According to Hersey and Blanchard (1995), situational leadership model requires effective leaders “to be able to adapt to their chosen style”, in order to promote the readiness level of the followers through “the stage of development”, which helps them to build and increase their confidence and acquire skills for maximized performance (pp. 208-210).
In this respect, the followers’ target-orientation with the use of task behavior and engagement in decision-making with the help of relationship behavior are encouraged with the following aspects: a) “specific direction and close supervision” of the “telling” style; b) the encouragement of “confidence and motivation of two-way communication” of a coaching style; c) the leader’s “participating” style of recognition and listening during the followers’ s “decision-making and problem-solving”; and d) the leader’s “delegating” style of the followers’ “responsibility for directing their own behavior”.
Considering the leadership vision of Manz and Sims (1995), the followers provide better contribution, sufficient setting of goals and proficient exercising of initiative through facilitated “self-leadership” and increased “self-management”. In this respect, “substantial latitude for the establishment” of the process of taking responsibility and “shifting from dependence to independence” is done with the “encouragement and guided participation” of the “superleaders”, who help “unleash the abilities of followers that surround them ”.
According to Miller (1995), the development process of the subordinates is impeded by the “temporary inequality” are “permanent inequality” of the “superior party”, who legitimizes such inequalities through its ignorance and determination of the ways in which their authorized power “may be acceptably used”. Furthermore, these dominant groups define the roles for the “inferior parties” by encouraging the development of the “personal and psychological characteristics”, which are “pleasing” for the superior parties when the subordinates’ silence, submissiveness, and lack of “assertiveness” are dictated by their desire “to avoid conflict and destructive treatment”. Morrison (1995) stated that, such inequality exists due to the problems of diversity, which are based on the systematic barriers that “restrict the opportunities and rewards available for nontraditional managers”, and are based on the “prejudice treatment of their differences”, restriction “from the required depth and job experience” and unstimulated working environment that “scrutinizes” such workers for possible mistakes.
In addition, maximized readiness, development and performance of the followers can be achieved with the leader’s ability to access requirements of the situation, the superior group’s encouragement of the process for self-leadership affirmation, and the dominant group’s elimination of the diversity and inequality barriers. Additionally, these aspects will help to facilitate the self-doubt stage of the followers, increase their confidence and competence of the acquired skills, and achieve the progress of the organizational performance.