We accept

Analysis of Situational Control Theory

The situational theory of command is becoming ever more popular in the context of modern organizational authority. This is noticeable from the way in which where it is surfacing in educational literature such as catalogs, journals and research accounts. A command style identifies the structure of action; including both action and words as exhibited with a head or as identified by supporters. Situational authority revolves around job-related maturity. Matching to Symbol, et al (2009) job maturity refers to an individual's ability in performing employment which is an integral factor determining a leader's habit. The situational control model sets it that effective management would depend on both the acts of management and control and these enhance an organization's match to current global fads. The model surfaced from the realization and understanding that not all individuals within an organization or community being led compare in terms of maturity level and that the necessity for a command style differ with situations. Thus the model is based on situational variables as it depends on day-to-day perceptions of a innovator as well as the environmental observations rather than research data. Current research demonstrates efficiency in the light of the model involves a leader's examination of the development level (maturity) of their fans as well as the problem accessible to modify their leadership approach appropriately (Norris & Vecchio, 2000; GEN Dennis, 1999). Situational control entails first understanding one's predominant management approach and the level of the follower's development process. Situational authority is specially becoming a highly effective strategy among Military leaders given the current rates of scientific advancement and fight techniques. Situational control is thus very vital in challenging the ambiguous and complicated nature of the modern military services environment.

Background of the Situational Control Model

The situational leadership theory was developed by Hersey and Blanchard in the 1960s basing on Reddin's 3-D platform of management (Hersey & Blanchard, 1996). The developmental procedure for the model focused on three key categories: consideration; initiation of composition; and leader tendencies. In situational command, the subordinates' job-relevant maturity (both psychological and job maturity) is the principal situational factor determining a leader's tendencies. Maturity is regarded to be a product of the education level and/ or experience. Psychological maturity is an essential requirement of job maturity and it demonstrates a person's point out of drive, that is, their self-confidence and self-esteem levels; that are highly inspired by ethical techniques in a company. Hersey and Blanchard determined that physiological maturity is associated with a person's orientation towards success as well as the ability and willingness to assume responsibility. Hersey and Blanchard thus figured performance is basically a "behavioral manifestation of job relevant maturity" (Hersey & Blanchard, 1996). Proponents of the model contain the notion that all situation demands another leadership style and so the best course of action is dependent on the situation accessible, that is, success in leadership would depend on the adaptability to adjust to situations.

It is also vital to note that the leader-follower romantic relationship determines the results of any particular process. Lee-Kelley (2002) highlights that situational management is based on both flexibility and efficiency. Four leadership methods apply under the situational leadership model and are dependent on followers' job-related maturity. The major notion under this model is the fact that flexibility and adaptability determine which of the diverse styles would apply in the context of varied situations, supporters or duties.

The Four Command Approaches/Styles Applied in Situational Leadership

S1: Directing (high task, low relationship tendencies)

Leaders take the responsibility of identifying the assignments and tasks for his or her supporters. They thus get excited about close guidance of the follower activities as well as taking and announcing all the decisions. In this regard, the leaders tend to be concerned with the task of meeting goals and completing duties than on building strong associations with the subordinates (Norris & Vecchio, 2000). Communication in this style is usually the best way since control autocratically categorizes employee's responsibilities.

S2: Training (high job, high relationship habit)

Although the first choice has the power of earning decisions, he/she usually entails the recommendations of the supporters while keeping a good marriage with them. Although communication is two-way, final decisions on ideas are usually made by the leader alternatively than their creators (Draw, et al. 2009). Leaders are thus centered on selling their suggestions to the followers to have them understand the value of their jobs and the many organizational techniques.

S3: Participative (high associations, low task habit)

This style is usually very motivating to subordinates as it requires a shared decision making process and a two-way communication channel (Hersey & Blanchard, 1996). Supporters are usually contained in all job-related tasks as well as in determining how responsibilities and responsibilities are to be accomplished. The leader often depends on the followers' contribution in organizing the day-to-day duties such as duties and techniques allocation.

S4: Delegating (low relationship, high task action)

In certain situations, leaders are compelled to entrust their followers with a lot of your choice making process. The leader's task thus requires monitoring progress although he/she is not thoroughly involved in the process of making decisions. However, the first choice is more focused on problem dealing with and taking decisions but grants the enthusiasts the authority to look for the final decision. Followers decide when it is appropriate to entail the first choice.

There are four major follower maturity levels that determine the need for a leadership style (Hersey & Blanchard, 1996).

Follower Development Process/Maturity Levels

The first maturity level (M1) includes followers who will often have no self-confidence, knowledge or skills necessary for these to work individually. Such individual's usually require supervision and route before they could be entrusted with responsibilities. In that situation, effective command would entail applying the directing procedure of management (Peter, et al. 2008). The second level (M2) of maturity entails fans who generally have will to execute a task nevertheless they lack the capacity to do so independently. This means that leading such a group would necessitate that the leader employ an approach that can discipline the followers at their tasks. The third maturity level (M3) includes individuals who are usually highly experienced and can attend to the task involved satisfactorily. Participative management is most effective to lead such fans. However, these followers lack the self-confidence to assume exclusive responsibility of viewing an activity to accomplishment. The fourth maturity level (M4) includes those individuals who are not only experienced but are also confident and in a position to take on the task (Mark, et al. 2009; Fernandez & Vecchio, 1997). They are not only willing and able but are also self-confident that they can successfully fulfill accomplishments independently. In the event of M4, leaders usually assume the delegating command style.

It is essential to notice that differentiated management is merely possible under the situational authority approach since different enthusiasts with varying degrees of needs, abilities and maturity levels are led. The situational model is dependant on the perception that real leadership revolves around people management in a fashion that is fair with regard to being mutually satisfying as well as providing beneficial objectives; which are usually free of any manipulation. Matching to Hersey and Blanchard, the process of managing, influencing and motivating followers towards attainment of mentioned accomplishments relies on three key control skills: (i) prediction of future habit; (ii) understanding the habit of days gone by; and (iii) the changing, handling as well directing behaviours (Lee-Kelley 2002). In this regard, research implies that effective situational market leaders are usually employed in a number of behavioral manifestations: romance and task actions, which are important in driving imagination and advancement among followers.

Applying Situational Leadership in the Military Services


The increasingly complicated military environment demands for a highly effective approach to leadership, the one that is adaptive to different enthusiasts' situations. The US Army Field Manual (FM) 22-100 emphasizes on the ability of any military services leader to modify to this situation or individuals being led (US Military Field Manual (FM) 22-100, 1999). Use of the model is obvious among successful armed forces leaders. Military market leaders such as fight leaders are usually not confined to any one leadership style in virtually any given situation, not with the considerably changing nature of the struggle field now and in the foreseeable future. It is increasingly becoming mandatory that armed service market leaders be adaptive (adaptable) enough to engage styles that will improve the success of the military. Situational management in army would make a difference especially in enabling military leaders to use advantage of techniques from the four varieties of situational leadership with regard to motivating military towards completing missions successfully. Ability to utilize cultural awareness, acoustics judgment, home control, and intelligence is the key to effective situational command.

As a Military Leader

According to Lau (1998), the idea of situational management became of particular importance in the armed forces following the creation of the continental military. Additionally it is based on the recent view that control, teamwork, self-discipline, and company are deficient within the makes (GEN Dennis, 1999). In this respect, military mindset has been growing situational control frameworks going back 100 years to promote effective military patterns predicated on the view that one behavior among armed service individuals would inevitably facilitate better benefits. When using this model, it's important to utilize the studies and factual statements about military results and units came across within my service to avoid repetition of past blunders over an over. This way, one would be able to study from these earlier histories and give attention to key concerns that address soldiers simultaneously in regards to mission accomplishment tasks. This would help in focusing on the task and social areas of duty as one adapts his/her authority style to complement supporters' needs and ability. Studies reveal that training has had more emphasis on the managerial training as opposed to the tactical solutions (COL Kent & LTC David, 2001); this would be a concern and an opportunity to apply the many leadership techniques within the constraints of the situational model of leadership to get the best from the military. Studies have shown that troubles associated with compromises on the gratification level, solution seeking and perfectness credited to autocratic rules can be effectively solved through the situational management approach, whereby battle leaders take good thing about the ability for adjusting communication movement through adapting to control styles that are situationally appropriate (GEN Dennis, 1999).

Military leadership responsibilities revolve around being both a communal specialist and a task specialist, that is, ones primary goal is to accomplish the group's main obstacle of defeating foes in fight. Such a job requires being more up to date, active and smart than the supporters. As a social specialist, one's challenge would encompass building and retaining a close romantic relationship with the group, keeping the group mutually, and providing morale (Peter, et al. 2008). To be a military leader, having the ability to situationally adjust to the interpersonal needs of the supporters would help in mitigating issues worried about low morale such as desertion, criminal offenses, malingering and absenteeism. Thus, the sociable specialist role helps someone to have the ability to improve a team's cohesiveness. A perfect military, situational-based leader is person who can excellently and concurrently apply both the task of an expert and the same competency as a sociable innovator (COL Kent & LTC David, 2001). Friendly situational adaptability is particularly very important to effective and successful leadership among leaders at the lower levels than it is designed for the higher levels. It really is imperative that a person be conversant with the dynamics of the guidelines in the military to achieve untried alternatives and meet problems with this model.

For effectiveness, one has to constantly look for situations in which they can apply new alternatives. More especially lower rates require that a person be less sensitive on rank differences and have more foresight and effort regarding what's right or who is right; this is an example of ideal situational adaptive ability in which they would be dependent on information to deal with issues (Lau, 1998). Still on situations, using specialized expertise while at exactly the same time focusing on the group's cohesiveness, especially because of the stressing aspect of the military services environment, would be the perfect move to make. This implies that ones adaptability and flexibility needs to be impressive as armed service work usually includes surprises which would necessitate this. Therefore, a versatile management model such as situational control is most applicable in the military services situation due to the necessity to efficiently handle unanticipated incidents.

Being an adaptive leader is key to conceive the importance of creating a host for enabling supporters as well as junior leaders to grow their logical risk-taking. It allows them to improve their development, training and training levels (Lee-Kelley 2002; Lau, 1998). That is particularly so in the face of the increasing style of the hardware, techniques and tactics applied in the armed service today. Situational approach in military management includes training the subordinate officials to tackle more difficult tasks with use of fewer resources. John Blair and Adam Hunt describe the various elements that impact the situational way of management within the military. They sought to enhance the knowledge of the major characteristics defining leadership in future battle fields as well as the level of their impact on commanders, troops and the military in general (COL Kent & LTC David, 2001). Wayne and John point out on the organizational and environmental factors (macrocontigency factors) and the microcontigency factors encompassing the situational factors that are particular to tasks, individuals or device.

Most current military services services are based on the situational management model. Situation control training in the military commenced as soon as the 1970s but only limited studies have been on a single in the military services framework. Recent research on air assault battalion of US National Army Officer demonstrates this model works effectively within the navy (Tag, et al. 2009). A military leaders' major achievement under this model would be to facilitate the introduction of the job-related maturity of the soldiers.

According to the rules defined in FM 22100, the effectiveness of a combat leader relies on the capability to demonstrate flexibility in conditions of the management procedure while leading other soldiers (Lau, 1998). This is because the military is seen as a different behaviours with some responding better to suggestions, coaxing, soft prodding or guidelines. An example of one approach involves applying the S2 (training) style for the subordinates' in maturity level 3 to boost their motivation, dedication, and ownership of decisions. Thus, being situational means that one has the capability to move from using an excessively directive approach to suing the one which allows the subordinates to be self sufficient; this is the basis for command and subordinate development in the military. FM 22100 signifies that the most crucial competency of any military services leader is being in a position to identify the needs of the subordinates as well as their skills so as to figure out the best method of bring out their best (US Military Field Manual (FM) 22-100, 1999). Efficiency and success is thus increased by the capability to use a combo of the top features of all the four situational command styles to fit with individuals, place and task involved; since it is almost always difficult to lead in fight fields that want different techniques while based on a single procedure. Studies in military leadership have determined that unit results are improved by integration of transactional and transformational competencies in to the various situational leadership strategies (GEN Dennis, 1999).

Shortcomings of the Situational Leadership Model

Studies by mid-air University Command and Management Program Advisory Group identified that the situational control model has some restrictions that are worthwhile noting (COL Kent & LTC David, 2001). While the model works well in outlining the appropriate style of command predicated on job-maturity it does not look after other important concerns within the military services. For instance, the model will not address the magnitude to which control is practiced, different styles essential in the event of specific fight action, personnel versus operations command or the many styles which may be appropriate in the vent of put together, joint, or even service leadership. It is because leaders might not exactly have the ability to identify situations where in fact the various control styles apply more properly or that they lack the capacity or expertise to employ the appropriate actions whenever the informing or the directing styles are most appropriate. It is difficult to determine the readiness level of the supporters since this model involves a multifaceted way (Fernandez & Vecchio, 1997).


The situational leadership theory is now increasingly popular in modern organizational leadership especially in the army set up. Management is an important aspect of combat ability and thus the reason for situational model reputation. The main task in combat situational leadership has been able to stimulate the military through morale factors enhanced by device cohesion. A leader's adaptability is the key requirement for the success of the situational leadership model. Communication is one way to improve task motivation and leadership end result in the context of the model. Communication is also two in order to improve morale and involvement. However, the S1 and S4 styles usually entail more situational concerns than simply the subordinate's readiness. The appropriateness of the management style changes with change in the control environment. The model stresses on using more than one style of authority especially when developing followers. According to this model, there's a no best authority style since the key determinants of command is the adaptation to the work maturity and the skill level of the subordinates. As proven Situational management is thus very vital in challenging the ambiguous and intricate nature of the present day military services environment.

More than 7 000 students trust us to do their work
90% of customers place more than 5 orders with us
Special price $5 /page
Check the price
for your assignment