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 I read Blanchard’s (2008) article each example he provided, I was able to tell how I’ve used the different styles throughout my life in different ways.

Coaching: The coaching model is a high directive and high supportive style of leading. (Blanchard, 2018). Looking back this was my dominant style when I was teaching. I learned somewhat the hard way when I was first teaching that I had to limit the decision making process for students. For example, when I was student teaching first graders I had “free time” once a week for 30 minutes. The intent was to allow the student to explore their personal interests whether it was science, art, reading etc. It quickly turned out to be 30 minutes of mass chaos. As a result I limited their choices. Before the student could start free time they had to tell me what they would be working on and I had to approve it. I also didn’t allow them to change their mind after it had been approved. This allowed for more structure and was far more meaningful educationally for the student then when I had given them free reign. By doing this I showed a high regard for their personal feelings and suggestions in the decision making process (Blanchard, 2008). In this situation too I had to adapt to a more paternalism/materialism approach behaviorally (Northouse, 2016). As a teacher I wanted to be more of a middle of the road management style , but as Blanchard (2008) pointed out, I learned that the student’s skill level had to play a role in how I managed them and as a result I took much more of the “benevolent dictator” (Northouse, 2016, p. 77) approach in leading my classroom.

Delegating: When I worked for the USO I was in charge of project managing the opening of a new USO center and getting it ready for an open house ceremony. With this task I had to coordinate with several departments within the USO, my leadership and the military leadership. I did this by delegating (Blanchard, 2008) and creating a working spreadsheet where I created deadlines of when action items needed to be done by. I knew that I had a great team that was highly capable so for the most part I gave each department a deadline and let them decide how they would complete the task. The only directive that I laid out for them was to contact me if they ran into issues and to give me general updates so I knew where everyone was at in the process. Overall it worked out great, and my team even said that they appreciated how streamlined the process was. With this though, I had one team in particular that I had to vary my leadership approach. As Blanchard (2008) points out each style of leadership is dependent on competence and commitment of the follower(s). One team was committed, but they had a tendency to be major procrastinators. As a result, I used more of the coaching style (Blanchard, 2008). I did this by physically checking in on the team once a week and sitting with them as they worked on the task. In his way I was able to ensure that the task was completed, but still showed my support by allowing them to ask questions, listen their ideas, and walking them through the process.

Follower Role: I have to admit, that when I first read this prompt I thought to myself: How can a follower or a child have a directive or supportive approach to leadership? I have to admit, I’m still trying to wrap my mind around this but I’m getting there. First, I thought back to our first week were we talked about traits and that leadership is a two-way street between the leader and the follower (Northouse, 2016). Then I had the light bulb moment with the video that was posted in our discussion: Why good Leaders Make You Feel Safe by Simon Sinek. As a follower I can lead by example and make personal sacrifices for the greater good of my. For example, there have been times that I will willingly take a task off of someone’s plate because they are busy and overwhelmed. There have been times that I have volunteered for a task that I really don’t want to do, but I do it because I’ve felt that it was my term to share the burden. As Sinek points out I was willing to make this self-sacrifice because I felt safe in knowing that my teammates would do the same for me ( ).

On a similar note I feel that the follower’s behavior is heavily dependent on the leader’s approach overall. For example, I worked for a company that I loved getting up in the morning and going to work for because I believed in their mission and leadership encouraged teamwork, innovation and actively looked for opportunities for employees to grow as leaders no matter what their position was within the organization. However, I’ve worked for other places that were very task oriented and your voice was only heard if you had a certain title in the company and there was little regard for the human factor (Northouse, 2016). My motivation was directly affected due to the different leadership approaches and overall organizational culture. This has led me to ask several questions:

1-    How can a leader objectively asses a follower’s commitment or motivation?

2- Is a follower’s ability to effect change within an organization dependent (or limited) upon the leader’s approach to leadership and the overall culture of the organization?

a.       If not, then how can a follower effect change in a positive way especially if there is poor leadership overall?

3-   How can a leader asses if they are using the wrong situational approach? For example, the leader is using a directive approach when they should be using a delegating approach.