HILL’S LEADERSHIP MODEL 2
Hill’s Leadership Model
The lack of leadership impedes the performance of a team. Supervision of a team is the
main cause for the failure of self-management teams to appropriately develop and lead to
enhancements in quality and productivity of lives for the employees. Despite the existence of
various team leadership models, perhaps the most popular is Hill’s Team model. The reason for
its popularity is that it offers the leader a mental direction to facilitate in the diagnosis of team
issues (Northouse, 2007). After the problems have been identified, appropriate action can be
taken to rectify the team problems. The model is mainly founded on the argument presented by
functional leadership that a leader should monitor the team. Necessary steps should also be taken
to make sure that there is effectiveness in the team while trying to meet its objectives (Bligh et
al., 2006). The major components of the model are leadership decisions, actions and
effectiveness of the team. The mode describes three leadership actions that affect team success.
The first leadership action described in the model is about leadership decisions. In this
action, a leader is required to monitor both the external and internal settings. He is also
mandated to conduct information search in order to understand the functioning of the team.
Information searching entails getting feedback from members of the team, carrying out surveys
about team assessment, evaluation of team outcomes and networking with people who are not in
the team (Bligh et al., 2006). The first action further entails the leader organizing, interpreting
and structuring the information to enable beneficial action plans to be made (Northouse, 2007).
A leader is also required to ascertain the appropriate action that he/she should take basing on the
information obtained. Finally, the leader should ascertain the team’s life cycle and offer
leadership where it is needed. In this step, there is need for the leader to conduct motivational
coaching at the beginning, providing consultative coaching at the middle of the process and offer
educational coaching towards the end of the process. From personal experience, I have been
affected by this first decision. In the past, one of my leaders was reluctant to get feedback from