and I have been working with people with regards to their health. We make meal plans for them and guide them while they work out at the gym. Personally, I have found that the coaching style is the most effective. Listening to them talk about their goals and desires, while giving them direction in order to achieve those goals has shown substantial improvement in their performances. Without this style of leadership, it would be an arduous task to get them motivated, while still informing them.