Situational Leadership Theory

Imagine you’re running into some problems with your boss at work. Although you feel like you can do your job quite independently, your manager doesn’t seem to agree: they are overbearing, constantly checking if you’re on task, and not too trusting of you—making you want to hide in your cubicle. Although this hands-on approach might work well for your less-focused team members, you’re already hitting all of the marks, turning this “extra motivation” into more of a nuisance than anything else. In this scenario, situational leadership theory (SLT) could help your manager adjust their style to better match your needs and preferences.

Situational leadership theory (SLT) resists jumping to the conclusion that any particular leadership style is better than another. Instead, what really defines leadership is how a manager may adapt to the situation by considering their employees’ abilities. According to SLT, these situational adaptations apply in one-on-one or team settings. This workplace-centric theory goes one step further than just considering workplace factors—it's all about the people you work with. 

Maturity Levels

When applying SLT to the workplace, a leader must start by considering how mature their team members are, which is defined by rating them on two components: competence (skills and knowledge) and commitment (motivation and confidence). Each employee’s maturity level may influence how much a manager needs to intervene, give clear instructions, and work closely with them to help them achieve their goals. The four possible maturity levels are as follows:¹

1. High maturity (M4): High competence and high commitment. These employees are highly skilled, experienced, and confident in their ability to perform tasks independently. Their strong motivation and sense of responsibility enable them to take ownership of their work with minimal supervision.
2. Moderate-high maturity (M3):  High competence and variable commitment. These employees are capable and possess the necessary skills to perform tasks but may lack consistent confidence or motivation, possibly due to uncertainty or other external factors.
3. Moderate-low maturity (M2): Some competence and low commitment. These employees may have a basic understanding of their tasks or partial experience but lack the willingness to take on responsibilities independently, often due to low motivation or fear of failure.
4. Low maturity (M1): Low competence and low commitment. These employees are either new to their role or unfamiliar with the task and require significant guidance and motivation. Their enthusiasm may be high but is not yet matched by the skills or confidence needed for success. 

Leadership Styles

In order to understand and address these various maturity levels, there are two corresponding dimensions of behavior that leaders can fall on:²

1. Task behavior refers to the extent to which a leader provides direction to employees. High task behavior involves giving clear, detailed instructions on what tasks need to be done, how to perform them, and when they should be completed, with close supervision throughout. Low task behavior, on the other hand, allows employees more autonomy, offering minimal guidance and trusting them to take ownership of how and when tasks are completed.
2. Relationship behavior refers to the extent to which a leader engages with employees on a personal and supportive level. High relationship behavior is characterized by close collaboration, fostering open dialogue, actively listening, providing regular feedback, and recognizing progress to build trust and confidence. In contrast, low relationship behavior involves a more distant approach, with the leader engaging less frequently and focusing primarily on outcomes rather than interpersonal connection or support.

A given leader can be rated on each of these dimensions ranging from “low” to “high,” which is frequently visualized as a two-by-two matrix:
This matrix sheds light on the four types of leadership styles, where each approach falls into a quadrant relative to their levels of task and relationship behaviors. The four leadership styles are as follows: ²

1. Delegating style (S4): Low task behavior and low relationship behavior. Leaders take a hands-off approach, allowing employees to take full ownership of tasks and decision-making. This style works best with high-maturity (M4) employees, as they are confident, experienced, and motivated to work independently.
2. Participating style (S3): Low task behavior and high relationship behavior. Leaders collaborate closely with employees, providing support and encouragement while allowing them to take the lead. This style is most effective for moderate-high maturity (M3) employees, helping to build confidence and maintain motivation through active engagement.
3. Selling style (S2): High task behavior and high relationship behavior. Leaders provide clear direction and explain tasks in a persuasive, motivating manner to help employees overcome hesitation or lack of confidence. This approach is ideal for moderate-low maturity (M2) employees, as they benefit from both guidance and encouragement to build their skills and willingness.
4. Telling style (S1): High task behavior and low relationship behavior. Leaders give explicit instructions and closely supervise employees to ensure tasks are completed correctly. This style is suited for low-maturity (M1) employees who require step-by-step direction and support to develop their abilities and confidence.

Putting Maturity Levels and Leadership Styles Together

It can be confusing to keep track of all of these different maturity levels in connection to the leadership styles. We can simply understand how these ideas correspond to each other as follows:²

Understanding these four quadrants can help a leader determine how prepared an employee is for taking on a task relative to their capabilities, a concept called performance readiness. We may further understand performance readiness as an employee’s task execution when considering both their ability and willingness relative to the job.³ We can see all of this come together as such: