In any sphere of performance, this would require the leader to assume accountability for his role, provide appropriate guidance and coaching, and immense motivation.
Applying situational leadership to Wiegand and Geller’s (2005) predicament on positive reinforcement gives this argument a stronger base. For instance, Wiegand and Geller (2005) emphasize the need for learning-based focus, goal-setting, planning, self-monitoring, and persistence to attain personal mastery, an important indicator for positive reinforcement. By adopting situational leadership, the leader assumes both directive and supportive roles depending upon the situation and the individual. For a starter, the leader is more directive as well as supportive thus providing a direction; guiding the individual through the task, and providing feedback. For an established performer, the leader will have to delegate tasks, monitor and acknowledge his/her performance. In both situations, the leader is being effective in achieving desired outcomes.
Secondly, Wiegand and Geller (2005) indicate the need for personal control through tasks, opportunities and involvement in order for individuals to be motivated coupled with consistent feedback (Wiegand and Geller, 2005). Situational leadership explains when and why tasks and opportunities may be given to individuals; these aspects are not explained in both style and contingency approaches. Thirdly, reduction in anxiety and fear of failure is also accomplished by adopting a supportive role by the leader based on situation, which will enhance achievement motivation in individuals.
The style approach explains nature and behavior of the leaders, but with little emphasis on situations and also does not consider developmental level of the followers. Northouse (2009) indicates that the style approach is only descriptive of leadership behavior but does not prescribe what