research on situational leadership

Wally Skalij/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

By Colin Baker Leaders Staff

Colin Baker

Leadership and Business Writer

Colin Baker is a business writer for Leaders Media. He has a background in as a television journalism, working as...

Learn about our editorial policy

Updated Sep 7, 2022

Reviewed by Hannah L. Miller

Hannah L. Miller

Senior Editor

Hannah L. Miller, MA, is the senior editor for Leaders Media. Since graduating with her Master of Arts in 2015,...

What Is Situational Leadership, and How Do You Practice It?

What is situational leadership, understanding situational leadership theory, explanation of situational leadership, top qualities of situational leaders, when to use situational leadership, examples of situational leadership, how to start practicing situational leadership now.

Situational Leadership® is an adaptive style that takes into consideration current circumstances and team composition to determine the right way to lead. Instead of leading from a one-dimensional angle, situational leaders effectively guide their organizations by strategically deploying their leadership qualities . Therefore, they create better outcomes by modifying themselves to positively influence team members. 

Situational Leadership results in increased productivity and heightened levels of job satisfaction . According to research published by Scientific & Academic Publishing, “Situational Leadership was proven to be a very effective leadership style to motivate employees in different kinds of sectors. According to the results obtained . . . task behavior theory . . . is directly related to the improvement of employee’s task productivity.” 

Simply put, effective leadership isn’t one size fits all—people within an organization differ from one another. While some might need more support and direction, others may need the exact opposite. At various stages in a person’s career, or even in smaller situations, different types of leadership are needed. 

As Paul Hersey, co-creator of the Situational Leadership model, wrote: “People differ not only in their ability to do but also in their ‘will to do.’” Regardless of these differences, situational leaders serve in a way that gets everyone working toward a collective vision . Situational Leadership keeps all this in mind, teaching leaders how to adapt to their team’s needs on an individual level. 

In this article, find out more about Situational Leadership, its background, the top qualities of situational leaders, and how to grow a cohesive, strong team that achieves your organizational vision.

Key Takeaways

• The theory behind Situational Leadership originated in 1969.
• Situational Leadership puts team members at the forefront.
• A situational leader will change their approach based on employees’ Performance Readiness®.
• The four styles of Situational Leadership are Telling, Selling, Participating, and Delegating.
• Situational Leadership is best when you need to improve productivity under conditions that change constantly and require flexibility.

Situational Leadership is a flexible, adaptable style of leadership that determines whether a leader is more directive or supportive based on their followers’ individualized needs. For instance, business owners, executives, and managers who practice this type of leadership shift their management style based on a person’s development.

For Situational Leadership to work, the leader must always take into account what their followers require. In this sense, the situational approach puts followers front and center . A situational leader knows they have to be flexible depending on who they’re working with and what the conditions are. As such, Situational Leadership uses the most effective method at any moment.

As referenced above, Paul Hersey co-authored Management of Organizational Behavior with Ken Blanchard in 1969. In this foundational work, the two developed Situational Leadership theory. The concept lays out a business owner’s or manager’s relationship between task behavior and relationship behavior when interacting with their followers.

There are four different leadership styles paired with four levels of team members’ Performance Readiness® or maturity. In chronological order, the leadership styles rank from least ready (requiring the most amount of direction and support) to most ready (requiring the least amount of direction and support). 

Telling (S1)

Followers who have the lowest amount of Performance Readiness require the highest amount of attention. For example, this leadership style is typically used when someone is new to their role, not a self-starter, or failing to meet standards. When an employee cannot make decisions for themselves, a telling leader calls the shots. They set clearly defined goals and deadlines and also regularly check in on progress.

How to practice telling:

• Explain in detail what the goal of a task or project is.
• Provide specific information regarding who should be involved.
• Go into detail about the best practices for getting the job done.
• Make decisions for the employee as a way to get them to learn.
• Do all of the talking (don’t allow for much conversation, if any).
• Ask additional clarifying questions after giving instructions.
• Explain where they can get additional help if needed.

Selling (S2)

Selling leaders serve as influential, supportive figures for those who show interest in learning how to execute a job well done. This Situational Leadership style is used when providing motivation, growing buy-in, and building trust. In essence, a selling leader proves themselves as someone capable of leading their team members. 

How to practice selling:

• Still explain in detail everything you need the team member to do.
• Be the primary decision-maker.
• Give team members the chance to ask questions as part of the conversation.
• Engage in more of a two-way discussion over what must get done.
• Show recognition for the things the team member does well.
• Provide correction that leads to steady improvement over time.

Participating (S3)

A participating leader creates a collaborative, encouraging environment where input is welcome. While the employee at hand might be more experienced and capable than those requiring the telling or selling styles, they still need support. When practicing this style, hands-on leaders let the team member do the decision-making but help as needed.

How to practice participating:

• Ask for input from the team members.
• Engage in active listening to ensure understanding.
• Give recognition for special achievements and accomplishments.
• Allow team members to make important decisions.
• Note what skills and abilities team members already excel at.
• Create an environment where people feel comfortable taking risks and trying something new.
• Have active conversations with team members about a variety of strategies.

Delegating (S4)

This Situational Leadership style is practiced when dealing with experienced, competent, and motivated team members. With delegation , team members are granted the highest level of autonomy because they’ve proven they can successfully direct themselves. With this type of person, business owners and managers can be more hands-off, yet still offer support if the person needs it. 

How to practice delegating:

• Give primary control to the team members.
• Take a hands-off approach to all decision-making .
• Cast an overall vision for what the team should accomplish.
• Provide resources and guidance only when called upon.
• Monitor progress without delving into day-to-day tasks.
• Give praise and recognition when goals are met.

Because Situational Leadership is a leadership model, it is best defined by how it is put into action. For example, business leaders make it applicable in their organizations by exhibiting the following qualities: 

With Situational Leadership, managers focus on identifying and analyzing team members’ Performance Readiness factors, which helps them adjust their style of leadership. They aren’t afraid of going into the details and figuring out the best ways to help their team members achieve new levels of excellence.

A leader with adaptive qualities can quickly shift out of the four influencing behaviors whenever they want. Even if they’re dealing with more than one person at a time, they can still seamlessly transition based on the needs of those in the room. Adaptive organizational leadership can determine what needs to be done at any given moment. Leaders with this trait show that they’re in tune with others, and they respond appropriately.

Rather than using authority, those practicing Situational Leadership build influence, which comes from growing trust and a safe work environment. People don’t follow these leaders’ directions because they fear them. Instead, situational managers show a softer approach that others want to follow. Team members feel comfortable around them and don’t need to be convinced beyond the initial instructions.

The purpose of Situational Leadership is to serve others by being flexible with what employees need from the person guiding them. A situational leader is someone who shows dedication to servant leadership . For them, it’s not about the prestige or perks that come from being a leader. Instead, they want to serve others and meet their needs because that’s what is best for the team members.

Development

The primary goal of Situational Leadership is the growth and development of followers. Because of this, these leaders often serve as a coach who guides their team members through learning experiences and opportunities. If people make mistakes, they correct them and help them understand what they did wrong. When people do well, they receive appropriate recognition.

Problem-Solving

Situational Leadership gives leaders the opportunity to solve problems with their team. These problems might involve how to include a newcomer in the smoothest way possible or how to prepare one team member for future leadership roles. Situational leaders embrace these issues and give their best effort to come up with effective solutions.

Situational Leadership Works Best When:

• Productivity Counts: By working closely with each member of the team, Situational Leadership gets the most out of them. In that sense, you’re maximizing each team member’s potential. You base what each person can do on their level of skill.
• Flexibility Is Needed: If you have a team where there are significant differences in skill level, experience, motivation, and self-confidence, you’ll prefer a more flexible strategy. Situational Leadership excels at tailoring your approach for each person.
• Conditions Change Constantly: If you anticipate notable changes in the near future, Situational Leadership will come in handy. The same strategy with favorable conditions likely won’t work when things turn sour. By using Situational Leadership, you can adapt to those changes and always pick the best way to tackle problems.

Situational Leadership Isn’t the Best Option When:

• People Want to Work on Long-Term Goals: Situational Leadership tends to focus on short-term issues. In many ways, a situational leader will emphasize individual tasks that they need to deal with right away. While some approaches will have more long-term goals in mind, for the most part, Situational Leadership looks at the here and now. Those team members who prefer more long-term planning may end up becoming frustrated.
• You Need Input From Everyone: Situational Leadership follows guidelines on how to treat people depending on their skills, abilities, and experience. In cases where you need input from everyone on the team, you may want to use a democratic leadership style instead. Otherwise, those with less experience may feel left out since they might think they have little to contribute.
• The Team Needs Uniform Policies: When you use Situational Leadership, some team members may become confused at seeing you treat others differently. This may breed resentment and, without proper conflict management , can quickly spiral out of control. For teams that expect everyone to be treated the same, Situational Leadership might not be the right choice.

The following people serve as great examples of what the situational model looks like in practice. While understanding the theory is important, it’s equally beneficial for situational leaders to see how the model works. 

Dwight D. Eisenhower, 34th U.S. President and Five-Star General

“Plans are worthless, but planning is everything.”

Eisenhower is famously known as a highly adaptable situational leader. Dwight D. Eisenhower’s Situational Leadership served him as the Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force in Europe, president of Columbia University, and later the 34th U.S. president. While these positions of power differed, Dwight D. Eisenhower always led by studying people and thinking strategically. For example, during his presidency, he deeply analyzed other political leaders and tried to figure out what he called their “ personal equation .” Eisenhower’s Situational Leadership gave him a greater understanding of those he worked with and helped him realize how he could positively influence them . 

Phil Jackson, NBA Coach

“The strength of the team is each individual member. The strength of each member is the team.”

Jackson coached some of the greatest basketball players in history: Michael Jordan, Dennis Rodman, Kobe Bryant, and Shaquille O’Neal. He treated each player as an individual, analyzing their strengths and the places they could grow to better the team as a whole. For example, he quickly used the delegating leadership style with Jordan, but O’Neal required a more hands-on approach. Jackson knew Shaq was a phenomenal player but wasn’t at his optimal performance level when he joined the team. In a speech captured by Lakers Nation, Jackson says he challenged Shaq to play 48 minutes a game. This hands-on leadership approach led to Shaq winning MVP that year.  

Steve Jobs, Co-Founder of Apple

“It doesn’t make sense to hire smart people and tell them what to do; we hire smart people so they can tell us what to do.”

Apple co-founder Steve Jobs was a multi-faceted leader, which is why it’s difficult to categorize his leadership style. Based on the way he guided others, he was most likely to be a situational leader. His behavior and actions truly depended on the situation and individual he was dealing with at the time. While he was undoubtedly an incredibly inspiring CEO, he also lacked a high level of emotional control. When using the telling leadership style, Jobs could speak with a cutting directness. His example goes to show that even outstanding leaders still have room for improvement. Using these leadership styles is a process that requires dedication and the constant pursuit of growth and development.

You don’t have to wait to learn how to become a situational leader. Here are several ways you can begin practicing Situational Leadership today.

• Take stock of your team members’ individual talents, skills, qualities, and experience levels.
• Build connections with other people to increase your emotional intelligence .
• Stay neutral during periods of heightened emotions.
• Look for solutions to problems instead of dwelling on negatives.
• Manage your expectations carefully, and change them when needed.

Ultimately, Situational Leadership is closely connected to strengths-based leadership . Both involve assessing your team members and understanding the type of leadership that suits them best. As you do this, your whole team will work more effectively together.

Search Leaders.com

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, situational leadership theory: a test from a leader-follower congruence approach.

Leadership & Organization Development Journal

ISSN : 0143-7739

Article publication date: 11 June 2018

Issue publication date: 21 June 2018

Empirical tests of Hersey and Blanchard’s situational leadership theory (SLT) have demonstrated that the assessment of follower competence and commitment, critical contextual features dictating optimal leadership style, poses several problems in testing the validity of this theory. As well, most previous studies have used leader rating as the only information source in making these assessments. The purpose of this paper is to use the degree of agreement between leader rating and follower self-rating to determine follower competence and commitment, and consequently an optimal leadership style.

Design/methodology/approach

Survey data collected from both supervisors and employees in business organizations in Norway were analyzed to test the predictions put forward in SLT.

The results show that SLT principles are supported when leader rating and follower self-rating are congruent. However, no support was obtained for Blanchard’s suggestion to apply followers’ self-ratings of competence and commitment in the case of discrepant ratings of follower development level. But data do support the contention that leader assessment would be a better basis for providing followers with appropriate direction and support.

Originality/value

So far SLT has been a very popular but as yet under-researched theory. An important contribution of the present study is by making SLT an evidence-based theory, as opposed to just being intuitively sound. As such, the authors think SLT in an updated “convergent” version should be applied in organizations and taught in leadership development programs.

• Flexibility
• Leadership style
• Effective leadership
• Situational leadership theory
• Partnering for performance

Thompson, G. and Glasø, L. (2018), "Situational leadership theory: a test from a leader-follower congruence approach", Leadership & Organization Development Journal , Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 574-591. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-01-2018-0050

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2018, Emerald Publishing Limited

Related articles

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

Review of Situational Leadership® After 25 Years—A Retrospective (Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Nelson, 1993)

• First Online: 15 April 2021

Cite this chapter

• Olivier Serrat 2  

1121 Accesses

The situational leadership theory holds that leaders should change their style based on the competence and commitment of followers. This précis critiques Blanchard, Zigarmi, and Nelson’s ( 1993 ) research article on the subject, which offered a 25-year retrospective of the Situational Leadership Model, one of the more widely recognized approaches to leadership.

Review of Situational Leadership® After 25 Years—A Retrospective (Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Nelson, 1993) was completed on May 19, 2018.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

For each variable, Yukl ( 2013 ) gave examples of what might be termed drivers. He identifies those that impact the characteristics of the situation, with which the research article concerns itself, to be (a) the type of organizational unit, (b) the size of organizational unit, (c) the position power and authority of leader, (d) the task structure and complexity, (e) organizational culture, (f) environmental uncertainty and change, (g) external dependencies and constraints, and (h) national cultural values.

Inspired by the changing leadership style needed by parents as a child grows from infancy through adolescence to adulthood, the Situational Leadership Model was introduced as the Life Cycle Theory of Leadership in 1969 and first appeared in Management of Organizational Behavior (Blanchard & Hersey, 1969 ); as of 2012, the book was in its tenth edition. The Life Cycle Theory of Leadership was rebranded as the Situational Leadership Model in the mid-1970s, with both authors iterating on the original theory until 1977 (when they parted company). In brief, the authors characterized leadership style in terms of the amount of Directive Behavior and Supportive Behavior that a leader provides to his or her followers (e.g., Directing, Coaching, Supporting, or Delegating), that being a function of maturity levels (e.g., Very Capable and Confident, Capable but Unwilling, Unable but Confident, or Unable and Insecure). Next, a good leader would develop competence and commitment so followers become self-motivated rather than dependent on others for direction and guidance.

Typically, an executive summary is a short document—or section of a document—that summarizes the latter in such a way that readers can rapidly become acquainted with the large body of material without having to read it all. The executive summary in the research article is five lines-long and serves only to set the scene.

Blake, R., & Mouton, J. (1964). The managerial grid . Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing.

Google Scholar  

Blanchard, K., & Hersey, P. (1969). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Blanchard, K., Zigarmi, D., & Nelson, R. (1993). Situational Leadership® after 25 years: A retrospective. Journal of Leadership Studies, 1 (1), 22–36.

Article   Google Scholar  

Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., & White, R. (1960). Leader behavior and member reaction in three social climates. In D. Cartwright & A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynamics: Research and theory . Evanston, IL: Row Peterson & Company.

Tannenbaum, R., & Schmidt, W. (1958, March–April). How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard Business Review .

Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in organizations (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Zigarmi, D., Edeburn, C., & Blanchard, K. (1991). Research on the LBAII: A validity and reliability study . Blanchard Training and Development.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The Chicago School of Professional Psychology, Washington, DC, USA

Olivier Serrat

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Serrat, O. (2021). Review of Situational Leadership® After 25 Years—A Retrospective (Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Nelson, 1993). In: Leading Solutions. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6485-1_6

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6485-1_6

Published : 15 April 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-33-6484-4

Online ISBN : 978-981-33-6485-1

eBook Packages : Business and Management Business and Management (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• LEADx Nudge Stream
• LEADx Chatbot Coach
• LEADx Course Library
• Virtual Training
• 1:1 Executive Coaching
• Case Studies
• Benchmark Report
• LEADx Big 5
• LEADx CAT Scan
• LEADx Growth Mindset
• LEADx Resilience
• Everything DiSC
• CliftonStrengths
• Hogan Assessment
• Hogan Dark Side
• Insights Discovery
• Leadership Circle Profile 360
• Social Styles

• Leadership & Management

Situational Leadership® Theory In Plain Language: The Landmark Model From Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard

Human resource and training professionals seem to jump from fad to fad and are often guilty of burning through large sums of money reinventing the wheel with custom content. “It’s different here,” they truly believe. “We have a unique culture. We’re special!” 

Yet, if there was ever a standard for new manager training it has to be the theory of situational leadership.

What Is Situational Leadership ® Theory? 

The idea behind situational leadership is that you, the leader, should change your leadership approach to be more or less directive, and more or less supportive, based on the situation . 

And the situation means whether your direct report (i.e., team member) is a competent and committed superstar, or on the other end of the scale, an incompetent slacker. 

For example, you’ve got a young newbie on your team with little experience. You would want to be very “directive”–show her how to do it, tell her to do it, make sure it’s done right. But for another team member who has ten more years of experience than you do, and has always performed well, you’d just delegate and get out of the way. They don’t need you looking over their shoulder and being all micro-managey. (No, that’s not a real word. But it’s funny.)

“So What? What’s So Great About That?” 

So you’re not impressed with this model, huh? 

That’s because today, it seems like common sense. But before there was the idea of situational leadership most people assumed there was One Right Way to Lead. You could argue about what the right way was — Autocratic , Laissez-Faire , Servant , Transformational — but it was just assumed you had a model and led everyone the same way.

But in the 1960s leadership wonks started coming up with a variety of “ contingency theories .” Meaning the best leadership style would be contingent on things like organizational integrity, environmental factors, the type of tasks that needed to be completed, etc. 

And in the sixties, there was a lot of research and competing theories even within the broad idea of contingent-leadership. So they put all the professors on an island and each week they voted the most annoying leadership geek off the island until there was a single winner.

OK, that never happened. I was just making sure you didn’t fall asleep. What really happened was…

Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard: The Lennon and McCartney of Leadership

In the year that the Beatles would release Abbey Road, Dr. Paul Hersey and Dr. Ken Blanchard released Management of Organizational Behavior , a textbook that would turn them into rockstars of the leadership world. It’s a textbook that would be used in business courses for over forty years.

(What, they don’t look like rock stars to you?)

It was this textbook that laid out the original version of the model, and Hersey and Blanchard become partners in a management consulting and training company called The Center for Leadership Studies. 

But remember what eventually happened to the Beatles? 

Yep, the rockstars of leadership split up, too.

Two Different Versions? You Say Tomato, I Say Tomahto

In 1979, ten years after launching the theory of all theories, Blanchard left to start his own company, now known as The Ken Blanchard Companies. And he continued to refine the Situational Leadership ® model and began to call it Situational Leadership ® II.

To purists, there are important differences between the two models. For most HR professionals and managers, not so much. 

More recently, the two companies sued each other over the right to use the “Situational Leadership ® ” name. It was agreed that after the year 2020, The Center for Leadership Studies would continue to use the Situational Leadership ® name, while The Ken Blanchard Companies would have to refer to their model as just SLII ® .

You can see some of the differences between the two versions in the visual model. Situational Leadership ® offered by The Center for Leadership Studies looks like this:

The SLII ® model offered by The Ken Blanchard Companies looks like this:

The original model labels the four quadrants of leadership: Telling, Selling, Participating, Delegating.

The revised Blanchard model labels them: Directing, Coaching, Supporting, Delegating. 

SLII ® Explained

To further explain situational leadership theory, we’ll stick with the Blanchard SLII ® framework, and reference the image directly above.

The situational leader follows three simple steps:

• Identify the specific goal; frame it as a SMART goal
• Diagnose the individual’s level of competence and commitment
• Apply the correct leadership style

To understand and define the “performance readiness” of the follower, you determine how competent they are and how committed they are. You can see in the image above that followers move from D1 to D4 classifications as they become fully developed.

• D1 the Enthusiastic Beginner (Low Competence and High Commitment) — This individual may be inexperienced or brand new to the task, but is eager to learn and confident
• D2 the Disillusioned Learner (Low Competence and Low Commitment) — This individual may have little to no experience or is inconsistent, and is also frustrated, discouraged or overwhelmed
• D3 the Capable but Cautious Performer (High Competence and Low Commitment) — This individual is experienced and skillful but lacks confidence and is overly critical or apathetic
• D4 the Self-Reliant Achiever (High Competence and High Commitment) — This individual is experienced and consistently produces quality work, and is also self-assured, self-reliant and may even inspire others

The SLII ® model describes four basic levels of leadership based on a combination of directing and supporting:

• S1 Directing (High Directing and Low Supporting) — This leadership style plans, shows, tells, monitors and gives frequent feedback.
• S2 Coaching (High Directing and High Supporting) — This leadership style explains, redirects, encourages, and praises.
• S3 Supporting (Low Directing and High Supporting) — This leadership style asks questions, facilitates, listens, encourages, and collaborates.
• S4 Delegating (Low Directing and Low Supporting) — This leadership style empowers, provides resources, trusts, affirms and challenges.

You then match your leadership approach to their stage of development:

• For a D1 follower, use an S1 “Directing” style
• For a D2 follower, use an S2 “Coaching” style
• For a D3 follower, use an S3 “Supporting” style
• For a D4 follower, use an S4 “Delegating” style

A critical aspect of situational leadership is that you don’t make a single judgment about each employee. “Kevin is such a D1! I’ve got to direct everything…”

Rather it’s task-specific. A seasoned sales professional might be a D4 when it comes to sales calls, but a D1 when it comes to using the new CRM software system. As the leader, you’d delegate sales related items, but be highly directive when it comes to call planning, digital notes, and reporting.

Scholarly Research

Researchers continue to study situational leadership; notable published papers include:

• Situational Leadership After 25 Years: A Retrospective
• The Situational Leadership Theory: A Critical View
• A Test of the Situational Leadership Theory
• Situational Leadership Theory Revisited: A Test Of An Across-jobs Perspective

More Information

Visit The Ken Blanchard Companies website to learn more about SLII ® .

Visit The Center for Leadership Studies to learn more about Situational Leadership ® .

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

L&D’s Transformation From Order Taker To Trusted Learning Advisor

Think ‘Process’ Not ‘Event’ To Develop Your Emerging Leaders

9 Insights From The 2024 Leadership Development Benchmark Report

Latest articles.

How Consensus Cloud Solutions Scales And Sustains A Thriving Hybrid Culture with the CPO

The Secret To Great Leadership? Develop Your Aspiring Leaders with The Aerospace Corp’s CPO

A Scrappy And Highly Practical Approach To Develop Frontline Leaders with Collective Health’s CPO

• Terms of Service
• Privacy Policy

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2023 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

Situational Leadership Theory

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Amy Morin, LCSW, is a psychotherapist and international bestselling author. Her books, including "13 Things Mentally Strong People Don't Do," have been translated into more than 40 languages. Her TEDx talk,  "The Secret of Becoming Mentally Strong," is one of the most viewed talks of all time.

Verywell / Nez Riaz

Situational Leadership II

Elements of situational leadership theory, frequently asked questions.

Situational leadership theory suggests that no single leadership style is best. Instead, it depends on which type of leadership and strategies are best suited to the task.

According to this theory, the most effective leaders are those that are able to adapt their style to the situation and look at cues such as the type of task, the nature of the group, and other factors that might contribute to getting the job done.

Situational leadership theory is often referred to as the Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory, after its developers, Dr. Paul Hersey, author of "The Situational Leader," and Kenneth Blanchard, author of "One-Minute Manager."

Leadership Styles

Hersey and Blanchard suggested that there are four primary leadership styles:

• Telling (S1) : In this leadership style, the leader tells people what to do and how to do it.
• Selling (S2) : This style involves more back-and-forth between leaders and followers. Leaders "sell" their ideas and message to get group members to buy into the process.
• Participating (S3) : In this approach, the leader offers less direction and allows members of the group to take a more active role in coming up with ideas and making decisions.
• Delegating (S4) : This style is characterized by a less involved, hands-off approach to leadership . Group members tend to make most of the decisions and take most of the responsibility for what happens.

Maturity Levels

The right style of leadership depends greatly on the maturity level (i.e., the level of knowledge and competence) of the individuals or group.

Hersey and Blanchard's theory identifies four different levels of maturity, including:

• M1 : Group members lack the knowledge, skills, and willingness to complete the task.
• M2 : Group members are willing and enthusiastic, but lack the ability.
• M3 : Group members have the skills and capability to complete the task, but are unwilling to take responsibility.
• M4 : Group members are highly skilled and willing to complete the task.

Matching Styles and Levels

Leadership styles may be matched with maturity levels. The Hersey-Blanchard model suggests that the following leadership styles are the most appropriate for these maturity levels:

• Low Maturity (M1)—Telling (S1)
• Medium Maturity (M2)—Selling (S2)
• Medium Maturity (M3)—Participating (S3)
• High Maturity (M4)—Delegating (S4)

How It Works

A more "telling" style may be necessary at the beginning of a project when followers lack the responsibility or knowledge to work on their own. As subordinates become more experienced and knowledgeable, however, the leader may want to shift into a more delegating approach.

This situational model of leadership focuses on flexibility so that leaders are able to adapt according to the needs of their followers and the demands of the situation.

The situational approach to leadership also avoids the pitfalls of the single-style approach by recognizing that there are many different ways of dealing with a problem and that leaders need to be able to assess a situation and the maturity levels of subordinates in order to determine what approach will be the most effective at any given moment.

Situational theories , therefore, give greater consideration to the complexity of dynamic social situations and the many individuals acting in different roles who will ultimately contribute to the outcome.

The Situational Leadership II (or SLII model) was developed by Kenneth Blanchard and builds on Blanchard and Hersey's original theory. According to the revised version of the theory, effective leaders must base their behavior on the developmental level of group members for specific tasks.

Competence and Commitment

The developmental level is determined by each individual's level of competence and commitment. These levels include:

• Enthusiastic beginner (D1) : High commitment, low competence
• Disillusioned learner (D2) : Some competence, but setbacks have led to low commitment
• Capable but cautious performer (D3) : Competence is growing, but the level of commitment varies
• Self-reliant achiever (D4) : High competence and commitment

SLII Leadership Styles

SLII also suggests that effective leadership is dependent on two key behaviors: supporting and directing. Directing behaviors include giving specific directions and instructions and attempting to control the behavior of group members. Supporting behaviors include actions such as encouraging subordinates, listening, and offering recognition and feedback.

The theory identifies four situational leadership styles:

• Directing (S1) : High on directing behaviors, low on supporting behaviors
• Coaching (S2) : High on both directing and supporting behaviors
• Supporting (S3) : Low on directing behavior and high on supporting behaviors
• Delegating (S4) : Low on both directing and supporting behaviors

The main point of SLII theory is that not one of these four leadership styles is best. Instead, an effective leader will match their behavior to the developmental skill of each subordinate for the task at hand.

Experts suggest that there are four key contextual factors that leaders must be aware of when making an assessment of the situation.

Consider the Relationship

Leaders need to consider the relationship between the leaders and the members of the group. Social and interpersonal factors can play a role in determining which approach is best.

For example, a group that lacks efficiency and productivity might benefit from a style that emphasizes order, rules, and clearly defined roles. A productive group of highly skilled workers, on the other hand, might benefit from a more democratic style that allows group members to work independently and have input in organizational decisions.

Consider the Task

The leader needs to consider the task itself. Tasks can range from simple to complex, but the leader needs to have a clear idea of exactly what the task entails in order to determine if it has been successfully and competently accomplished.

Consider the Level of Authority

The level of authority the leader has over group members should also be considered. Some leaders have power conferred by the position itself, such as the capacity to fire, hire, reward, or reprimand subordinates. Other leaders gain power through relationships with employees, often by gaining respect from them, offering support to them, and helping them feel included in the decision-making process .

Consider the Level of Maturity

As the Hersey-Blanchard model suggests, leaders need to consider the level of maturity of each individual group member. The maturity level is a measure of an individual's ability to complete a task, as well as their willingness to complete the task. Assigning a job to a member who is willing but lacks the ability is a recipe for failure.

Being able to pinpoint each employee's level of maturity allows the leader to choose the best leadership approach to help employees accomplish their goals.

An example of situational leadership would be a leader adapting their approach based on the needs of their team members. One team member might be less experienced and require more oversight, while another might be more knowledgable and capable of working independently.

In order to lead effectively, the three skills needed to utilize situational leadership are diagnosis, flexibility, and communication. Leaders must be able to evaluate the situation, adapt as needed, and communicate their expectations with members of the group.

Important elements of situational leadership theory are the styles of leadership that are used, the developmental level of team members, the adaptability of the leader, communication with group members, and the attainment of the group's goals.

• DuBrin AJ. Leadership: Research, Findings, Practice, and Skills. Mason, OH: South-Western, Cengage Learning; 2013.
• Gill R. Theory and Practice of Leadership. London: Sage Publications; 2011.
• Hersey P, Blanchard KH.  Management of Organizational Behavior — Utilizing Human Resources . New Jersey/Prentice Hall; 1969.
• Hersey P, Blanchard KH. Life Cycle Theory of Leadership. Training and Development Journal.  1969;23(5):26–34.
• Nevarez C, Wood JL, Penrose R. Leadership Theory and the Community College: Applying Theory to Practice. Sterling, Virginia: Stylus Publishing; 2013.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Paper Information

• Paper Submission

Journal Information

• About This Journal
• Editorial Board
• Current Issue
• Author Guidelines

Human Resource Management Research

p-ISSN: 2169-9607    e-ISSN: 2169-9666

2017;  7(3): 102-110

doi:10.5923/j.hrmr.20170703.02

Situational Leadership and Its Effectiveness in Rising Employee Productivity: A Study on North Lebanon Organization

Khalil Ghazzawi 1 , Radwan El Shoughari 2 , Bernard El Osta 3

1 Lebanese University, Lebanon

2 Jinan University, Lebanon

3 Lebanese International University, Lebanon

Copyright © 2017 Scientific & Academic Publishing. All Rights Reserved.

Leadership style is a highly discussed and studied topic in the field of management due to its contribution in influencing employee’s productivity. From this perspective, this study will discuss the impact of situational leadership style on employee’s motivation. At this point, this paper is made to clarify how situational leadership affects the productivity of employees inside an organizations. A quantitative data collection approaches was used in order to study the relationship between both of these variables, were 150 participants employed at hospitals in North Lebanon filled a well-designed questionnaire to cover different aspects of situational leadership, demographic being the first part of the questionnaire, followed by situational leadership behavior of the managers, and ending with the last part of the questionnaire, employee behavior. Data collected is analyzed using SPSS, through factor reduction technique in order to unveil the relationship between situational leadership and employee productivity. As a second step analysis in this research paper, regression equation is generated to find how change in one or more factor affects the other one(s). As a final conclusion for this study, a positive relationship was found between situational leadership and employee productivity, therefore the studied hypotheses were accepted.

Keywords: Situational Leadership, Employee performance, Employee Productivity

Cite this paper: Khalil Ghazzawi , Radwan El Shoughari , Bernard El Osta , Situational Leadership and Its Effectiveness in Rising Employee Productivity: A Study on North Lebanon Organization, Human Resource Management Research , Vol. 7 No. 3, 2017, pp. 102-110. doi: 10.5923/j.hrmr.20170703.02.

Article Outline

1. introduction, 1.1. research objectives, 1.2. research hypothesis, 2. literature review, 2.1. the need of leadership in an organization, 2.2. situational leadership, 2.3. situational leadership models, 3. methodology, 4. results and findings, 4.1. reliability of the study, 4.2. factor analysis, 4.2.1. factor analysis of situational behavior (part b), 4.2.2. factor analysis of employee’s productivity and performance, 4.3. regression analysis, 5. conclusions, 6. recommendations.

The Leading Source of Insights On Business Model Strategy & Tech Business Models

Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Model

The Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Model (SLM) is a widely recognized leadership theory developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard in the late 1960s and early 1970s. This model emphasizes the importance of adapting leadership styles to suit the developmental level of followers, proposing that effective leadership is contingent upon the readiness and competence of subordinates.

Table of Contents

Core Concepts and Development

Core principles:.

• Leadership Flexibility: The SLM asserts that effective leaders are flexible and adaptable, capable of adjusting their leadership styles based on the readiness level of their followers.
• Developmental Continuum: The model posits that individuals progress through four stages of development—telling, selling, participating, and delegating—each requiring different levels of direction and support from leaders.

Development:

• The SLM was initially proposed by Paul Hersey in his 1969 book “Situational Leadership and Management: A Contingency Approach,” which outlined the core principles of the model .
• Ken Blanchard later collaborated with Hersey to refine and popularize the model , co-authoring the seminal book “Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources” in 1982.

Key Components of the SLM

1. leadership styles:.

• Telling (S1): High task orientation, low relationship orientation.
• Selling (S2): High task orientation, high relationship orientation.
• Participating (S3): Low task orientation, high relationship orientation.
• Delegating (S4): Low task orientation, low relationship orientation.

2. Developmental Levels:

• D1: Low competence, high commitment.
• D2: Some competence, low commitment.
• D3: Moderate to high competence, variable commitment.
• D4: High competence, high commitment.

Practical Applications

Leadership effectiveness:.

• The SLM helps leaders match their leadership styles to the developmental levels of their followers, enhancing communication, motivation, and performance.

Employee Development:

• By diagnosing the developmental level of individual team members, leaders can provide tailored support and guidance to facilitate their growth and advancement.

Change Management:

• The SLM offers a framework for managing change by recognizing the varying levels of readiness among employees and adjusting leadership approaches accordingly.

Team Dynamics:

• Leaders can use the SLM to foster collaboration and cohesion within teams, ensuring that each member receives the appropriate level of direction and support.

Criticisms and Limitations

Over-simplification:.

• Critics argue that the SLM oversimplifies the complexities of leadership and human behavior, presenting a linear and prescriptive approach to leadership development.

Lack of Empirical Support:

• Some research suggests that the SLM lacks strong empirical support, with mixed findings regarding its effectiveness in predicting leadership outcomes.

Contextual Factors:

• The SLM may not adequately account for contextual factors such as organizational culture, industry dynamics, and situational constraints, limiting its applicability in diverse settings.

Best Practices for Implementation

• Assessment: Conduct regular assessments of followers’ developmental levels to inform leadership decisions and interventions.
• Training: Provide leaders with training and development opportunities to enhance their understanding and application of the SLM.
• Flexibility: Encourage leaders to be flexible and adaptive in their leadership approaches, recognizing that one style may not fit all situations or individuals.
• Feedback: Foster open communication and feedback loops between leaders and followers to ensure alignment and mutual understanding.

Case Study: Implementation of Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Model in a Tech Company

• Description : A rapidly growing tech startup is facing challenges in managing its diverse team of software developers, designers, and engineers. The company recognizes the need for a flexible leadership approach to adapt to the varying skill levels and motivation levels of its employees.
• Assessment : The company conducts an assessment of each team member’s competence and commitment level related to their roles and responsibilities.
• For employees who are new to the company or lack the necessary skills and experience (low competence, low commitment), leaders adopt a directing style, providing clear instructions and closely supervising their work.
• For employees who have some experience but may still require guidance and support (moderate competence, variable commitment), leaders adopt a coaching style, providing guidance, feedback, and encouragement to help them develop their skills and confidence.
• For employees who are experienced and self-motivated (high competence, high commitment), leaders adopt a supporting style, providing autonomy and resources while serving as a facilitator and resource for problem-solving.
• For employees who are highly skilled but may lack motivation or engagement (high competence, low commitment), leaders adopt a delegating style, providing autonomy and empowerment while monitoring progress and providing feedback as needed.
• Improved Employee Development : Leaders are better equipped to provide tailored support and guidance to employees at different stages of their development, leading to improved skills, confidence, and job satisfaction.
• Enhanced Team Performance : By matching leadership styles to employees’ needs and task requirements, teams become more effective and efficient in achieving their goals and delivering results.
• Increased Employee Engagement : Employees feel supported, valued, and empowered to take ownership of their work, leading to higher levels of engagement, motivation, and commitment to the company’s mission and objectives.
• Reduced Turnover : By providing effective leadership and support, the company reduces the risk of employee burnout, dissatisfaction, and turnover, leading to greater continuity and stability within the organization.

The Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Model (SLM) offers a valuable framework for understanding and adapting leadership styles to suit the developmental levels of followers. By emphasizing flexibility, communication, and tailored support, the SLM enables leaders to effectively navigate diverse organizational challenges, foster employee development, and drive performance outcomes. While criticisms exist regarding its simplicity and empirical support, the SLM remains a widely used and influential model in the field of leadership development, providing valuable insights into the dynamic nature of leadership and human behavior.

Key Takeaways:

• Core Concepts of the SLM: The Situational Leadership Model (SLM) emphasizes leadership flexibility and the importance of adapting leadership styles based on the readiness and competence of followers. It proposes that effective leadership is contingent upon the developmental level of subordinates.
• Developmental Continuum: Individuals progress through four developmental stages—telling, selling, participating, and delegating—each requiring different levels of direction and support from leaders.
• Leadership Styles and Developmental Levels: The SLM identifies four primary leadership styles (telling, selling, participating, and delegating) and classifies followers into four developmental levels based on their readiness and competence.
• Practical Applications: The SLM is applied in various organizational contexts to enhance leadership effectiveness, support employee development, manage change, and foster team dynamics. It helps leaders match their leadership styles to the developmental levels of their followers, thereby improving communication, motivation, and performance.
• Criticisms and Limitations: Critics argue that the SLM oversimplifies leadership complexities, lacks strong empirical support, and may not adequately consider contextual factors. However, it remains a widely used and influential model in leadership development despite these criticisms.
• Best Practices for Implementation: Implementing the SLM involves regular assessments of followers’ developmental levels, providing training for leaders, encouraging flexibility in leadership approaches, and fostering open communication and feedback loops.
• Conclusion: The SLM offers valuable insights into leadership adaptability and the dynamic nature of leadership and human behavior. While it has its limitations, it remains a valuable framework for understanding and adapting leadership styles to suit the needs of followers in various organizational settings.

Connected Thinking Frameworks

Convergent vs. Divergent Thinking

Critical Thinking

Second-Order Thinking

Lateral Thinking

Bounded Rationality

Dunning-Kruger Effect

Occam’s Razor

Lindy Effect

Antifragility

Systems Thinking

Vertical Thinking

Maslow’s Hammer

Peter Principle

Straw Man Fallacy

Streisand Effect

Recognition Heuristic

Representativeness Heuristic

Take-The-Best Heuristic

Bundling Bias

Barnum Effect

First-Principles Thinking

Ladder Of Inference

Goodhart’s Law

Six Thinking Hats Model

Mandela Effect

Crowding-Out Effect

Bandwagon Effect

Moore’s Law

Disruptive Innovation

Value Migration

Bye-Now Effect

Stereotyping

Murphy’s Law

Law of Unintended Consequences

Fundamental Attribution Error

Outcome Bias

Hindsight Bias

Read Next:  Biases ,  Bounded Rationality ,  Mandela Effect ,  Dunning-Kruger Effect ,  Lindy Effect ,  Crowding Out Effect ,  Bandwagon Effect .

Main Guides:

• Business Models
• Business Strategy
• Marketing Strategy
• Business Model Innovation
• Platform Business Models
• Network Effects In A Nutshell
• Digital Business Models

More Resources

About The Author

Gennaro Cuofano

Discover more from fourweekmba.

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

• 70+ Business Models
• Airbnb Business Model
• Amazon Business Model
• Apple Business Model
• Google Business Model
• Facebook [Meta] Business Model
• Microsoft Business Model
• Netflix Business Model
• Uber Business Model

Advancing ‘Ahead of Ready’ with Next Generation Interceptor

Image above: Notional render of Lockheed Martin’s Next Generation Interceptor solution.  

The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) has selected Lockheed Martin to deliver the Next Generation Interceptor (NGI) – the nation’s new homeland missile defense capability.

NGI is part of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system and will provide a new, advanced interceptor for the mission to protect the homeland against limited long range ballistic missile threats from rogue nations. And our mature and reliable interceptor solution will help the warfighter stay ahead of these evolving threats.

“Lockheed Martin is proud to partner with the MDA on a revolutionary interceptor to advance our nation’s security. We are committed to delivering reliable interceptors that will seamlessly integrate with the current GMD system and can rapidly evolve with the threat,” said Sarah Hiza, vice president and general manager of Strategic and Missile Defense at Lockheed Martin.

Our Path to Development

In 2019, MDA announced the NGI competition to replace the current, aging ballistic missile defense interceptor.

Lockheed Martin was selected by the MDA in March 2021 to compete in the development phase of the NGI acquisition program.

In October 2021, the MDA approved Lockheed Martin’s NGI System Requirements Review (SRR)-- six months after the initial contract award.

By August 2022, we announced that our NGI program team validated prototype communications technology for in-flight situational awareness and, later that year, delivered NGI’s first flight software package ahead of schedule.

One year later, in August 2023, a series of subsystem Preliminary Design Reviews (PDR) validated the design for all elements of our NGI solution.

On September 29, 2023, our NGI program completed an All Up Round PDR , in partnership with the MDA, which assessed the program’s readiness and maturity to continue into the detailed design phase.

In November of 2023, we opened a $16.5M engineering facility in North Alabama where development, testing and system integration for NGI is taking place.

By November 2023, we also completed Knowledge Point 1 ahead of schedule – an MDA acquisition milestone demonstrating significant maturation across critical technologies and manufacturing readiness and transitioning the program into its product development phase.

Digital Enablement

With our NGI solution, we have built in efficiencies, upgradability, and sustainability so the warfighter can stay ahead of ready.

Since the program’s inception, the company’s embrace and integration of digital tools, processes, and technologies is an enabler to meet our customers’ production needs today and well into the future. All-digital development establishes a common digital thread – a foundation to enable accelerated testing, improve production processes, and more.

Revolutionizing U.S. Homeland Missile Defense

Our NGI solution is the solution the MDA requires, and we look forward to partnering with our customer on this new homeland missile defense interceptor for decades to come. With Lockheed Martin’s extensive understanding of the end-to-end missile defense mission, we are on the path to Critical Design Review as a trusted and transparent partner.

We are committed to delivering the first NGI in advance of the warfighter’s need.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

Leadership Effectiveness in Healthcare Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Sectional and Before–After Studies

Vincenzo restivo.

1 Department of Health Promotion, Maternal and Infant Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties (PROMISE) “G. D’Alessandro”, University of Palermo, Via del Vespro 133, 90127 Palermo, Italy

Giuseppa Minutolo

Alberto battaglini.

2 Vaccines and Clinical Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of Genova, Via Antonio Pastore 1, 16132 Genova, Italy

Alberto Carli

3 Santa Chiara Hospital, Largo Medaglie d’oro 9, 38122 Trento, Italy

Michele Capraro

4 School of Public Health, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Via Olgettina 58, 20132 Milan, Italy

Maddalena Gaeta

5 Department of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, University of Pavia, Via Forlanini 2, 27100 Pavia, Italy

Cecilia Trucchi

6 Planning, Epidemiology and Prevention Unit, Liguria Health Authority (A.Li.Sa.), IRCCS San Martino Hospital, Largo R. Benzi 10, 16132 Genoa, Italy

Carlo Favaretti

7 Centre on Leadership in Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Largo F. Vito 1, 00168 Rome, Italy

Francesco Vitale

Alessandra casuccio, associated data.

Data will be available after writing correspondence to the author.

To work efficiently in healthcare organizations and optimize resources, team members should agree with their leader’s decisions critically. However, nowadays, little evidence is available in the literature. This systematic review and meta-analysis has assessed the effectiveness of leadership interventions in improving healthcare outcomes such as performance and guidelines adherence. Overall, the search strategies retrieved 3,155 records, and 21 of them were included in the meta-analysis. Two databases were used for manuscript research: PubMed and Scopus. On 16th December 2019 the researchers searched for articles published in the English language from 2015 to 2019. Considering the study designs, the pooled leadership effectiveness was 14.0% (95%CI 10.0–18.0%) in before–after studies, whereas the correlation coefficient between leadership interventions and healthcare outcomes was 0.22 (95%CI 0.15–0.28) in the cross-sectional studies. The multi-regression analysis in the cross-sectional studies showed a higher leadership effectiveness in South America (β = 0.56; 95%CI 0.13, 0.99), in private hospitals (β = 0.60; 95%CI 0.14, 1.06), and in medical specialty (β = 0.28; 95%CI 0.02, 0.54). These results encourage the improvement of leadership culture to increase performance and guideline adherence in healthcare settings. To reach this purpose, it would be useful to introduce a leadership curriculum following undergraduate medical courses.

1. Introduction

Over the last years, patients’ outcomes, population wellness and organizational standards have become the main purposes of any healthcare structure [ 1 ]. These standards can be achieved following evidence-based practice (EBP) for diseases prevention and care [ 2 , 3 ] and optimizing available economical and human resources [ 3 , 4 ], especially in low-industrialized geographical areas [ 5 ]. This objective could be reached with effective healthcare leadership [ 3 , 4 ], which could be considered a network whose team members followed leadership critically and motivated a leader’s decisions based on the organization’s requests and targets [ 6 ]. Healthcare workers raised their compliance towards daily activities in an effective leadership context, where the leader succeeded in improving membership and performance awareness among team members [ 7 ]. Furthermore, patients could improve their health conditions in a high-level leadership framework. [ 8 ] Despite the leadership benefits for healthcare systems’ performance and patients’ outcomes [ 1 , 7 ], professionals’ confidence would decline in a damaging leadership context for workers’ health conditions and performance [ 4 , 9 , 10 ]. On the other hand, the prevention of any detrimental factor which might worsen both team performance and healthcare systems’ outcomes could demand effective leadership [ 4 , 7 , 10 ]. However, shifting from the old and assumptive leadership into a more effective and dynamic one is still a challenge [ 4 ]. Nowadays, the available evidence on the impact and effectiveness of leadership interventions is sparse and not systematically reported in the literature [ 11 , 12 ].

Recently, the spreading of the Informal Opinion Leadership style into hospital environments is changing the traditional concept of leadership. This leadership style provides a leader without any official assignment, known as an “opinion leader”, whose educational and behavioral background is suitable for the working context. Its target is to apply the best practices in healthcare creating a more familiar and collaborative team [ 2 ]. However, Flodgren et al. reported that informal leadership interventions increased healthcare outcomes [ 2 ].

Nowadays, various leadership styles are recognized with different classifications but none of them are considered the gold standard for healthcare systems because of heterogenous leadership meanings in the literature [ 4 , 5 , 6 , 12 , 13 ]. Leadership style classification by Goleman considered leaders’ behavior [ 5 , 13 ], while Chen DS-S proposed a traditional leadership style classification (charismatic, servant, transactional and transformational) [ 6 ].

Even if leadership style improvement depends on the characteristics and mission of a workplace [ 6 , 13 , 14 ], a leader should have both a high education in healthcare leadership and the behavioral qualities necessary for establishing strong human relationships and achieving a healthcare system’s goals [ 7 , 15 ]. Theoretically, any practitioner could adapt their emotive capacities and educational/working experiences to healthcare contexts, political lines, economical and human resources [ 7 ]. Nowadays, no organization adopts a policy for leader selection in a specific healthcare setting [ 15 ]. Despite the availability of a self-assessment leadership skills questionnaire for aspirant leaders and a pattern for the selection of leaders by Dubinsky et al. [ 15 ], a standardized and universally accepted method to choose leaders for healthcare organizations is still argued over [ 5 , 15 ].

Leadership failure might be caused by the arduous application of leadership skills and adaptive characteristics among team members [ 5 , 6 ]. One of the reasons for this negative event could be the lack of a standardized leadership program for medical students [ 16 , 17 ]. Consequently, working experience in healthcare settings is the only way to apply a leadership style for many medical professionals [ 12 , 16 , 17 ].

Furthermore, the literature data on leadership effectiveness in healthcare organizations were slightly significant or discordant in results. Nevertheless, the knowledge of pooled leadership effectiveness should motivate healthcare workers to apply leadership strategies in healthcare systems [ 12 ]. This systematic review and meta-analysis assesses the pooled effectiveness of leadership interventions in improving healthcare workers’ and patients’ outcomes.

2. Materials and Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement guidelines [ 18 ]. The protocol was registered on the PROSPERO database with code CRD42020198679 on 15 August 2020. Following these methodological standards, leadership interventions were evaluated as the pooled effectiveness and influential characteristic of healthcare settings, such as leadership style, workplace, settings and the study period.

2.1. Data Sources and Search Strategy

PubMed and Scopus were the two databases used for the research into the literature. On 16th December 2019, manuscripts in the English language published between 2015 and 2019 were searched by specific MeSH terms for each dataset. Those for PubMed were “leadership” OR “leadership” AND “clinical” AND “outcome” AND “public health” OR “public” AND “health” OR “public health” AND “humans”. Those for Scopus were “leadership” AND “clinical” AND “outcome” AND “public” AND “health”.

2.2. Study Selection and Data Extraction

In accordance with the PRISMA Statement, the following PICOS method was used for including articles [ 18 ]: the target population was all healthcare workers in any hospital or clinical setting (Population); the interventions were any leader’s recommendation to fulfil quality standards or performance indexes of a healthcare system (Intervention) [ 19 ]; to be included, the study should have a control group or reference at baseline as comparison (Control); and any effectiveness measure in terms of change in adherence to healthcare guidelines or performances (Outcome). In detail, any outcome implicated into healthcare workers’ capacity and characteristics in reaching a healthcare systems purposes following the highest standards was considered as performance [ 19 ]. Moreover, whatever clinical practices resulted after having respected the recommendations, procedures or statements settled previously was considered as guideline adherence [ 20 ]. The selected study design was an observational or experimental/quasi-experimental study design (trial, case control, cohort, cross-sectional, before-after study), excluding any systematic reviews, metanalyses, study protocol and guidelines (Studies).

The leaders’ interventions followed Chen’s leadership styles classification [ 6 ]. According to this, the charismatic leadership style can be defined also as an emotive leadership because of members’ strong feelings which guide the relationship with their leader. Its purpose is the improvement of workers’ motivation to reach predetermined organizational targets following a leader’s planning strategies and foresights. Servant leadership style is a sharing leadership style in whose members can increase their skills and competences through steady leader support, and they have a role in an organization’s goals. The transformational leadership style focuses on practical aspects such as new approaches for problem solving, new interventions to reach purposes, future planning and viewpoints sharing. Originality in a transformational leadership style has a key role of improving previous workers’ and healthcare system conditions in the achievement of objectives. The transactional leadership style requires a working context where technical skills are fundamental, and whose leader realizes a double-sense sharing process of knowledge and tasks with members. Furthermore, workers’ performances are improved through a rewarding system [ 6 ].

In this study, the supervisor trained the research team for practical manuscript selection and data extraction. The aim was to ensure data homogeneity and to check the authors’ procedures for selection and data collection. The screening phase was performed by four researchers reading each manuscript’s title and abstract independently and choosing to exclude any article that did not fulfill the inclusion criteria. Afterwards, the included manuscripts were searched for in the full text. They were retrieved freely, by institutional access or requesting them from the authors.

The assessment phase consisted of full-text reading to select articles following the inclusion criteria. The supervisor solved any contrasting view about article selection and variable selection.

The final database was built up by collecting the information from all included full-text articles: author, title, study year, year of publication, country/geographic location, study design, viability and type of evaluation scales for leadership competence, study period, type of intervention to improve leadership awareness, setting of leader intervention, selection modality of leaders, leadership style adopted, outcomes assessed such as guideline adherence or healthcare workers’ performance, benefits for patients’ health or patients’ outcomes improvement, public or private hospitals or healthcare units, ward specialty, intervention in single specialty or multi-professional settings, number of beds, number of healthcare workers involved in leadership interventions and sample size.

Each included article in this systematic review and meta-analysis received a standardized quality score for the specific study design, according to Newcastle–Ottawa, for the assessment of the quality of the cross-sectional study, and the Study Quality Assessment Tools by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute were used for all other study designs [ 21 , 22 ].

2.3. Statistical Data Analysis

The manuscripts metadata were extracted in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet to remove duplicate articles and collect data. The included article variables for the quantitative meta-analysis were: first author, publication year, continent of study, outcome, public or private organization, hospital or local healthcare unit, surgical or non-surgical ward, multi- or single-professionals, ward specialty, sample size, quality score of each manuscript, leadership style, year of study and study design.

The measurement of the outcomes of interest (either performance or guidelines adherence) depended on the study design of the included manuscripts in the meta-analysis:

• for cross-sectional studies, the outcome of interest was the correlation between leadership improvement and guideline adherence or healthcare performance;
• the outcome derived from before–after studies or the trial was the percentage of leadership improvement intervention in guideline adherence or healthcare performance;
• the incidence occurrence of improved results among exposed and not exposed healthcare workers of leadership interventions and the relative risks (RR) were the outcomes in cohort studies;
• the odds ratio (OR) between the case of healthcare workers who had received a leadership intervention and the control group for case-control studies.

Pooled estimates were calculated using both the fixed effects and DerSimonian and Laird random effects models, weighting individual study results by the inverse of their variances [ 23 ]. Forest plots assessed the pooled estimates and the corresponding 95%CI across the studies. The heterogeneity test was performed by a chi-square test at a significance level of p < 0.05, reporting the I 2 statistic together with a 25%, 50% or 75% cut-off, indicating low, moderate, and high heterogeneity, respectively [ 24 , 25 ].

Subgroup analysis and meta-regression analyses explored the sources of significant heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis considered the leadership style (charismatic, servant, transactional and transformational), continent of study (North America, Europe, Oceania), median cut-off year of study conduction (studies conducted between 2005 and 2011 and studies conducted between 2012 and 2019), type of hospital organization (public or private hospital), type of specialty (surgical or medical specialty) and type of team (multi-professional or single-professional team).

Meta-regression analysis considered the following variables: year of starting study, continent of study conduction, public or private hospital, surgical or non-surgical specialty ward, type of healthcare service (hospital or local health unit), type of healthcare workers involved (multi- or single-professional), leadership style, and study quality score. All variables included in the model were relevant in the coefficient analysis.

To assess a potential publication bias, a graphical funnel plot reported the logarithm effect estimate and related the standard error from each study, and the Egger test was performed [ 26 , 27 ].

All data were analyzed using the statistical package STATA/SE 16.1 (StataCorp LP, College 482 Station, TX, USA), with the “metan” command used for meta-analysis, and “metafunnel”, “metabias” and “confunnel” for publication bias assessment [ 28 ].

3.1. Studies Characteristics

Overall, the search strategies retrieved 3,155 relevant records. After removing 570 (18.1%) duplicates, 2,585 (81.9%) articles were suitable for the screening phase, of which only 284 (11.0%) articles were selected for the assessment phase. During the assessment phase, 263 (92.6%) articles were excluded. The most frequent reasons of exclusion were the absence of relevant outcomes ( n = 134, 51.0%) and other study designs ( n = 61, 23.2%). Very few articles were rejected due to them being written in another language ( n = 1, 0.4%), due to the publication year being out of 2015–2019 ( n = 1, 0.4%) or having an unavailable full text ( n = 3, 1.1%).

A total of 21 (7.4%) articles were included in the qualitative and quantitative analysis, of which nine (42.9%) were cross-sectional studies and twelve (57.1%) were before and after studies ( Figure 1 ).

Flow-chart of selection manuscript phases for systematic review and meta-analysis on leadership effectiveness in healthcare workers.

The number of healthcare workers enrolled was 25,099 (median = 308, IQR = 89–1190), including at least 2,275 nurses (9.1%, median = 324, IQR = 199–458). Most of the studies involved a public hospital ( n = 16, 76.2%). Among the studies from private healthcare settings, three (60.0%) were conducted in North America. Articles which analyzed servant and charismatic leadership styles were nine (42.9%) and eight (38.1%), respectively. Interventions with a transactional leadership style were examined in six (28.6%) studies, while those with a transformational leadership style were examined in five studies (23.8%). Overall, 82 healthcare outcomes were assessed and 71 (86.6%) of them were classified as performance. Adherence-to-guidelines outcomes were 11 (13.4%), which were related mainly to hospital stay ( n = 7, 64.0%) and drug administration ( n = 3, 27.0%). Clements et al. and Lornudd et al. showed the highest number of outcomes, which were 19 (23.2%) and 12 (14.6%), respectively [ 29 , 30 ].

3.2. Leadership Effectiveness in before–after Studies

Before–after studies ( Supplementary Table S1 ) involved 22,241 (88.6%, median = 735, IQR = 68–1273) healthcare workers for a total of twelve articles, of which six (50.0%) consisted of performance and five (41.7%) of guidelines adherence and one (8.3%) of both outcomes. Among healthcare workers, there were 1,294 nurses (5.8%, median = 647, IQR = 40–1,254). Only the article by Savage et al. reported no number of involved healthcare workers [ 31 ].

The number of studies conducted after 2011 or between 2012–2019 was seven (58.3%), while only one (8.3%) article reported a study beginning both before and after 2011. Most of studies were conducted in Northern America ( n = 5, 41.7%). The servant leadership style and charismatic leadership style were the most frequently implemented, as reported in five (41.7%) and four (33.3%) articles, respectively. Only one (8.3%) study adopted a transformational leadership style.

The pooled effectiveness of leadership was 14.0% (95%CI 10.0–18.0%), with a high level of heterogeneity (I 2 = 99.9%, p < 0.0001) among the before–after studies ( Figure 2 ).

Effectiveness of leadership in before after studies. Dashed line represents the pooled effectiveness value [ 29 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 ].

The highest level of effectiveness was reported by Weech-Maldonado R et al. with an effectiveness of 199% (95%CI 183–215%) based on the Cultural Competency Assessment Tool for Hospitals (CCATH) [ 39 ]. The effectiveness of leadership changed in accordance with the leadership style ( Supplementary Figure S1 ) and publication bias ( Supplementary Figure S2 ).

Multi-regression analysis indicated a negative association between leadership effectiveness and studies from Oceania, but this result was not statistically significant (β = −0.33; 95% IC −1.25, 0.59). On the other hand, a charismatic leadership style affected healthcare outcomes positively even if it was not statistically relevant (β = 0.24; 95% IC −0.69, 1.17) ( Table 1 ).

Correlation coefficients and multi-regression analysis of leadership effectiveness in before–after studies.

3.3. Leadership Effectiveness in Cross Sectional Studies

A total of 2858 (median = 199, IQR = 110–322) healthcare workers were involved in the cross-sectional studies ( Supplementary Table S2 ), of which 981 (34.3%) were nurses. Most of the studies were conducted in Asia ( n = 4, 44.4%) and North America ( n = 3, 33.3%). All of the cross-sectional studies regarded only the healthcare professionals’ performance. Multi-professional teams were involved in seven (77.8%) studies, and they were more frequently conducted in both medical and surgical wards ( n = 6, 66.7%). The leadership styles were equally distributed in the articles and two (22.2%) of them examined more than two leadership styles at the same time.

The pooled effectiveness of the leadership interventions in the cross-sectional studies had a correlation coefficient of 0.22 (95%CI 0.15–0.28), whose heterogeneity was remarkably high (I 2 = 96.7%, p < 0.0001) ( Figure 3 ).

Effectiveness of leadership in cross-sectional studies. Dashed line represents the pooled effectiveness value [ 30 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 ].

The effectiveness of leadership in the cross-sectional studies changed in accordance with the leadership style ( Supplementary Figure S3 ) and publication bias ( Supplementary Figure S4 ).

Multi-regression analysis showed a higher leadership effectiveness in studies conducted in South America (β = 0.56 95%CI 0.13–0.99) in private hospitals (β = 0.60; 95%CI 0.14–1.06) and in the medical vs. surgical specialty (β = −0.22; 95%CI −0.54, −0.02) ( Table 2 ).

Multi-regression analysis of leadership effectiveness in cross-sectional studies.

* 0.05 ≤ p < 0.01.

4. Discussion

Leadership effectiveness in healthcare settings is a topic that is already treated in a quantitative matter, but only this systematic review and meta-analysis showed the pooled effectiveness of leadership intervention improving some healthcare outcomes such as performance and adherence to guidelines. However, the assessment of leadership effectiveness could be complicated because it depends on the study methodology and selected outcomes [ 12 ]. Health outcomes might benefit from leadership interventions, as Flodgren et al. was concerned about opinion leadership [ 2 ], whose adhesion to guidelines increased by 10.8% (95% CI: 3.5–14.6%). On the other hand, other outcomes did not improve after opinion leadership interventions [ 2 ]. Another review by Ford et al. about emergency wards reported a summary from the literature data which acknowledged an improvement in trauma care management through healthcare workers’ performance and adhesion to guidelines after effective leadership interventions [ 14 ]. Nevertheless, some variables such as collaboration among different healthcare professionals and patients’ healthcare needs might affect leadership intervention effectiveness [ 14 ]. Therefore, a defined leadership style might fail in a healthcare setting rather than in other settings [ 5 , 13 , 14 ].

The leadership effectiveness assessed through cross-sectional studies was higher in South America than in other continents. A possible explanation of this result could be the more frequent use of a transactional leadership style in this area, where the transactional leadership interventions were effective at optimizing economic resources and improving healthcare workers’ performance through cash rewards [ 48 ]. Financing methods for healthcare organizations might be different from one country to another, so the effectiveness of a leadership style can change. Reaching both economic targets and patients’ wellness could be considered a challenge for any leadership intervention [ 48 ], especially in poorer countries [ 5 ].

This meta-analysis showed a negative association between leadership effectiveness and studies by surgical wards. Other research has supported these results, which reported surgical ward performance worsened in any leadership context (charismatic, servant, transactional, transformational) [ 47 ]. In those workplaces, adopting a leadership style to improve surgical performance might be challenging because of nervous tension and little available time during surgical procedures [ 47 ]. On the other hand, a cross-sectional study declared that a surgical team’s performance in private surgical settings benefitted from charismatic leadership-style interventions [ 42 ]. This style of leadership intervention might be successful among a few healthcare workers [ 42 ], where creating relationships is easier [ 6 ]. Even a nursing team’s performance in trauma care increased after charismatic leadership-style interventions because of better communicative and supportive abilities than certain other professional categories [ 29 , 47 ]. However, nowadays there is no standardized leadership in healthcare basic courses [ 5 , 6 , 12 ]. Consequently, promoting leadership culture after undergraduate medical courses could achieve a proper increase in both leadership agreement and working wellness as well as a higher quality of care. [ 17 ]. Furthermore, for healthcare workers who have already worked in a healthcare setting, leadership improvement could consist of implementing basic knowledge on that topic. Consequently, they could reach a higher quality of care practice through working wellness [ 17 ] and overcoming the lack of previous leadership training [ 17 ].

Although very few studies have included in a meta-analysis examined in private healthcare settings [ 35 , 38 , 40 , 41 , 42 ], leadership interventions had more effectiveness in private hospitals than in public hospitals. This result could be related to the continent of origin, and indeed 60.0% of these studies were derived from North America [ 38 , 41 , 42 ], where patients’ outcomes and healthcare workers’ performance could influence available hospital budgets [ 38 , 40 , 41 , 42 ], especially in peripheral healthcare units [ 38 , 41 ]. Private hospitals paid more attention to the cost-effectiveness of any healthcare action and a positive balance of capital for healthcare settings might depend on the effectiveness of leadership interventions [ 40 , 41 , 42 ]. Furthermore, private healthcare assistance focused on nursing performance because of its impact on both a patients’ and an organizations’ outcomes. Therefore, healthcare systems’ quality could improve with effective leadership actions for a nursing team [ 40 ].

Other factors reported in the literature could affect leadership effectiveness, although they were not examined in this meta-analysis. For instance, professionals’ specialty and gender could have an effect on these results and shape leadership style choice and effectiveness [ 1 ]. Moreover, racial differences among members might influence healthcare system performance. Weech-Maldonado et al. found a higher compliance and self-improvement by black-race professionals than white ones after transactional leadership interventions [ 39 ].

Healthcare workers’ and patients’ outcomes depended on style of leadership interventions [ 1 ]. According to the results of this meta-analysis, interventions conducted by a transactional leadership style increased healthcare outcomes, though nevertheless their effectiveness was higher in the cross-sectional studies than in the before–after studies. Conversely, the improvement by a transformational leadership style was higher in before–after studies than in the cross-sectional studies. Both a charismatic and servant leadership style increased effectiveness more in the cross-sectional studies than in the before–after studies. This data shows that any setting required a specific leadership style for improving performance and guideline adherence by each team member who could understand the importance of their role and their tasks [ 1 ]. Some outcomes had a better improvement than others. Focusing on Savage et al.’s outcomes, a transformational leadership style improved checklist adherence [ 31 ]. The time of patients’ transport by Murphy et al. was reduced after conducting interventions based on a charismatic leadership style [ 37 ]. Jodar et al. showed that performances were elevated in units whose healthcare workers were subjected to transactional and transformational leadership-style interventions [ 1 ].

These meta-analysis results were slightly relevant because of the high heterogeneity among the studies, as confirmed by both funnel plots. This publication bias might be caused by unpublished articles due to either lacking data on leadership effectiveness, failing appropriate leadership strategies in the wrong settings or non-cooperating teams [ 12 ]. The association between leadership interventions and healthcare outcomes was slightly explored or gave no statistically significant results [ 12 ], although professionals’ performance and patients’ outcomes were closely related to the adopted leadership style, as reported by the latest literature sources [ 7 ]. Other aspects than effectiveness should be investigated for leadership. For example, the evaluation of the psychological effect of leadership should be explored using other databases.

The study design choice could affect the results about leadership effectiveness, making their detection and their statistical relevance tough [ 12 ]. Despite the strongest evidence of this study design [ 50 ], nowadays, trials about leadership effectiveness on healthcare outcomes are lacking and have to be improved [ 12 ]. Notwithstanding, this analysis gave the first results of leadership effectiveness from the available study designs.

Performance and adherence to guidelines were the main two outcomes examined in this meta-analysis because of their highest impact on patients, healthcare workers and hospital organizations. They included several other types of outcomes which were independent each other and gave different effectiveness results [ 12 ]. The lack of neither an official classification nor standardized guidelines explained the heterogeneity of these outcomes. To reach consistent results, they were classified into performance and guideline adherence by the description of each outcome in the related manuscripts [ 5 , 6 , 12 ].

Another important aspect is outcome assessment after leadership interventions, which might be fulfilled by several standardized indexes and other evaluation methods [ 40 , 41 ]. Therefore, leadership interventions should be investigated in further studies [ 5 ], converging on a univocal and official leadership definition and classification to obtain comparable results among countries [ 5 , 6 , 12 ].

5. Conclusions

This meta-analysis gave the first pooled data estimating leadership effectiveness in healthcare settings. However, some of them, e.g., surgery, required a dedicated approach to select the most worthwhile leadership style for refining healthcare worker performances and guideline adhesion. This can be implemented using a standardized leadership program for surgical settings.

Only cross-sectional studies gave significant results in leadership effectiveness. For this reason, leadership effectiveness needs to be supported and strengthened by other study designs, especially those with the highest evidence levels, such as trials. Finally, further research should be carried out to define guidelines on leadership style choice and establish shared healthcare policies worldwide.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijerph191710995/s1 , Figure S1. Leadership effectiveness by leadership style in before after studies; Figure S2. Funnel plot of before after studies; Figure S3. Leadership effectiveness in cross sectional studies by four leadership style; Figure S4. Funnel plot of cross-sectional studies; Table S1. Before after studies included in this systematic review and meta-analysis; Table S2. Cross-sectional studies included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. All outcomes were performance.

Funding Statement

This research received no external funding.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.R., A.C. (Alessandra Casuccio), F.V. and C.F.; methodology, V.R., M.G., A.O. and C.T.; software, V.R.; validation, G.M., A.B., A.C. (Alberto Carli) and M.C.; formal analysis, V.R.; investigation, G.M., A.B., A.C. (Alberto Carli) and M.C.; resources, A.C. (Alessandra Casuccio); data curation, G.M. and V.R.; writing—original draft preparation, G.M.; writing—review and editing, A.C. (Alessandra Casuccio), F.V., C.F., M.G., A.O., C.T., A.B., A.C. (Alberto Carli) and M.C.; visualization, G.M.; supervision, V.R.; project administration, C.F.; funding acquisition, A.C. (Alessandra Casuccio), F.V. and C.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Ethical review and approval were waived for this study due to secondary data analysis for the systematic review and meta-anlysis.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Thought leadership
• Defense and intelligence

Microsoft and partners: Securing the digital subsea environment through innovation

• By Martin Slijkhuis, Senior Industry Advisor Worldwide Public Sector Defense and Intelligence, Microsoft
• Lloyd Hewitt, Director Business Strategy Worldwide Public Sector Defense and Intelligence, Microsoft
• The Microsoft Cloud

A comprehensive approach to deliver continuous innovation to support and secure the critical underwater infrastructure.

The underwater and littoral environments remain critical to a nation’s economic interests and its ability to exploit marine resources. In addition to the traditional resources, energy production from water and wind are vital resources carried by subsea cables. These cables provide high-speed, low-cost, and reliable connections, with more than 400 cables spanning over 1.3 million kilometers across the world. They are essential for global data transmission, including the financial and digital economies.

In October 2020, NATO Defense Ministers discussed the threat to critical subsea infrastructure posed by increasing state actor capability and aggression. 1 Subsea protection was renewed in 2022 by the United Kingdom Defence Chief, Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, and is a current priority by NATO in the Digital Ocean initiative. 2 Subsea protection is a subject of debate across the globe spanning the Atlantic Ocean, Pacific Ocean, and European seas, which experience highly congested sea-borne infrastructures. 3 Furthermore, in 2024, NATO is exploring the “Digital Ocean” as a pioneering initiative for maritime situational awareness. 4

Protection of the subsea domain relies on allied defense organizations and asset operators developing and deploying innovative solutions and data-driven insights to enhance situational awareness, communication, and decision-making capabilities. However, this is a complex environment, and several technical and operational challenges need to be addressed, such as high latency, low bandwidth, power consumption, security, data quality, multi-domain sensor integration, and processing at the edge.

Transforming Sub-Surface Operations

Leverage the power of data and AI to empower the defense ecosystem

Strategies can be implemented to address these challenges by using industry-leading capabilities and integrating them with hyperscale data fabric. This collaborative effort involves working closely with allied defense organizations, coast guard, government entities, and asset operators to determine innovative ways of deploying a secure and intelligent digital backbone to safeguard critical underwater infrastructure.

Meeting the challenge

Fundamentally, meeting the operational information demands requires the ingestion, analysis, distribution, and visualization of data across the subsea domain:

• Data ingestion : Securely and reliably collect, store, and process data from various sources, such as sensors, devices, satellites, and surface links. Additionally, this may require technology and infrastructure that can operate disconnected for extended periods and with an innate ability to conduct safe, secure syncing when connectivity becomes available.
• Data analysis : Applying artificial techniques, such as anomaly detection, classification, and prediction, to data to generate actionable insights and intelligence. This may require those AI and machine learning models to be developed using high-performance computing and packaged for inferencing at the extreme edge, with processes that allow efficient deployment and an effective feedback loop.
• Data distribution : Sharing and exchanging data across different domains, platforms, and stakeholders in a timely and efficient manner while respecting data governance, together with the ability to support interoperability standards (such as Standardization Agreements [STANAGs], CATL, and others) and also meeting the challenge of denied, degraded, intermitted, and latent network requirements while maintaining security policies.
• Data visualization : Presenting and displaying the data and insights in a user-friendly and intuitive way, such as dashboards, holographic displays, geospatial data infrastructure, and charts to support situational awareness and enhance decision-making.

Meeting the challenges is a significant undertaking and requires a flexible, modular, and interoperable solution. That solution must support and adapt to the dynamic and complex underwater environment, while meeting security requirements and the priorities of allied defense organizations and industry partners.

Therefore, we aim to support the construction of a common reference architecture for a test and development environment based on the principles of a digital software factory. This will enable the implementation and underpin the sustainment of a machine learning ecosystem for an interoperable, underwater infrastructure in support for continuous innovation at speed and at scale.

A proposed solution

At the core, there are four principles of design to help ensure security and intelligence in an underwater environment. They include:

• Hyperscale compute at scale in the cloud and at the edge to enable secure information operations that extends cloud services to the edge, providing a trusted collaboration environment for a wide range of infrastructure partners. The provision of a hyperscale environment also meets the ongoing needs for security, scalability, and reliability.
• Secure data exchange to support a Zero Trust , multi-domain network of asset operations and sensors, while maintaining security and data controls. A secure data exchange capability also meets the operational requirements for trusted data and information sharing across a complex ecosystem of agencies and public and private infrastructures within a multi-dimensional legal framework that cross the boundaries of territorial waters.
• Ubiquitous connectivity through terrestrial and non-terrestrial networks, leveraging current infrastructures at scale and meeting the asymmetric growth in data volume and near real-time data insights. Furthermore, we envision the (future) application of private 5G and satellite backhaul connecting sensors at subsurface, surface, and above surface that enhance risk management and reduce mitigation at sea.
• Assurance and risk management services for the maritime and energy sectors combining the requirement for public and private partnerships in current and future energy infrastructure.

Applying these design principles provides a comprehensive solution for a secure undersea digital backbone. It will:

• Enable enhanced situational awareness for all parties across the operating landscape.
• Facilitate data sharing and exchange across domains, platforms, and stakeholders.
• Ensure security and reliability across the infrastructure and environment.
• Optimize the performance and operations through the provision of undersea digital services for the maritime, energy, and defense sectors.  

Ultimately, delivering enhanced human-machine teaming in military and non-military operations provides the backbone for computational decision-assist capabilities that are data-driven, trusted, and transparent.

Enhance maritime operations with Microsoft solutions

The domain of critical underwater infrastructure is a strategic and challenging environment that requires cloud-enabled innovative and interoperable capabilities to enhance data and network management for undersea operations.

Microsoft for Defense and Intelligence believes this approach will provide a comprehensive and flexible solution that delivers significant benefits for situational awareness, communication, collaboration, security, reliability, performance, as well as efficiency of undersea operations and the critical infrastructure situated in the maritime environment.

For more insights, read the “ Transforming Sub-Surface Operations with Data-Driven Decision Support ” whitepaper.

Empowering militaries. Improving operations. Protecting national security.

1 NATO seeks ways of protecting undersea cables from Russian attacks, Euractiv .

2 Chief of Defence Staff: Russia cutting underwater cables could be ‘an act of war, Froces.net .

3 Australia must do more to secure the cables that connect the Indo-Pacific, ASPI Strategist .

4 NATO Digital Ocean Industry Symposium, NATO .

Related posts

Accelerating industrial transformation with Microsoft AI solutions  

Optimizing factory operations with Microsoft Cloud for Manufacturing  

Microsoft at the 2024 NAB Show: Reimagining media with data and AI  

3 ways Microsoft AI capabilities are helping public finance agencies reignite economies