Situational Leadership, Leadership vs. Management, and Leadership Defined
Two topics routinely come up in conversations with leaders in some of my circles. One is the subject of leadership and management. A second topic is the situational leadership approach, illustrated by Ken Blachard in a model “called the Situational Leadership II (SLII) model.”[1] Peter Northouse addresses both of these subjects in Leadership: Theory and Practice. Of course, Northouse unpacks many models of leadership in what is one of the more comprehensive works I’ve read on the subject of leadership (and I’ll say more about Northouse’s definition of leadership in a moment), but the two topics above continue to resurface, especially in coaching conversations with leaders, regardless of their context – public, private, and social sectors…founders, entrepreneurs, pastors, non-profit executives, or CEOs. Let’s start with the situational approach first.
Situational Leadership
What is it? “The premise of the theory is that different situations demand different kinds of leadership,” where leaders must “match their style to the competence and commitment of the followers. Effective leaders are those who can recognize what followers need and then adapt their own style to meet those needs.”[2] One of the reasons Blanchard’s popular SLII model comes up in my world here in Atlanta is because of the emphasis placed on it as a model one can use in discipleship. The founding pastor of the large presbyterian church where my family and I have been members for many years was greatly impacted by Ken Blanchard several decades ago. Blanchard’s “situational leadership paradigm” provided a framework that corresponded to the pastor’s T.E.A.M.S. model of discipleship embraced by the church’s leadership (T = Truth, E = Equipping, A = Accountability, M = Mission, S = Supplication).[3] When I say “my world here in Atlanta,” I say that because our church has planted many churches around Atlanta, including churches that aren’t even presbyterian. The 501c3 church planting organization I led for several years was birthed in part by our home church. So…the topic of discipleship and Blanchard’s model comes up from time to time across those connections.
Blanchard’s model, illustrated and explained by Northouse in chapter 5 (Situational Approach) of Leadership: Theory and Practice, consists of four leadership styles or categories – Delegating, Supporting, Coaching, and Directing.[4] The pastor overlaid the T.E.A.M.S. “operating system” with Blanchard’s SLII model. Though he admits the correlation is not perfect, he briefly summed up the comparison this way: “Directing is the same as “Truth”. Coaching is the same as “Equipping”. Support is the same as “Accountability”. And delegating is the same as “Mission”. Just add “Supplication” and you have the operating system for spiritual formation.”[5] More information about this model’s influence on the church is found in the church’s discipleship ministry called Life On Life Missional Discipleship, which offers training seminars and clinics to churches around the country.[6]
Leadership and Management
The two are often pitted against the other. Leadership versus management. Truth be told, “management” just sounds…boring?
Ok, brief excursus… What comes to mind when you hear the term “manager”? A cog in the machine? Bill Lumberg and TPS reports?[7] A corporate suit? Even as I ask that, I’m wondering…how many people still wear suits “to the office” (yet another 20th century phrase that needs explanation, especially post pandemic)? I mean, who really wants to go to school to be a “manager?” After all, we are pursuing a Doctor of Leadership, not a doctorate in Management.
Of course, I’m not serious. In fact, do a quick Google search on doctoral degrees in management (I did, just now). You’ll find a number of excellent programs, including Ivy League schools and more. Management is a good and crucial thing. In fact, Peter Northouse says both are required. Actually, Dr. Northouse says that John Kotter says that: “Although they are different in scope, Kotter (1990, pp. 7-8) contended that both management and leadership are essential if an organization is to prosper.”[8]
In his excellent article, “What Leaders Really Do,” originally published in 1990 and re-printed by the Harvard Business Review, John Kotter differentiates leadership from management. Kotter writes, “Management is about coping with complexity. Its practices and procedures are largely a response to one of the most significant developments of the twentieth century: the emergence of large organizations. Without good management, complex enterprises tend to become chaotic in ways that threaten their very existence. Good management brings a degree of order and consistency to key dimensions like the quality and profitability of products. Leadership, by contrast, is about coping with change.”[9] [emphasis mine]
We need good management, and for those who are managers, they must manage well to the glory of God and in the service of those who report to them.
But Northouse hasn’t written a book on management.
Leadership defined
Instead, it would seem that Northouse has written the one leadership book to rule them all. Of course, the subject of leadership begs a good definition. The problem is that definitions are all over the map. Northouse observes, “After decades of dissonance, leadership scholars agree on one thing: They can’t come up with a common definition for leadership.”[10] Some definitions are indicative of their era. Look at the first three decades of the 20th century for starters. Northouse states that definitions of leadership from 1900 – 1929 “emphasized control and centralization of power with a common theme of domination.” I’m guessing those themes wouldn’t fly in today’s cultural climate. Just a hunch.
Thankfully, Northouse DOES provide a modern and more helpful and usable definition of leadership: “Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.”[11]
Leadership: Theory and Practice aims to feel right at home with and ubiquitous throughout why, how, and what classes on leadership across the country.[12] However, any organizational coach, consultant, or company could leverage Northouse’s material for an application of best practices of various leadership models.
[1] Northouse, Peter G. Leadership: Theory and Practice, Seventh Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2016, 3.
[2] Ibid., 93-94.
[3] See https://lifeonlife.org/resource/how-to-train-disciples-a-biblical-guide/.
[4] Northouse, 94-96.
[5] See https://lifeonlife.org/resource/how-to-train-disciples-a-biblical-guide/.
[6] See https://lifeonlife.org/.
[7] See the movie Office Space.
[8] Northouse, 13.
[9] Read John Kotter’s article on the Harvard Business Review’s site here: https://hbr.org/2001/12/what-leaders-really-do.
[10] Ibid., 5.
[11] Ibid., 6.
[12] Northouse, xix.
About the Author
Travis Vaughn
7 responses to “Situational Leadership, Leadership vs. Management, and Leadership Defined”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi Travis,
You wrote, “But Northouse hasn’t written a book on management…. Instead, it would seem that Northouse has written the one leadership book to rule them all.”
I too enjoyed the differentiation between leaders and managers. I am sure there is a bit of overlap but as of late, I have to say that my “value added” is more on the leadership side as we look to start work in Ukraine next Spring.
This book has given me some time to pause to see what kind of Team leadership can be adapted to our role in Eastern Europe.
Thanks for your comments.
Shalom…
Russ,
As you start the work in Ukraine in 2024, is there a particular leadership approach/model that you plan to employ or plan to refer to? Something from Northouse, such as the situational, adaptive, or transformational approach? If you are planning to launch or initiate the work in partnership with Ukrainians, and then turn it over to Ukrainians, I wonder how that will affect your choice of models. Or, perhaps you are planning to do something entirely different. If we had more time, I’d love to talk with you about whether Simon Walker’s ecology of power or Northouse’s leadership models seems the most agile in what I would imagine would be a challenging context to launch something new, given the condition of the country. I look forward to learning how this unfolds in the spring.
Hi Travis,
Again thanks for the thought provoking questions. I met with Stephanie a 70 year old widow who is moving to Odessa last night.
It was good to hear her God walk and to see how God was calling her to Ukraine.
In the midst of the conversation I spoke to her about the “team leadership concept.” We shall see if that takes.
What may be emerging is perhaps a team captain (like a baseball team). Each person on the team has their own skill sets and a call from God, but they all have the common goal of loving Ukrainians and sharing the Gospel.
Perhaps the leadership for this season will be members of my fledgling team taking turns to further their brand of ministry (Nate = Relief work in Kharkiv, Mitch and Holly = Children in Kyiv, and Stephanie = widows and seniors in Odessa.)
I certainly want our leadership style to be agile, but so far the people who are moving to Ukraine have strong faith but little experience in leadership or managerial skills. Of the 2 our four so far, I haven’t found my leader in waiting (sometimes we call them our GoodSports Junior – who we mentor into leadership positions).
I like Walker’s approach because leadership styles will respond to the situation and certainly the Ukraine situation is shifting sand. I hope that once we the team is on the ground, adapts to a new culture, and “hears” God’s voice, that an GSI will develop as an organization/tool of the church.
Sigh…again TMI.
Shalom.
Travis, I’m reading your section on leadership vs. management and in my mind it’s intersecting with Northouse’s theme of task vs. relationship which is woven throughout the book. Obviously, both leadership and management require skill in both task accomplishment and relationship, but I wonder if the balance is the same. In your experience, is the interplay between task vs. relational orientation similar for leaders and managers or are there significant differences ?
Kim, this is a great question. In my experience, most people want/need objectives, strategies, and goals to one degree or another. The same people need feedback, whether that is in the form of a performance review or whether that is in the form of feedback from a board, a group of advisors, a committee, or others within the organization who know about their work. Without goals (will inevitably include tasks or tactical steps) and feedback, I think people will wrestle with a host of doubts/questions/fears. Not everyone (some people are just wired to work independently of others and require little feedback and little interaction) of course. But everyone wants to be known or recognized, I think. Those in managerial roles may be committed to the tasks that move the org to their bottom line and therefore are the ones who “supervise” the employee according to the employee’s job description and goals. I think trust is key. Will the manager be willing to help the employee set his/her own goals related to the mission of the org…that may be a small example of relational orientation instead of task-only? Leaders tend to lead and probably aren’t always the best people to monitor tasks as performed by the employees/workers/contractors/volunteers. But sometimes they can do both. Wow, that was way too long of an answer, but you asked a great question!
Travis.
Wow. This inspires so many thoughts.
Like how Walker and situational leadership overlap…
And that my weak spot in managing needs covered from those gifted in it so I can lead well and they can manage well; that both are so necessary….
And tha that this is indeed a comprehensive book and nice reference to have on the shelf when talking about leadership.
Thanks!
Travis,
I enjoyed reading your insightful post on leadership and the Situational Leadership II (SLII) model by Ken Blanchard. It’s fascinating to see how this model has been applied in various contexts, including discipleship and spiritual formation, within your church community.
Your discussion on the distinction between leadership and management is spot on. While both are crucial, they serve different purposes within organizations. John Kotter’s perspective on this differentiation is thought-provoking, emphasizing the importance of leadership in coping with change.
Peter Northouse’s book, “Leadership: Theory and Practice,” indeed provides a comprehensive overview of leadership theories and models. His definition of leadership as a process of influencing a group to achieve a common goal is a valuable foundation for understanding leadership in today’s complex world.
I appreciate your thoughtful analysis and how you connect these concepts to real-world applications. It’s evident that you’re actively engaging with the material and seeking ways to enhance your leadership skills and understanding. Keep up the great work!