Saturday, August 27, 2016

A511.3.3.RB - Directive and Supportive Behaviors



Kenneth Blanchard, et. al., developed a leadership approach widely known as Situational Leadership in which are defined four leadership styles or behaviors, and four follower categories.  (Northouse, 2016, Chapter 5) Included in the four leadership styles are two categories of behavior: directive and supportive.  The directive behavior is, as the name suggests, a “one-way” communication wherein the leader tells the subordinate (or follower) what to do, how to do it, when to get it done, etc.  Generally, the leader gives detailed instructions and the follower does as they are directed.  The supportive behavior is a “two-way” street wherein the leader and follower are mutually engaged in determining the what, how, and timeframe, etc. of the task (or tasks) to be performed by the follower.  Supportive behavior encompasses a participative approach that provides for emotional and social support to the follower on the part of the leader.

With these basic definitions in mind, I would like to reflect on my directive versus supportive behaviors as I exhibit (or exhibited) them in my various roles as a leader, follower, parent, child, friend, and I’ll even take the risk and throw in spouse.

I am an only child who grew up with a strict mother and father, where I learned my work ethic starting at a young age.  I had a 21-year career in the military and have now been a defense support contractor and consultant for approximately 11.5 years. I have been married for 33 years, and I am the father of two sons, now ages 28 and 26.  In my military career, I had many opportunities to lead teams, both small and large, and to direct a large acquisition program organization.  I also had many opportunities to follow leaders, most of whom I considered quite good at their jobs.  In my role as a support contractor and consultant to various acquisition program offices, I have had ample opportunity to serve as a follower, often as a follower of people in leadership roles who are considerably younger than I am.  This can present some interesting challenges and, if I’m lucky, can also provide me with mentoring opportunities.

But let’s start with my role as a child.  I was certainly a follower and throughout my younger years especially, my parents were directive leaders.  This is not to say that they were cold-hearted or distant; but when I was young, I was told what to do, how to do it, and generally when it must be done.  I had assigned household chores, like keeping my room clean, emptying the waste baskets in the house, and helping both parents with odd jobs around the house, in the yard, etc.  When my parents told me to do something, they always expected me to comply with their instructions and not have to be told twice.  Of course, I oftentimes violated those instructions and suffered the consequences.  I can remember, as I grew older, my dad’s seemingly favorite words of sage advice: “If you had spent half the time doing what I asked instead of complaining, you’d have it done by now.”  Those words were usually followed by the consequences of not doing what I was told, and having to be told more than once.

In my later teens, and living with my parents in northern Michigan, we heated our house with a wood furnace.  I worked at a local restaurant, often in the evenings, and didn’t arrive home until after midnight on a Friday night.  But I experienced many 7:00 am wakeup calls from my dad, telling me that we were going to go cut a load of wood.  My father was a carpenter and worked extremely hard his entire life (which is probably why he is now 85 and in many ways more fit than I am).  He expected his only son to grow up used to hard work without complaint.  I cut a lot of wood.  I did a lot of chores.  And though I didn’t completely realize it at the time, those experiences were preparing me to work hard, and diligently, as an adult.  My parents prepared me well for my military career.  Rarely was my parent’s leadership style a “two-way street”, but in my late teens there were instances where their leadership, their parenting, did both allow and even encourage me to participate in decision-making, as well as allowing me more flexibility on when I got things done (as long as they were done!).

When I became a parent myself, I expected things to work with my two sons in basically the same way that they had worked between me and my parents.  The thing is, my wife and I never really discussed our parenting approach before we had our first son.  My wife is one of five children who grew up in a small house, and whose parents were more lenient with the chores, with direction, and with consequences.  Looking back now, I can see that my wife’s parents had their hands full with five kids and the kind of directive approach that I had experienced growing up wasn’t nearly as feasible when dealing with five children instead of one.  The point is that my wife and I found ourselves at nearly opposite ends of the spectrum when it came to parenting.  I attempted to be directive and establish consequences for misbehavior.  My wife was almost entirely participative in her approach with our sons, even when they were quite young.  After some parenting-skills disagreements, I dialed down my directive approach and more or less followed her lead.  As a result, our sons usually listened to me and di what they were told; my wife had a harder time in that department but in the end she is today much closer to our sons than I am.  My sons respect me and my work ethic, but they usually turn to their mother first when they need help since mom always provided the social and emotional support in their formative years.

Given my upbringing, I was more or less ideally suited to the military’s typically directive style among the leaders for whom I worked as a junior officer.  I followed orders without question (although I did ask clarifying questions if I didn’t understand the task at hand).  As more work was pushed my way, I simply worked harder and longer because that’s what my dad did.  As the years went by, this became problematic for me when I would constantly be consumed by work to the detriment of family time.  I did not really know how to balance work and family, even though I heard that refrain countless times from senior military leaders.  So I missed much of my sons growing up, which is something I will always regret.  But my military bosses thought highly of my work ethic and I fared well on my appraisals.

As I began to assume leadership positions in my military career, I started out highly mission oriented and low on the social-emotional support scale.  I had grown up, and I had spent the first few years in the military, believing that mission was everything and people are just supposed to do as they are told.  Besides that, I was an introvert so the social side of things was not my strong suit early on.  But after five years on active duty, the Air Force sent me to the Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) to get my Master of Science in Systems Management.  I was lucky enough there to be exposed to professors who knew, and taught, the theories of people like Dr. W. Edwards Deming.  I quickly began to see that the people side of the whole leadership thing really mattered.  And one of Deming’s cardinal rules was that if an organization’s output was not right, it was the fault of management and not the workers.

When I finished at AFIT, I was assigned to an acquisition program office where I was given a significant leadership role.  And I began to act on the people side of the equation, while ensuring that our mission was successful.  I applied what I had learned about Deming, and about Blanchard (from my Organizational Behavior class at AFIT).  This introvert found that I actually liked the social-emotional aspects of leading teams.  I began to have off-sites; I structured meetings and reviews to give my followers direct participation in decisions about strategy, and execution.  Over the years, starting with that first assignment after AFIT, I have naturally tended toward what Blanchard would call a “supporting” and “coaching” leader.  I find that I’m happier at work, and my followers are happier at work, and we are more successful at accomplishing the mission when I hover between those two leadership behaviors.

Now that I’m a support contractor and consultant, I am back to being a follower.  I am fortunate in that I usually get to be a behind-the-scenes supporting and coaching leader of sorts in providing recommendations to my clients and even sometimes being asked to mentor some of the more junior government people.  I just need to be careful.  Some government personnel (military and civilian), and leaders, know how to best employ a support contractor’s skills and experience and tap into that knowledge for the benefit of all.  Other government folks can view contractors as “second-class citizens” who should be seen but not heard; those types of people take offense if a contractor “steps out of his lane” and tries to make suggestions or give recommendations about the conduct of the business of running acquisition programs.  I can work with both types of people in that regard, and I can still salute smartly and do my work quietly when required.  But I much prefer the two-way street when I am a follower.

Now we’re down to my roles as a friend and spouse.  As a friend, I am never directive.  In my mind, friendship is by definition a two-way street.  If asked specifically for advice, I will offer steps that I would take, or the things that I would do in a given situation.  But I would never presume to direct a friend.  Unfortunately, when my wife and I were first married, I did assume the role of a director at times.  Looking back, I don’t really know why I would have thought that was appropriate, but my upbringing and my youth (and lack of relationship experience) probably had a lot to do with it.  Needless to say, my directive approach as a spouse was met with more than a little resistance and I gradually began to learn (often the hard way) that directive behavior in marriage is the wrong approach.  I have that message, and these days I do not direct anything.  Sometimes my wife does, but that’s okay (listen up husbands!).  Marriage is a lifelong learning process and I continue to work on my supportive, social-emotional skills as a spouse.  I have found that I am a problem solver, so when my wife is concerned about something and brings it to me, I have to be careful not to try to immediately “fix” the problem.  Part of being a good husband is about listening and empathy, and not jumping in with directions in any situations unless specifically asked to do so…and even then one must be careful.  If anything is a true two-way street, it is (and must be) in marriage.

I know that Blake and Mouton have sharply criticized the Situational Approach (Robert Blake and Jane Mouton, 1981), asserting that only the Management Grid theory yields the one, best leadership style, but I find the Situational Leadership approach by Blanchard extremely useful and directly applicable to the real-world fact that leadership situations or scenarios vary.  Common sense tells us that we cannot act one way, and one way only in all situations.  For me, paying attention to directive behavior and social-emotional behavior has proven an important guide in my leadership, followership, friendship, marital and other roles that I have in life.  Adjusting those two behavioral factors in dealings with my adult children, as well as my aging parents, I find to be necessary with each situation that arises.

No comments:

Post a Comment