有關 Blanchard & Hersay的領導生命週 … - 企管

我找了論文了，原文如下：

Situational Leadership, Perception, and Imapct of Power.
Paul Hersey；Kenneth H. Blanchard；Walter E. Natemeyer
Group & Organiztion studies（pre-1986）；Dec. 1979;4, 4；ABI/INFORM Global
pg.418

"Telling" is for low maturity.

People who are unable an unwilling to take responsibility need clear,
specific directions and supervision.

This style is called "telling" because it requires telling people what,
how, when, and where to perform.

It emphasizes directive behavior.

Too much supportive behavior with people at this level maybe seen as
permissive or, more important, as rewarding poor performance.

Telling involves high task behavior and low relationship behavior.

Paul Hersey is president of Leadership Studies Productions,
230 West Third Avenue, Escondido, CA 92025.
Phone 619/741-6595；fax 619/747-9384

Ken Blanchard is cofounder of Blachard Training and Development,
125 State Place, Escondido, CA 92029.
Phone 619/489-5005；fax 619/489-8407.

==================================================================

不過在 1996 年的一篇文章中，

Great ideas revisited:Revisiting the life-cycle theory of leadership
Hersey, Paul;Blanchard, Ken
Training & Development; Jan 1996;50,1;ABI/INFORM Global
pg.42

有提到

The Parisi-Carews also thought that the second level of development of
maturity should be "unwilling and unable," in order to correspond with
the dissatisfaction stage of group development.

意思大致上就跟我們討論的很像，因為環境改變，現在的人所接收的資訊和教育不同，
工作的行為和心態上也不一樣，所以模型的內容設定上應該也要有所更動。

Hersey 回答 I would agree with Ken: Most people enter a new job position
of task at readiness level 2 instead fo 1, which improves their accuracy
in diagnosing development and helps them become more responsive in dealing
with a regression in performence. Leadership intervention can occur anywhere
along the readiness continuum.

翻成白話文就是「媽的！老子用了二、三十年的模型你說改就改喔！」

當然人家原文是說得很多、很婉轉，也有用邏輯定義解釋得很清楚，我只是摘錄一段，
可是講了老半天，他們兩個根本就覺得沒必要改，

然後我又上了 Ken Blanchard 的網站企圖找尋到底目前最新的模型為何，
結果發現這老兄還寫了Situational Leadership II
http://www.blanchardtraining.com/news/event_detail_pw16.cfm
同時 Situational Leadership 這個名詞已經註冊專利了，
當然也有 Training 可以上，

然後另外一位 Paul Hersey 更誇張，
他把 Situational Leadership 還加上了 360 度評估與回饋，
http://www.situational.net/Pages/360.html
然後本來的權變因素 "maturity" 也不知道什麼時候改成 "readiness"，
可想而知，原來的 M1 也被改成了 R1，

可是換湯不換藥，
本來 M1 設定為 "unable and unwilling"，
現在 R1 設定為 "unable and unwilling" or "unable and insecure"，
http://www.leadershipdevelopment.co.uk/docs/LessonsInLeadership.pdf

然後兩個人好像分道揚鑣了，
Ken Blanchard 用 Situational Leadership II 然後領導風格改成
S1：Directing
S2：Coaching（本來是 selling 銷售型）
S3：Supporting（本來是 Participating 參與型）
S4：Delegating

Paul Hersey 還是用 Situational Leadership，
領導風格改為 S1 and S2—The Directive Styles
S2 and S3—The Supportive Styles
S3 and S4—The Empowering Styles

真的不得不佩服這兩位老先生阿，
所以說，管理理論是活的！不是死的！是會變的！
我們學的理論人家現在都還在不斷更新、繼續賺錢呢！

我想結果應該就是這樣了吧，
M1 的設定和之後的發展也搞清楚了，

這個理論還在發展當中，
還希望大家能提供更多的資料讓討論能夠更完整一點，

我想假如今年研究所考這個出來的話，
大家要祈禱分數多一點，
這樣才夠寫阿！

我找資料找得很辛苦ㄋㄟ，
平常十一點就睡覺的人到現在凌晨四點還在這邊打字，
可是為了兼具科學與藝術的管理、為了考研究所的學子們、為了愛與和平，我願意！
感動的人給我點鼓勵吧 ～ Orz 我真的好累喔.....

--