Situational leadership preferences in Australia

Congruity, flexibility and effectiveness

Gayle C. Avery*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Australian managers’ preferences for situational leadership styles and perceived effectiveness were compared, using both “self” and “other” ratings on Blanchard's latest model. Overall, supervisors and senior/middle managers preferred supportive styles, and avoided delegating and directing. However, they rated themselves as significantly more supportive and less directive than “other” raters indicated. Approximately 50 percent of the sample was able to use more than one style, suggesting that preferences for supportive styles were not simply due to ignorance of alternatives. Subordinates did not consider their managers’ focus on supportive preferences effective (using Blanchard's definition of effectiveness). Comparison of subordinates’ effectiveness scores awarded to the 50 most effective and 50 least effective managers, found agreement between managers and subordinates only in the effective group. In the low-effectiveness group, managers and subordinates displayed little agreement on the managers’ effectiveness. Implications of the findings, limitations of the study and suggestions for further research are discussed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)11-21
Number of pages11
JournalLeadership & Organization Development Journal
Volume22
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Feb 2001

Keywords

  • Australia
  • Effectiveness
  • Flexibility
  • Leadership
  • Management styles
  • Managers

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Situational leadership preferences in Australia: Congruity, flexibility and effectiveness'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this