Dr. Elattuvalapil Sreedharan (b.

12 June 1932 in Palghat

district, Kerala) is an Indian technocrat, known for completing both the
Konkan Railway and Delhi Metro projects within budget and ahead of
schedule.

Early life
Ellatuvalapil Sreedharan is from Karukaputhoor in Palaghat district of
Kerala. The surname Ellatuvalapil belongs to the famous Tharavad in
this part of Kerala. He was a classmate of T. N. Seshan, the former
Chief Election Commissioner of India in school. He later studied at the
Victoria College in Palghat and then graduated as an engineer from the
Government Engineering College, Kakinada (now JNTU). After a short
tenure as a lecturer in Civil engineering at the Kerala Polytechnic in
Kozhikode and a year at the Bombay Port Trust as an apprentice, he
joined the Indian Railways in its Service of Engineers. This was through
a nation-wide selection procedure and his first assignment was in the
Southern Railway as a Probationary Assistant Engineer in December
1954.

Government career
In 1963, a huge tidal wave washed away parts of Pamban bridge that
connected Rameshwaram to mainland Tamil Nadu. The Railways set a
target of six months for the bridge to be repaired while Sreedharan's
boss, under whose jurisdiction the bridge came, reduced it to three
months. Sreedharan was put in-charge of the execution and he restored
the bridge in 46 days. The Railway minister's Award was given to
him in recognition of this achievement. In 1970, as the deputy chief
engineer, he was put in charge for implementation, planning and design
of Calcutta metro, the first ever metro in India. Cochin Shipyard
launched Rani Padmini, the first ship it built, when he was its
Chairman and Managing Director (CMD). He retired from Indian
Railways in 1990.
[
On contract

The Delhi Metro arrives at a station.

Though he retired, the Government needed his services and he was
appointed the CMD of Konkan Railway on contract in 1990. Under his
stewardship, the company executed its mandate in seven years. The
project was unique in many respects. It was the first major project in
India to be undertaken on a BOT (Build-Operate-Transfer) basis; the
organization structure was different from that of a typical Indian Railway
set-up; the project had 93 tunnels along a length of 82 km and involved
tunneling through soft soil. The total project covered 760 km and had
over 150 bridges. That a public sector project could be completed
without significant cost and time overruns was considered an
achievement by many.
He was made the managing director of Delhi Metro and by mid-2005, all
the scheduled sections were completed by their target date or before
and within their respective budgets. Sreedharan was given the
sobriquet of Metro Man by the media. In 2005, he was awarded the
Chevalier de la Legion d'Honneur (Knight of the Legion of Honour) by
the government of France. He had announced that he would retire by
the end of 2005, but his tenure has been extended by another three
years to oversee the completion of the second phase of Delhi Metro.
Recently he was called in Pakistan for development of the Lahore Metro
plan.

[edit]
Awards and accolades
Railway Minister's Award (1963)
Padma Shri by the Government of India (2001)
Man of the Year by The Times of India (2002)
Shri Om Prakash Bhasin Award for professional excellence in
engineering (2002)
 CII (Confederation of Indian Industry) Juror's Award for
leadership in infrastructure development (2002-03)
One of Asia's Heroes by TIME (2003)
AIMA (All India Management Association) award for Public
Service Excellence (2003)
Degree of Doctor of Science (Honoris causa) from IIT Delhi.
Bharat Shiromani award from the Shiromani Institute, Chandigarh
(2005)
Chevalier de la Legion d'Honneur (Knight of the Legion of
Honour) by the government of France (2005)
CNN-IBN Indian Of the Year 2007: Public Service (2008)[1]
Padma Vibhushan by the Government of India (2008)
The Metro Man of India, Elattuvalapil Sreedharan was born on 12 July
1932 in Kerala. He studied at the Victoria College in Palghat, before
graduating in engineering from the former Government Engineering
College, Kakinada. While he started off his career as a lecturer in Civil
engineering at the Kerala Polytechnic in Kozhikode, he moved to the
Bombay Port Trust as an apprentice, before joining the Indian Railways in
its Service of Engineers. His first major challenge came in 1963, when a
tidal wave washed away portions of the Pamban bridge connecting
Rameshwaram with mainland Tamil Nadu. Though the Railways had set a
target of six months for the bridge to be repaired, Sreedharan got it
restored in a record time of 46 days. He was awarded the Railway
Minister's Award for this achievement. He then served as the deputy chief
engineer, in charge of the implementation, planning and design of
Calcutta Metro in 1970. He also served as the Chairman and Managing
Director of the Cochin Shipyard.

Though he retired from Indian Railways in 1990, the Government called

him out of retirement and he was appointed as the CMD of Konkan
Railway on contract in 1990. This highly challenging project was
completed under his stewardship in a period of seven years. The Konkan
Railway was the first major project in India to be undertaken on a BOT
(Build-Operate-Transfer) basis; the project covering a total of around 760
kms has 93 tunnels and over 150 bridges. He was appointed as the
Managing Director of Delhi Metro and in what is a rarity for projects
undertaken by government agencies in India, most of the scheduled
sections of the Delhi Metro project have been completed well-ahead of
schedule.

His tenure was extended by a further three years in 2005 till the
completion of the second phase of Delhi Metro. He has received many
awards and accolades. He was awarded the Padma Shri by the
Government of India in 2001, the Man of the Year by The Times of India
in 2002 and was named as one of Asia's Heroes by TIME in 2003. Besides,
he was awarded the Chevalier de la Legion d'Honneur (Knight of the
Legion of Honour) by the government of France in 2005.

Get to know about some more Indian Personalities:

Sir Mokshagundam Visvesvaraya E. Sreedharan Kiran Bedi Verghese
Kurien Shahnaz Hussain Indra Nooyi Kalpana Chawla Rakesh Sharma
Reita Faria Sunita Williams

Top Career Opportunities

200000+ Jobs of all specializations Send your resume and be hired!
Naukri.com
Polytechnic University
Explore Polytechnic University Search for colleges online
www.graduateguide.com

. Sreedharan : Magnificent obsession

How many people in Delhi know a man called E.

Sreedharan? He is 70. Should have retired a long
time ago with enough achievements to boast about
to his grandchildren. Most of his working life he
was yet another unknown engineer with the
railways, until he took up the challenge of building
the Konkan Railway that reduced the Mumbai-
Kochi distance by one-third. Everybody said it
wasn’t possible. Also, that it would cost too much
money, will be a white elephant, will be
technologically impossible, will ravage the
environment. The usual reasons why no new
infrastructure can be built in India. There were PILs
filed, processions taken out. He defied them all and
built India’s first, genuine railway project of any
notable size after the British.

When the government was short of money, he

raised public bonds and that was a decade ago
when such things were unprecedented. The
Konkan Railway is to Indian infrastructure what the
Mohali stadium is to Indian cricket.
Sreedharan did not stop there. Everybody laughed
when plans to build a metro rail in Delhi were
announced. All of us knew the chaos even a small,
one-line metro in Kolkata had caused for a decade
and a half. But Sreedharan took up the project. It is
now being built, ahead of schedule, in spite of the
setback of the Japanese sanctions after Pokharan
and without making a tenth of the mess the
construction of an ordinary flyover creates in Delhi.
You can drive around Parliament Street without
noticing the mass of workmen and machines
working underneath and, within a year, unless
another PIL or an ‘anonymous’ complaint to the CBI
or the CVC stops the work, Delhi will see its first
metro line. Yet, how much credit has Sreedharan
got? How often do you see him on television, on
the front pages of our newspapers? Or maybe you
will, when someone envious of what he has
achieved, and the fact that he will leave behind a
monument to his own achievement this city should
be proud of, files a complaint with the CBI, CVC, a
PIL, and so on.

He is a modest man. It is not the self-effacing

version of modesty which politicians wear, but the
genuine kind. E. Sreedharan, architect of the
Konkan Railway and the Delhi Metro Rail, believes
that all his achievements were the result of team
efforts. The 71-year-old civil engineer ("still looking
forward to retirement") has been selected as one
of the most outstanding Asians by Time magazine.
But he takes it in his stride. "Why do you want to
write about me?" he asks this correspondent.
"Write about the project." The project is mapping
Delhi with a world class metro rail network. That is
his focus and passion now.Focus and passion.
Probably these are the keywords. But when he is
asked about the mantra of success, Sreedharan
again downplays his role. "I have been lucky
enough to pick up the right people for the right
job," he says, sitting in his sparsely furnished
office. So why should one write about Sreedharan?
Because he is an extraordinary man, an
extraordinary bureaucrat, who believes in certain
values and has sustained them throughout his life
against umpteen odds. This was the case from the
start. In 1963, disaster struck the Rameshwaram
island when tidal waves washed away the Pamban
bridge connecting it with mainland Tamil Nadu. A
passenger train was swept away, killing hundreds
of persons. The Southern Railway decided to
restore the bridge and set a target of six months.
General Manager B.C. Ganguly advanced the
deadline by three months and the Railway Board
assigned the task to a 31-year-old executive
engineer, Sreedharan. It was a tough task as it was
an old bridge, built by the British in late-nineteenth
century, with 146 spans and a scherzer-a steel
girder which opens up for large vessels to pass
under the bridge.Sreedharan took up the challenge
and advanced the deadline by a month, making
the task tougher. He made the bridge functional in
46 days. He achieved this by the application of
some 'commonplace values'-discipline, punctuality
and honesty-and the introduction of a new work
culture. These traits continue. After the Delhi Metro
Rail Corporation (DMRC) was set up, one of the first
things Sreedharan did as managing director was to
instil a "sense of corporate culture". "In private
organisations run by the Tatas, Birlas and Ambanis,
it is not difficult to stick to deadlines," says
Sreedharan. "The word of the boss is final." In a
government set-up, where there are too many
bosses and too few juniors, it is next to impossible.
But not totally impossible, as Sreedharan has
proved. He believes in working with slim
organisations. (He also believes in being slim.)
While it took more than two decades to build the
Kolkata metro ("The result of bad planning," says
Sreedharan), Delhi stuck to its deadline of
December 2002. In Delhi, he did not have to face
many hurdles. There were no stay orders, no
dharnas. People in the Old Delhi area (Chandni
Chowk) did object to their houses being
demolished . But the DMRC used the tunnel boring
machine technology to solve this problem. It has
ensured that there were no major traffic
bottlenecks, no demolition. He is focused and
passionate about his work. His insistence on
deadlines had earned him 20 transfers in the early
years of his career. Sreedharan, who has been in
the Indian Railways for 50 years, had successfully
completed one mega-project earlier-the Konkan
railway between Maharashtra and Mangalore. The
rail-line was mooted in 1990 by then railway
minister George Fernandes, while talking to
Railway Board members. After stating it,
Fernandes himself dismissed it as impossible.A
month later, Sreedharan went to Fernandes with a
well-charted out plan. "I told him that we will have
to work in a different fashion," he recalls. Probably
his enthusiasm infected Fernandes, who got
cabinet approval for the project within three days.
Maharashtra and Kerala immediately agreed to the
project, but Karnataka chief minister Virendra Patil
objected.Sreedharan, then a member of the
Railway Board, went to Maharashtra, Karnataka,
Goa and Kerala and got all the necessary approvals
before his 'retirement'. But retirement was not to
be as Fernandes wanted him to head the West
Coast Railway. Thus the Konkan Rail Corporation
was born. It created an engineering marvel by
laying a rail network across the mountainous
Western Ghats. Sreedharan insists he does not
have any special skills to get the best out of
people. "I always found that people cooperate if
you work for a good cause," he says. Is he a
workaholic? "No," says he. "I am committed to my
work but not a workaholic." His colleagues agree
that he does not believe in making people stay on
in the office if they have finished their given task.
"He even takes a nap in the afternoons," says a
colleague. Sreedharan, who was born in Chattanur,
a small village near Palakkad in Kerala, does not
have much of a social life. "Once in a while I go to
classical music concerts," he says. He also makes it
a point to visit Kerala at regular intervals to meet
relatives. "Very often, he travels by lower class,"
says a colleague. A favourite journey is, of course,
through the Konkan rail stretch, which he can
watch with proprietary pride." I have four children,"
says he. "We were not really well-off. But my wife,
Radha, took care of all those problems." One son is
an engineer but he did not join the Railways
despite his father encouraging him. "I believe that
when an officer is given a particular task, he
should be made responsible to finish it," says
Sreedharan. He almost has an obsession with
deadlines. (In the early years of his career, it
earned him 20 transfers.) Every officer in DMRC
keeps a digital board which shows the number of
days left for the completion of the next target. On
April 23, it was 160 days left for the Tis Hazari-Tri
Nagar section of the Delhi Metro to be complete.
So, where he does go from there? "Retirement," he
says with a twinkle in the eyes. He thanks God for
giving him success. "I am a religious person but
religion does not mean going to temples. To me it
means leading a virtuous life," he says. Success
and virtue. A rare combination in today's world.
But they run side by side in Sreedharan's life. Like
rail tracks.
The first day of operation for the New Delhi Metro last December
was chaotic: more than 1 million people showed up to ride the South
Korean-made trains, and they urinated on platforms, pushed
emergency-stop buttons for a lark and filched 30,000 train tokens.
Afterward, the Metro authorities ran local-radio ads laying out the
rules. "No drunkenness," they intoned, "no abusive language, no
milk cans and pets allowed. No tampering with switches and
gadgets."

Discipline has been restored, which is hardly surprising considering

the man who built the Delhi Metro: Elattuvalapil Sreedharan, a
decidedly grownup railroad engineer, who was set to retire before
being chosen to head the $2 billion project in 1997. Sreedharan
insisted on creating the Metro his own way. He assembled a
motivated team of professionals—bypassing India's notorious
bureaucracy—and visited subway systems around the world for tips.
And he completed the first line well within budget—unusual in
Indian infrastructure projects—largely by cracking down on
kickbacks. "The contractors are grateful not to have to give bribes
to get a project," says Sreedharan, sitting rigidly in his New Delhi
office.

That achievement has spread pride—and hope. "If they can do more
things like this," says Kunti Sharma, a housewife and frequent Metro
passenger, "New Delhi will compare to any other capital in the
modern world." Sreedharan has consulted with Hyderabad and
Bombay about possible metros. Meanwhile, the 70-year-old plans to
stay in New Delhi until the Metro is complete in 2007. "I have laid
the road map," he says. And given India one of its smoothest rides
in memory.
 FAMOUS MODELS
Situational Leadership
This is a term that can be applied generically to a
style of leadership, but that also refers to a
recognised, and useful, leadership model. In
simple terms, a situational leader is one who can
adopt different leadership styles depending on the
situation. Most of us do this anyway in our
dealings with other people: we try not to get angry
with a nervous colleague on their first day, we
chase up tasks with some people more than others
because we know they'll forget otherwise.

But Ken Blanchard, the management guru best

known for the "One Minute Manager" series, and
Paul Hersey created a model for Situational
Leadership in the late 1960's that allows you to
analyse the needs of the situation you're dealing
with, and then adopt the most appropriate
leadership style. It's proved popular with
managers over the years because it passes the two
basic tests of such models: it's simple to
understand, and it works in most environments for
most people. The model doesn't just apply to
people in leadership or management positions: we
all lead others at work and at home.

LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOUR

Blanchard and Hersey characterised leadership

style in terms of the amount of direction and of
support that the leader gives to his or her
followers, and so created a simple grid:

Directing Leaders define the roles and tasks of

the 'follower', and supervise them closely.
Decisions are made by the leader and
announced, so communication is largely one-
way.

Coaching Leaders still define roles and tasks, but

seeks ideas and suggestions from the
follower. Decisions remain the leader's
prerogative, but communication is much more
two-way.

Supporting Leaders pass day-to-day decisions,

such as task allocation and processes, to the
follower. The leader facilitates and takes part
in decisions, but control is with the follower.

Delegating Leaders are still involved in decisions

and problem-solving, but control is with the
follower. The follower decides when and how
the leader will be involved.

Effective leaders are versatile in being able to

move around the grid according to the situation, so
there is no one right style. However, we tend to
have a preferred style, and in applying Situational
Leadership you need to know which one that is for
you.

DEVELOPMENT LEVEL

Clearly the right leadership style will depend very

much on the person being led - the follower - and
Blanchard and Hersey extended their model to
include the Development Level of the follower.
They said that the leader's style should be driven
by the Competence and Commitment of the
follower, and came up with four levels:

High Competence Experienc

D4
High Commitment skilled tha
High Competence Experienc
D3
Variable Commitment / quickly
Some Competence May have
D2
Low Commitment situation
Low Competence Generally
D1
Low Commitment motivatio
Development Levels are also situational. I might
be generally skilled, confident and motivated in my
job, but would still drop into Level D1 when faced,
say, with a task requiring skills I don't possess. For
example, lots of managers are D4 when dealing
with the day-to-day running of their department,
but move to D1 or D2 when dealing with a
sensitive employee issue.

SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP

You can see where this is going. Blanchard and

Hersey said that the Leadership Style (S1 - S4) of
the leader must correspond to the Development
level (D1 - D4) of the follower - and it's the leader
who adapts.
For example, a new person joins your team and you're asked
to help them through the first few days. You sit them in front
of a PC, show them a pile of invoices that need to be processed
today, and push off to a meeting. They're at level D1, and
you've adopted S4. Everyone loses because the new person
feels helpless and demotivated, and you don't get the invoices
processed.
On the other hand, you're handing over to an experienced
colleague before you leave for a holiday. You've listed all the
tasks that need to be done, and a set of instructions on how to
carry out each one. They're at level D4, and you've adopted
S1. The work will probably get done, but not the way you
expected, and your colleague despises you for treating him
like an idiot.

But swap the situations and things get better. Leave detailed
instructions and a checklist for the new person, and they'll
thank you for it. Give your colleague a quick chat and a few
notes before you go on holiday, and everything will be fine.

By adopting the right style to suit the follower's

development level, work gets done, relationships
are built up, and most importantly, the follower's
development level will rise to D4, to everyone's
benefit.

To make Situational Leadership work, you need to

go through a training programme, where you'll
learn about how to operate effectively in all the
Leadership Styles, and how to determine the
Development Level of others. And the Blanchard
organisation would be happy to tell all about their
training programmes worldwide.

You can also get the basics from Ken Blanchard's

"Leadership and the One Minute Manager."

Situational leadership theories in organizational studies are a

type of leadership theory, leadership style, and leadership model that
presumes that different leadership styles are better in different
situations, and that leaders must be flexible enough to adapt their style
to the situation they are in.
A good situational leader is one who can quickly change leadership
styles as the situation changes. Most of us attempt to do this in our
dealings with people: we try not to get angry with a new employee, and
we remind forgetful people. The model doesn't apply only to people in
leadership or management positions; all people lead others at work, at
play, and at home.

Contents [hide]
1 The Hersey and Blanchard model
0 1.1 Leadership styles
1 1.2 Development levels
2 1.3 Leadership/development
matching
3 1.4 SL II
2 See also
3 Resources

[edit]
The Hersey and Blanchard model
As a leadership model, the best known example was developed by Paul
Hersey, a professor who wrote a well known book "Situational Leader"
and Ken Blanchard, the management guru who later became famous
for his "One Minute Manager" series. They created a model of
situational leadership in the late 1960s in their work Management of
Organizational Behavior (now in its 9th edition) that allows one to
analyze the needs of the situation, then adopt the most appropriate
leadership style. It has been proven popular with managers over the
years because it is simple to understand, and it works in most
environments for most people.
The model rests on two fundamental concepts; leadership style, and
development level.

[edit]
Leadership styles
Blanchard and Hersey characterized leadership style in terms of the
amount of direction and support that the leader provides to their
followers. They categorized all leadership styles into four behavior
types, which they named S1 to S4:
S1: Directing/Telling Leaders define the roles and tasks of the
'follower', and supervise them closely. Decisions are made by the
leader and announced, so communication is largely one-way.
S2: Coaching/Selling Leaders still define roles and tasks, but
seek ideas and suggestions from the follower. Decisions remain
the leader's prerogative, but communication is much more two-
way.
S3: Supporting/Participating Leaders pass day-to-day
decisions, such as task allocation and processes, to the follower.
The leader facilitates and takes part in decisions, but control is
with the follower.
S4: Delegating Leaders are still involved in decisions and
problem-solving, but control is with the follower. The follower
decides when and how the leader will be involved.
Of these, no one style is considered optimal or desired for all leaders to
possess. Effective leaders need to be flexible, and must adapt
themselves according to the situation. However, each leader tends to
have a natural style, and in applying Situational Leadership he must
know his intrinsic style.

[edit]
Development levels
The right leadership style will depend on the person being led - the
follower. Blanchard and Hersey extended their model to include the
Development Level of the follower. They stated that the leader's chosen
style should be based on the competence and commitment of her
followers. They categorized the possible development of followers into
four levels, which they named D1 to D4:
D1: Low Competence, High Commitment - They generally
lack the specific skills required for the job in hand. However, they
 are eager to learn and willing to take direction.
D2: Some Competence, Low Commitment - They may have
some relevant skills, but won't be able to do the job without help.
The task or the situation may be new to them.
D3: High Competence, Variable Commitment - They are
experienced and capable, but may lack the confidence to go it
alone, or the motivation to do it well or quickly.
D4: High Competence, High Commitment - They are
experienced at the job, and comfortable with their own ability to
do it well. They may even be more skilled than the leader.
Development Levels are also situational. I might be generally skilled,
confident and motivated in my job, but would still drop into Level D1
when faced, say, with a task requiring skills they don't possess. For
example, many managers are D4 when dealing with the day-to-day
running of their department, but move to D1 or D2 when dealing with a
sensitive employee "issue"
The development level is now called the performance readiness level
(Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2008). It is based on the Development
levels and adapted from Hersey's Situational Selling and Ron
Campbell of the Center for Leadership Studies has expanded the
continuum of follower performance to include behavioral indicators of
each readiness level.
R1: Unable and Insecure or Unwilling - Follower is unable
and insecure and lacks confidence or the follower lacks
commitment and motivation to complete tasks.
R2: Unable but Confident or Willing - Follower is unable to
complete tasks but has the confidence as long as the leader
provides guidance or the follower lacks the ability but is motivated
and making an effort.
R3: Able but Insecure or Unwilling - Follower has the ability
to complete tasks but is apprehensive about doing it alone or the
follower is not willing to use that ability.
R4: Able and Confident and Willing - Follower has the ability
to perform and is confident about doing so and is committed.
[edit]
Leadership/development matching
Blanchard and Hersey said that the leadership style (S1 - S4) of the
leader must correspond to the development level (D1 - D4) of the
follower. Furthermore it is the leader who must adapt, not the follower.
To get the most of situational leadership, a leader should be trained in
how to operate effectively in various leadership styles, and how to
determine the development level of others.
For an example of a mismatch, imagine the following scenario. A new
person joins your team and you're asked to help him through the first
few days. You sit him in front of a PC, show him a pile of invoices that
need to be processed today and then excuse yourself to a meeting. He
is at level D1, and you've adopted S4, an obvious mismatch. Everyone
loses because the new person feels helpless and demotivated and you
don't get the invoices processed.
For another example of a mismatch, imagine you're handing over your
duties to an experienced colleague before you leave for a holiday.
You've listed all the tasks that need to be done and given him a detailed
set of instructions on how to carry out each one. He is at level D4, and
you've adopted S1. The work will probably get done, but your colleague
will despise you for treating him like an idiot.
But leave detailed instructions and a checklist for the new person, and
they'll thank you for it. Give your colleague a quick chat and a few notes
before you go on holiday, and everything will be fine. By adopting the
right style to suit the follower's development level, work gets done,
relationships are built, and most importantly, the follower's development
level will rise, to everyone's benefit.

[edit]
SL II
In 1979 Ken Blanchard and wife, Marjorie Blanchard formed a separate
company now called The Ken Blanchard Companies where they and a
group of founding associates continue to work on further refinements to
the original Situational Leadership Model. The development of
Situational Leadership® II has been the collaborative work of Blanchard
associates over the years (Ken Blanchard, Margie Blanchard, Don
Carew, Eunice Parisi-Carew, Fred Finch, Laurie Hawkins, Drea Zigarmi,
and Patricia Zigarmi).
The work of Drs. Don Carew and Eunice Parisi-Carew with Group
Development theory was the initial impetus to change the original
model. In particular, the Carews cited the extensive research of
Lacousiere, who found there is a sequence to the stages of
development that groups and teams go through over time. The initial
stage is orientation (Stage 1), when group members first come together
and are eager to participate, but are unsure of how to work together.
Next comes the seemingly inevitable occurrence of dissatisfaction
(Stage 2), as working together turns out to be more difficult than
anticipated. If the group is able to work through this dissatisfaction, it
moves into resolution or integration (Stage 3), where members learn
how to work together. If interactions continue to improve, the group
reaches the final stage of production (Stage 4). The Carews were able
to show that the leadership styles needed to move a group through
these stages correspond to the flow of the four leadership styles of
Situational Leadership® II.
Style 1, Directing, is appropriate for orientation, where goals have to be
made clear and roles defined. Style 2, Coaching, is necessary to move
through the dissatisfaction stage, since the group still needs direction
but now also needs support, encouragement, and listening behaviors.
Once a group gets to the resolution or integration stage, the leader’s
role could change to Style 3, Supporting, as a facilitator is needed. Now
direction is provided by the group. Finally, in the production stage, an
outside observer would not be able to determine the designated leader.
Here, Style 4, Delegating, is appropriate.
The research influenced changes in the original model. The belief being
that it is preferred to hire either winners—people who are experienced
and already developed in a particular job and can operate effectively
with an S3 or S4 style—or else potential winners who need to be
trained. Potential winners, are often low in competence (knowledge and
skills), but are high on commitment because of their initial motivation
and eagerness to learn this particular job and their confidence in their
learning capacity. Thus the second level of development/maturity
should be “unable and unwilling” (some to low competence/low
commitment) to correspond with the dissatisfaction stage of group
development.
Again, consistent with the stages of group development. When people
take on a new task where they are inexperienced, after awhile
disillusionment sets in. They are often frustrated and overwhelmed—the
task is much harder than they thought it would be because they need
more time and energy to gain competence than they had anticipated.
When that occurs, while they have some competence (more than they
had in the beginning) their motivation and confidence drops.The new
thinking required reconstructing the representation of the stages of
development in order to depict individual growth that moved from an
enthusiastic beginner to a disillusioned learner, on to a capable but
cautious performer, and finally to a self-directed achiever. The result
was a continuum from “developing” to “developed.”

[edit]
See also

© Chimaera Consulting Limited 1999.