Situational leadership recognises that there is no single best leadership style - the most effective approach depends on the competence and commitment of the person you are leading and the specific task at hand. For engineering managers overseeing teams with diverse experience levels, situational leadership provides a practical framework for adapting your management style to bring out the best in every team member.
Understanding the Situational Leadership Model
The Situational Leadership model, developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, identifies four leadership styles mapped to four development levels. The two behavioural dimensions are directive behaviour (telling people what, how, when, and where to do things) and supportive behaviour (listening, facilitating, encouraging, and involving people in decision-making). Different combinations of these behaviours produce four distinct leadership styles.
The four styles are: Directing (high directive, low supportive) for enthusiastic beginners who need clear instructions; Coaching (high directive, high supportive) for disillusioned learners who need both guidance and encouragement; Supporting (low directive, high supportive) for capable but cautious performers who have the skills but lack confidence; and Delegating (low directive, low supportive) for self-reliant achievers who can operate independently.
The critical insight is that the same person may need different styles for different tasks. A senior engineer who requires Delegating for feature development might need Coaching for people management if they have recently become a tech lead. Situational leadership requires engineering managers to assess competence and commitment at the task level, not the person level.
- Directing - clear instructions for enthusiastic beginners (high directive, low supportive)
- Coaching - guidance plus encouragement for disillusioned learners (high directive, high supportive)
- Supporting - encouragement for capable but cautious performers (low directive, high supportive)
- Delegating - autonomy for self-reliant achievers (low directive, low supportive)
- Assess the development level per task, not per person
Assessing Development Levels in Engineering Teams
Development Level 1 (D1) describes someone who is new to a task but enthusiastic - a junior engineer starting their first project or a senior engineer taking on an unfamiliar technology. They have high commitment but low competence. They need clear direction: specific instructions, defined standards, and frequent check-ins. Avoid overwhelming them with autonomy before they have built foundational skills.
Development Level 2 (D2) is the most challenging stage - competence is growing but commitment has dropped as the person realises how much they do not know. This is the engineer who has been in the role for six months and is frustrated by their slow progress. They need both direction and support: continued guidance on the task combined with coaching, encouragement, and acknowledgement of their progress.
Development Levels 3 and 4 represent increasing competence with varying commitment. D3 engineers have the skills but may lack confidence for specific tasks - they need supportive leadership that builds their self-assurance. D4 engineers are fully competent and committed - they need delegation and autonomy, with the manager stepping back to avoid micromanagement.
Applying Situational Leadership in Practice
During one-on-ones, assess each direct report's development level for their current responsibilities. Ask about their confidence level, where they feel stuck, and what kind of support would be most helpful. Match your leadership style to their responses - a team member expressing uncertainty needs more direction, while one expressing frustration at lack of autonomy needs less.
Code reviews are a practical application of situational leadership. For D1 engineers, provide detailed, instructive review comments that explain the why behind your suggestions. For D2 engineers, balance corrective feedback with encouragement and highlight their improvements. For D3 engineers, ask questions rather than prescribing solutions to build their confidence. For D4 engineers, focus only on high-level concerns and trust their judgement on details.
Project assignment is another area where situational leadership applies. Assign D1 engineers to well-defined tasks with clear requirements. Give D2 engineers stretch assignments with available support. Offer D3 engineers leadership opportunities that build confidence. Provide D4 engineers with ambiguous, high-impact problems where they can exercise full autonomy.
Recognising and Correcting Style Mismatches
The most damaging mismatch is applying a Delegating style to someone at D1 or D2 - giving autonomy to someone who needs direction. This manifests as the new engineer who is left to figure things out on their own, becomes increasingly frustrated, and either produces poor-quality work or disengages entirely. Engineering managers who pride themselves on not micromanaging are particularly susceptible to this error.
The opposite mismatch - applying a Directing style to someone at D3 or D4 - is experienced as micromanagement. A senior engineer who is told exactly how to implement a solution loses motivation and may eventually leave for an organisation that respects their expertise. If you find yourself dictating implementation details to experienced engineers, step back and examine whether your directive behaviour is serving the team or satisfying your own need for control.
Watch for regression - a person's development level can decrease due to role changes, organisational upheaval, or personal circumstances. An engineer who was D4 under their previous manager may temporarily become D2 as they adjust to your leadership style and expectations. Be prepared to increase your directive and supportive behaviour during transitions, then gradually pull back as confidence rebuilds.
Developing Your Leadership Flexibility
Most managers have a default leadership style that feels natural. Some default to Directing because they want to ensure quality. Others default to Delegating because they do not want to be seen as micromanagers. Self-awareness about your default style is the first step toward developing flexibility. Ask your team for feedback on how they experience your management style and where they would like more or less direction.
Practice the styles that feel less natural. If you tend toward Delegating, deliberately practise providing more structure and guidance to newer team members - even though it feels uncomfortable. If you tend toward Directing, practise stepping back and letting experienced engineers make decisions you disagree with, intervening only if the decision poses genuine risk.
Build a development plan for each direct report that maps their current development level for key responsibilities and defines how you will adjust your leadership style as they grow. Share this plan with them - when people understand why you are providing more direction or more autonomy, they are more receptive to your approach and can advocate for the support they need.
Key Takeaways
- There is no single best leadership style - effectiveness depends on the person and the task
- Assess development level per task, not per person - the same engineer may need different styles for different responsibilities
- The most damaging mismatches are too much autonomy for beginners and too much direction for experts
- Most managers have a default style - developing flexibility across all four styles is essential
- Share your approach with direct reports so they understand why your style varies and can advocate for their needs
Frequently Asked Questions
- How do you avoid being seen as inconsistent when using different styles with different people?
- Transparency is key. Explain to your team that you intentionally adapt your management style based on each person's development level and needs. When people understand the reasoning, they see it as personalised support rather than inconsistency. Having explicit conversations about what kind of support each person wants reinforces this - most people appreciate a manager who tailors their approach rather than applying a one-size-fits-all style.
- How does situational leadership work in engineering teams with flat hierarchies?
- Situational leadership applies to any relationship where one person influences another's work, regardless of formal hierarchy. Tech leads, mentors, and senior engineers all exercise leadership with their peers. The principles are the same: assess the other person's competence and commitment for the specific task, and adjust your level of direction and support accordingly. In flat organisations, this flexibility is even more important because influence replaces authority.
- How long should it take for someone to move from D1 to D4?
- There is no fixed timeline - it depends on the complexity of the task, the person's aptitude, and the quality of support they receive. For a straightforward skill like learning a new programming language, an experienced engineer might move from D1 to D4 in weeks. For a complex responsibility like architectural decision-making, the journey might take years. Focus on providing the right support at each stage rather than rushing people through the development levels.
Explore Engineering Manager Templates
Download our situational leadership assessment template, development level tracker, and one-on-one guides designed to help engineering managers adapt their leadership style.
Learn More