The Basics of Situational Leadership
I have been reflecting on Situational Leadership lately, specifically, the challenge of matching the right leadership style to the right scenario and to each team member’s level of readiness. I have come to realize the importance of not only assessing a person’s competency and experience, but also factoring in their onboarding and training within our organization, as well as the stakes of the situation itself.
Below is how I see Situational Leadership playing out in real life, with insights based on real-world examples. If you are leading a team or managing a critical project, these perspectives may help you steer your people in the right direction without running the risk of being labeled a “micromanager.”
1. Revisiting the Basics of Situational Leadership
Ken Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Model (often called the SLII model) outlines four main leadership “styles” (S1 through S4), each paired with a team member’s developmental level:
Directing (S1): High directive, low supportive—often necessary when someone is brand-new to the role and needs clear, step-by-step guidance.
Coaching (S2): High directive, high supportive—still involves providing guidance, but also includes more two-way communication and encouragement.
Supporting (S3): Low directive, high supportive—team members possess the skills but may need confidence-building and emotional support.
Delegating (S4): Low directive, low supportive—ideal for high performers or experienced team members who can handle tasks on their own with minimal oversight.
It is widely accepted that “you can’t lead everyone the same way,” but it is crucial to include additional layers in the assessment:
How thoroughly has this person been onboarded within our company?
What is the nature of the situation—low-stakes vs. high-stakes?
2. Competency vs. Organizational Familiarity
One thing we have learned is that you can hire someone who is incredibly talented, with years of industry experience, yet they may still need extra direction (S1 or S2) if they are not fully oriented to our organizational processes. For instance, we once brought in a supervisor who had an impressive track record at a different company. Even though this individual was highly skilled in managerial tasks, they were completely new to our internal systems, tools, and client expectations. Because they were starting from square one within our structure, we recognized the need to provide more directed leadership in the beginning essentially an S2 (Coaching) approach:
Why S2 vs. S4? They already knew how to supervise teams, so we did not need to micromanage them across the board. However, they still needed to understand how we handle performance evaluations, day-to-day staff management, and departmental communication. We granted them the freedom to make certain supervisory decisions while staying closely involved to ensure they were comfortable with our style of employee engagement and reporting.
Communication is key: We had an honest conversation early on: “We know you are skilled and bring a lot of experience. But you are also new here, so we will be checking in a bit more frequently for the next few months. It is not micromanaging; we just want to ensure you have every resource you need and that the team is aligned around your leadership.” This transparency spared us misunderstandings and helped the new supervisor trust that our involvement was about support, not control.
3. Factoring in High-Stakes Situations
Just as important as a person’s skill level is the urgency and importance of the situation. We have experienced this firsthand in scenarios with high-end clients on the verge of leaving if certain critical milestones were not met by non-negotiable deadlines. As much as we tend to prefer a more hands-off, empowering leadership style (S3 or S4), high-stakes projects often demand a more directive approach. Why?
High-Stakes Outcomes: Failure could mean losing major revenue and a valuable business relationship.
Time Constraint: There was no slack in the timeline—missing the deadline was not an option.
Team Composition: Part of the team might be new or still learning our organization’s processes.
In such scenarios, S1 (Directing) or S2 (Coaching) becomes warranted even for seasoned team members because the margin for error is slim. This does not mean eroding trust or initiative. Rather, it involves providing crystal-clear objectives, more frequent status checks, and rapid decision-making support. We have found success by spelling out tasks and deadlines in a more granular fashion than usual:
Clear Milestones: “Here is what needs to be done by the end of today; here is what we will accomplish by tomorrow; here is exactly when we will hold our progress check.”
Active Oversight: We remain available in real-time (via messaging, calls, or short video check-ins) to remove any roadblocks.
Expectation-Setting: To avoid the “micromanagement” label, we explain to the team: “Because this deadline is critical and cannot slip, we will be checking in more frequently. This is not about a lack of trust we simply want to offer immediate support if something goes off track.”
Once the deadline is met and the high-stress period subsides, we pivot back toward a more S3 or S4 approach.
4. Clarity to Avoid the Micromanagement Trap
A common question is: “How can we lead at S1 or S2 levels without appearing overbearing?” The answer often lies in how we communicate our intentions. If someone is at a lower developmental level perhaps they are brand-new or still building confidence here are some tips to keep the atmosphere positive and constructive:
Set the Stage Early: Onboarding is the perfect opportunity to explain why we will be more hands-on. Emphasize that it is about ensuring they have the right tools, knowledge, and support to succeed.
Stay Solutions-Focused: When checking in, prioritize removing obstacles and guiding rather than scrutinizing.
Offer Encouragement: Provide plenty of positive feedback when they do things right. This helps them see our guidance as supportive rather than micromanaging.
Discuss Growth Trajectory: Let them know the plan. “Once you have a handle on X, Y, and Z, we will move you into a more autonomous position.” Demonstrating that there is a clear path to S3 and S4 can be highly motivating.
5. Bringing It All Together
Situational Leadership is all about knowing when to ramp up direction and when to step back and empower. A person’s competence and commitment level is important, but so is their familiarity with our processes and culture. And sometimes, the situation’s urgency (like time-sensitive deliverables or precarious client relationships) justifies a more directive style, even if we typically prefer more autonomy.
Key Takeaways:
Assess readiness in context including how well each person is onboarded and trained in our organization.
Consider the stakes and urgency a high-risk scenario often requires a more directive style.
Communicate transparently about why we are taking a certain leadership approach—help people see the difference between leadership support and micromanagement.
Shift gears as people develop our ultimate goal is to move individuals toward greater autonomy (S3 or S4), but we must ensure they are set up for success first.
Remember: The most effective step is to speak openly with team members. Let them know why we are leading the way we are—whether that is hands-on or more hands-off. That mutual understanding and context often makes the difference between a team that simply follows orders and a team that truly believes we have their best interests at heart.
I would love to hear your thoughts on Situational Leadership and how you use this mindset and cascade this to your front line leaders.