MSLD 511 Module 3 - Directive and Supportive Behaviors
Blanchard (2008) includes a leader’s directive and supportive behaviors as the foundation of his situational leadership theory. Directive behavior typically represents a one-way communication where the leader directs the activity that the follower will complete. Supportive behaviors are considered “two-way” where the responses exhibit emotional and social support and the follower participates with the leader in the discussion. Consider some of your roles (parent, child, friend, leader, follower, etc.) and provide examples of how you use supportive and directive behaviors.
As a Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) in the United States Air Force, Blanchard's approach to leadership in terms of "directive" and "supportive" is all too familiar. As mentioned in previous MSLD 511 course work, the Air Force pushed me into leadership roles faster than the average profession. The Air Force expects those at all ranks to step up and become leaders when the opportunity presents itself. Despite this hope, the military is much like a cross-section of the civilian populous.
While it would seem military members grow up quickly and advance more quickly as professionals than their civilian counterparts, there is still the heavy use of directive and supportive leadership involved in the military. As I became a young NCO, it was finally my turn to start supervising young Airmen. This was at the ripe old age of 23 years old. Ha! To be honest, differentiating between "directive" vs. "supportive" leadership was foreign to me. It was all directive at that point. After all, wasn't the military about giving and taking orders?
As time passed, my critical thinking skills started to take shape. What if I was more directive with some of my subordinates and more supportive with others? Would their attitudes change? Would they perform differently? Would they respect me as a leader if I approached them in a directive vs. supportive manner? Without knowing what directive and supportive leadership was in technical terms, I began to test the limits of each.
Blanchard (2008) tells us that competence and commitment will determine which approach to use when dealing with our followers. This became more evident over the time as my supervising experiences increased. In dealing with a wide spectrum of followers, I had to quickly figure out what worked and what didn't. Within a few years as a supervisor, I had learned how to be directive and supportive based on the situation and individual at hand.
Specifically, if an individual asked questions that would seem as if they could be answered through a a small amount of critical thinking and a little bit of common sense, then a more directive approach was enforced. On the other hand, if the individual did their due diligence and was able to complete tasks with minimal assistance, the supportive approach was rendered. This was my specific tool in measuring the competence and commitment of the individual. As a result, I was able to quickly realize the needs of each individual and how to handle them from a directive and/or supportive leadership perspective.
Most recently, I have naturally and coincidentally (through MSLD 511) discovered Situational Leadership (SLII) via Blanchard et al. (2013) where four different categories of situational leadership can be employed based on the varied range of skills and/or needs of followers. This model has enabled me to handle situations more precisely dependent upon of the specific combination of competence or commitment displayed by followers. In reflecting on this specific model, it has eased any tension between myself and my subordinates as I am able to more quickly identify what category of competence and/or commitment the follower falls into and am able to act more accordingly. SLII has allowed me to expand my leadership skills and better handle followers across the competency/commitment spectrum.
References
Blanchard, K. (2008). Situational leadership. Leadership Excellence Essentials, 25(5), 19.
Blanchard, K. H., Zigarmi, P., & Zigarmi, D. (2013). Leadership and the one minute manager:
Increasing effectiveness through Situational Leadership II. New York, NY: William Morrow.
As a Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) in the United States Air Force, Blanchard's approach to leadership in terms of "directive" and "supportive" is all too familiar. As mentioned in previous MSLD 511 course work, the Air Force pushed me into leadership roles faster than the average profession. The Air Force expects those at all ranks to step up and become leaders when the opportunity presents itself. Despite this hope, the military is much like a cross-section of the civilian populous.
While it would seem military members grow up quickly and advance more quickly as professionals than their civilian counterparts, there is still the heavy use of directive and supportive leadership involved in the military. As I became a young NCO, it was finally my turn to start supervising young Airmen. This was at the ripe old age of 23 years old. Ha! To be honest, differentiating between "directive" vs. "supportive" leadership was foreign to me. It was all directive at that point. After all, wasn't the military about giving and taking orders?
As time passed, my critical thinking skills started to take shape. What if I was more directive with some of my subordinates and more supportive with others? Would their attitudes change? Would they perform differently? Would they respect me as a leader if I approached them in a directive vs. supportive manner? Without knowing what directive and supportive leadership was in technical terms, I began to test the limits of each.
Blanchard (2008) tells us that competence and commitment will determine which approach to use when dealing with our followers. This became more evident over the time as my supervising experiences increased. In dealing with a wide spectrum of followers, I had to quickly figure out what worked and what didn't. Within a few years as a supervisor, I had learned how to be directive and supportive based on the situation and individual at hand.
Specifically, if an individual asked questions that would seem as if they could be answered through a a small amount of critical thinking and a little bit of common sense, then a more directive approach was enforced. On the other hand, if the individual did their due diligence and was able to complete tasks with minimal assistance, the supportive approach was rendered. This was my specific tool in measuring the competence and commitment of the individual. As a result, I was able to quickly realize the needs of each individual and how to handle them from a directive and/or supportive leadership perspective.
Most recently, I have naturally and coincidentally (through MSLD 511) discovered Situational Leadership (SLII) via Blanchard et al. (2013) where four different categories of situational leadership can be employed based on the varied range of skills and/or needs of followers. This model has enabled me to handle situations more precisely dependent upon of the specific combination of competence or commitment displayed by followers. In reflecting on this specific model, it has eased any tension between myself and my subordinates as I am able to more quickly identify what category of competence and/or commitment the follower falls into and am able to act more accordingly. SLII has allowed me to expand my leadership skills and better handle followers across the competency/commitment spectrum.
References
Blanchard, K. (2008). Situational leadership. Leadership Excellence Essentials, 25(5), 19.
Blanchard, K. H., Zigarmi, P., & Zigarmi, D. (2013). Leadership and the one minute manager:
Increasing effectiveness through Situational Leadership II. New York, NY: William Morrow.
Comments
Post a Comment