A new starter asks for step-by-step instructions. A seasoned colleague wants room to make decisions. Another employee knows the work perfectly well but hesitates before taking ownership. Treating all three in exactly the same way rarely helps. Situational leadership offers managers a practical alternative: change the guidance and encouragement you provide according to the person and the task.
Start with the task, not the employee’s job title
Situational leadership grew from work associated with Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard. The situational leadership model asks managers to assess someone’s readiness for a particular responsibility and then adjust their approach. It considers both ability and willingness or confidence, rather than assuming seniority tells the whole story.
A skilled finance officer might independently prepare monthly reports yet need close guidance when implementing unfamiliar software. Calling that person either ‘experienced’ or ‘inexperienced’ misses the point. The useful question is: experienced at what?
Two levers managers can adjust
The framework combines directive behaviour with supportive behaviour. Directive behaviour means setting expectations, demonstrating methods, establishing checkpoints and explaining who makes decisions. Supportive behaviour means listening, encouraging questions, acknowledging concerns and helping someone solve problems.
Neither is automatically good or bad. Detailed instructions can reassure someone learning an unfamiliar process, yet frustrate a colleague who has mastered it. Equally, freedom can build confidence or leave someone feeling abandoned. The appropriate balance changes as capability and commitment change.
The four situational leadership styles
Directing: provide clarity when the task is unfamiliar
Directing involves substantial task guidance and comparatively little collaborative problem-solving. Explain the expected outcome, outline the steps, show a reliable example and agree on frequent checks. This is particularly useful when someone has little task-specific experience, even if they are keen to begin.
Coaching: explain the why as well as the how
Coaching combines substantial direction with substantial support. An employee may know the basics but encounter setbacks, lose confidence or struggle to apply a skill consistently. The manager continues to set a clear path while inviting questions, discussing obstacles and giving constructive feedback.
Imagine a junior project coordinator who can run routine meetings but struggles when deadlines slip. Rather than simply taking over, the manager might help plan a recovery meeting, explain the reasoning behind each step and practise a difficult conversation. The employee learns judgement, not just a script.
Supporting: build ownership when skill is already present
Supporting reduces detailed instruction while increasing listening and shared problem-solving. It suits someone with the capability to complete a task who may be uncertain, frustrated or reluctant to take the lead.
Instead of prescribing a solution, ask what options they see, which risk concerns them and what assistance would make action easier. An experienced designer presenting a proposal to senior stakeholders may need encouragement and a sounding board rather than another lesson in design. Support should strengthen autonomy rather than create dependence.
Delegating: give capable people genuine responsibility
Delegating involves relatively little direction and relatively little ongoing support because the employee can manage that particular task independently. Agree on the outcome, decision-making boundaries, resources and review date, then allow the person to choose the method.
Delegation is not disappearing. Managers remain accountable for appropriate oversight and must be available when circumstances change. It works best when the employee has both demonstrated competence and willingness to own the work.
A practical example: one employee, two different approaches
Consider Aisha, an experienced marketing executive at a UK retailer. She has successfully managed email campaigns for years. Her manager can delegate the next campaign, agree on performance measures and review results at the end. Detailed daily instructions would add little value.
The same week, Aisha is asked to prepare her first supplier contract briefing. She understands the business but not the organisation’s procurement process. Her manager switches to directing initially, showing the required template, identifying approval stages and checking an early draft. As Aisha gains familiarity, their conversations become more coaching-focused.
Nothing about Aisha’s competence as a professional has changed. Only her readiness for a particular task has. That distinction prevents both micromanagement and premature delegation.
How to choose the right approach in a one-to-one
Begin with three questions: Has this person done a comparable task successfully? Can they explain the next steps and likely risks? Do they feel confident and willing to proceed? Listen to their answers, but also look at recent work rather than relying on confidence alone.
Next, agree what success looks like, then match the level of structure and support to the evidence. For unfamiliar work, demonstrate and check early. For developing skills, explain decisions and practise together. For capable but hesitant colleagues, discuss options and remove obstacles. For independent performers, agree boundaries and step back.
Ask again after a milestone. Readiness can improve quickly or fall when circumstances change. A new regulatory requirement, system rollout or unusually sensitive client may justify more guidance even for a trusted colleague.
Good team development also requires feedback that describes specific behaviour. ‘Your risk summary identified the approval gap early’ is more useful than ‘Great job’. Managers exploring related approaches may also find value in reading about coaching leadership, effective delegation and employee development plans.
Common mistakes that undermine the approach
The biggest mistake is labelling people permanently. Someone is not a ‘delegating employee’ or a ‘directing employee’. Their needs vary by objective. Another is confusing quietness with low motivation, or enthusiasm with competence. Ask rather than assume.
A third mistake is treating the model as a rigid diagnostic test. Its categories are useful prompts for discussion, not a guarantee of results. Workload, psychological safety, organisational constraints and individual preferences all affect performance. The wider evidence on people management also supports clear expectations, constructive relationships and appropriate organisational support.
Finally, explain your change in management style. Without context, closer check-ins may feel like lost trust. Saying ‘This process is new, so we’ll review the first draft together and reduce the checks as it becomes familiar’ makes the intention clear.
Conclusion
Situational leadership is most useful as a habit of observation and adjustment. Diagnose the needs of the task, choose an appropriate balance of instruction and encouragement, then reassess as work progresses. Managers who can change their approach without changing their standards give people a better chance to learn, contribute and work independently.
Frequently asked questions
What are the four styles of situational leadership?
The four commonly described styles are directing, coaching, supporting and delegating. They differ in how much task guidance and interpersonal support the manager provides.
Is situational leadership the same as adaptive leadership?
Both involve adjusting to circumstances, but they are not identical frameworks. Situational leadership focuses particularly on matching managerial behaviour to someone’s readiness for a task; adaptive leadership can also refer to helping groups tackle complex change.
Can situational leadership work with remote teams?
Yes. Clear written outcomes, agreed check-in points and purposeful video or voice conversations can provide direction or support without constant surveillance. Judge progress by work and feedback, not online status.
Does a senior employee ever need a directing style?
Yes. Experience in one area does not automatically transfer to a new task. Even senior colleagues may appreciate precise guidance when using unfamiliar systems, procedures or requirements.