A good leader doesn't have just one style. They have several, and they know which one to deploy based on the situation. That's the essence of situational leadership: the ability to adapt your approach based on team maturity, the type of task, external conditions, and the stakes of the moment.
It sounds simple. In practice, it's one of the hardest skills to develop. Most leaders have a dominant natural style, the one they're comfortable with, and they apply it in almost every situation, even when it's not the most appropriate. Situational leadership asks you to step out of that comfort zone deliberately and flexibly.
The Two Main Models: Hersey-Blanchard and Goleman
Two frameworks structure thinking about situational leadership.
The Hersey-Blanchard Model (1969)
Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard published their model in 1969 in Management of Organizational Behavior. The central idea: the optimal leadership style depends on team members' "maturity level" on a specific task. This maturity breaks down into two dimensions:
- Competence: Can they do the task? (experience, knowledge, capabilities)
- Motivation: Do they want to do it? (confidence, commitment, willingness)
Crossing these two dimensions yields four maturity levels (M1 to M4) and four corresponding leadership styles (S1 to S4).
The Goleman Model (2000)
Daniel Goleman, in his landmark 2000 Harvard Business Review article, identified six leadership styles based on emotional intelligence. Each has a different impact on team climate and performance. He recommends that leaders master at least four of these styles and alternate between them based on situations.
The two models are complementary: Hersey-Blanchard focuses on the employee's maturity level, Goleman on the overall objective and context.
Before going deeper into each style, take the leadership style test to identify your natural style and development areas.
Hersey-Blanchard's Four Styles
S1: Directing: For Motivated Beginners (M1)
Employee profile: Low competence, high motivation. The "enthusiastic beginner": new to the role, full of energy, but without the necessary know-how.
What the leader does: Directs strongly. They tell what to do, how to do it, and when. Close supervision, precise instructions, demonstration. Little room for discussion on methods.
When to use it:
- Onboarding a new team member
- Training on a new procedure
- Crisis management where speed trumps discussion
The trap: Staying in directive mode with an employee who has evolved. An expert who keeps receiving detailed instructions feels infantilized and will disengage.
S2: Coaching: For Discouraged Learners (M2)
Employee profile: Low-to-medium competence, low motivation. The person has started learning but is hitting real difficulties, which undermines their confidence.
What the leader does: Continues to guide (still directive on methods) but explains the reasons more, listens to concerns, encourages, and supports. The "coach" style: guiding and motivating simultaneously.
When to use it:
- An employee doubting themselves after initial failures
- Transition to complex new responsibilities
- A difficult project where someone is losing confidence midway
The trap: Over-explaining the "why" to someone who's already understood, it can seem condescending. Coaching leadership has a limited lifespan; the goal is to progress toward S3.
S3: Supporting: For Disengaged Experts (M3)
Employee profile: High competence, low motivation. The employee knows how to do it but doesn't want to: lack of situational confidence, boredom, frustration.
What the leader does: Reduces directives, increases relational support. They listen, involve in decisions, validate the other person's competencies. The leader shares decision-making power.
When to use it:
- An expert bored in an overly repetitive role
- An employee who feels undervalued or excluded from decisions
- A situation where you need their expertise but their motivation has dropped
The trap: Adopting this style with someone who doesn't yet have the skills, without direction, they're left without reference points and progress more slowly.
S4: Delegating: For Motivated Experts (M4)
Employee profile: High competence, high motivation. The committed expert: they know it, they want it, they can do it.
What the leader does: Truly delegates. They set the goal and constraints, then let the employee choose their methods. Minimal supervision, maximum trust.
When to use it:
- Confirmed experts on projects in their domain
- Autonomous team members with a solid delivery track record
- Projects where creativity and individual initiative are assets
The trap: Delegating to someone who isn't yet at M4 level for that specific task, even an expert in their field may be M1 on a new responsibility.
Goleman's Six Styles: Impact on Climate
Goleman adds an important dimension: the impact of leadership style on the team's emotional climate, and therefore on long-term performance.
| Style | Approach | Climate impact | When to use it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coercive | "Do what I say" | Very negative | Extreme crises |
| Authoritative | "Come with me" | Very positive | Vision, change of direction |
| Affiliative | "People first" | Positive | Human crises, tensions |
| Democratic | "What do you think?" | Positive | Consensus, expertise |
| Pacesetting | "Do as I do" | Negative if overused | Quick results, high-performing teams |
| Coaching | "Try this" | Very positive | Long-term development |
The coercive style should be used exceptionally. Goleman measured that leaders who use it frequently systematically degrade team climate: even when their intentions are good.
The coaching style is the most underused. Goleman notes that most leaders lack the time or skills to coach genuinely, but its impact on long-term performance is among the highest.
The Decision Tree: Which Style in Which Context
Here's a practical decision aid:
Emergency or crisis situation → Directing (Hersey S1) + Authoritative or Coercive (Goleman) Time doesn't allow for consultation. Clear direction prevails.
Enthusiastic new employee → Directing then Coaching (Hersey S1→S2) Orient without crushing enthusiasm. Explain the "why" behind methods.
Expert losing motivation → Supporting (Hersey S3) + Affiliative or Democratic (Goleman) Reconnect them to the value of their work. Involve them in decisions.
High-performing team on strategic project → Delegating (Hersey S4) + Authoritative (vision) or Democratic (Goleman) Set the direction, let the team choose methods, maintain a clear vision.
Long-term development of a team member → Coaching (Goleman) with S2/S3 elements depending on maturity Invest in their growth, even when it takes time.
Rebuilding team after conflict → Affiliative (Goleman) + Supporting (Hersey S3) Emotional connection temporarily takes priority over results.
Common Traps of the Single-Style Leader
The "Spreadsheet Management" of the Directive leader. They lead everyone the same way: instructions, supervision, control. Experts feel micromanaged and leave. Beginners don't receive adequate support.
The "Nice Guy" of the Affiliative leader. They avoid difficult directives, favor harmony over standards. The team appreciates the atmosphere but performance stagnates.
The "Mirror" of the Democratic leader. They consult on every decision, even those that shouldn't be democratic. The team ends up not knowing who decides, and conflicts arise.
The exhausting perfectionist. They set the pace by doing everything perfectly, expecting everyone to follow. Only top performers survive. Others collapse or leave.
Developing Your Leadership Flexibility
Leadership flexibility is developed: it doesn't come naturally. Here's how to progress:
1. Know your default style. Your dominant style is the one you adopt under pressure: it's revealing. The leadership styles test gives you this starting point. Also check out our article on what leadership style suits you.
2. Identify situations where you force your style. Observe yourself in meetings and one-on-ones. When you switch team members, do you switch style? If the answer is often no, that's a development area.
3. Deliberately practice the opposite style. If you're naturally Directive, choose one week to practice Supporting with a competent team member. If you're naturally Affiliative, practice a directive conversation on a performance topic.
4. Develop your emotional intelligence. Goleman's most effective styles (Authoritative, Coaching, Affiliative) rely on empathy and self-awareness. Our article on leadership and emotional intelligence explores this dimension.
FAQ: Situational Leadership
Does situational leadership apply to all cultures?
The model was developed primarily in an American context. Cross-cultural research (Hofstede, Trompenaars) shows that tolerance for directiveness and expectations of leaders vary by culture. In high power-distance cultures (e.g., some Asian or Southern European cultures), a more directive style may be better accepted or even expected.
Can you use different styles with the same person depending on the task?
Absolutely, and that's precisely the principle of the Hersey-Blanchard model. A senior developer (M4 on technical work) may be M1 on team management if it's their first leadership responsibility. The style must be adapted to the task, not just the person.
How do I know if my style doesn't match the situation?
The signals are clear: passive resistance, drops in engagement, repeated questions about already-given instructions (sign of too much directive), or conversely recurring errors and lack of framework (sign of too little directive). Direct feedback from your team is the best compass.
Is situational leadership compatible with agile methodologies?
Very much so. Agile approaches (Scrum, Kanban) value team self-organization: which corresponds to Hersey's S4/Delegating style. But an agile leader also knows how to shift to S1 when the team faces an unknown situation, or to S3 when an expert loses motivation during a difficult sprint.
How do you reconcile situational leadership and leadership consistency?
Consistency isn't in the style: it's in the values and vision. A leader can be directive on Monday and participative on Wednesday without being inconsistent: if their team understands that both approaches serve the same goal. Explicit communication helps: "I'm asking you to follow this procedure exactly because [reason], and in two weeks we'll review it so you can propose improvements."
Situational leadership isn't a recipe. It's a framework that asks you to stay connected to the reality of your team members, their maturity level on each task, and the stakes of the moment. The best leaders don't ask "what's my style?" but "what's the style this person needs right now?"
This test is for fun and informational purposes only. It does not constitute a psychological diagnosis.