Historically Black colleges and universities are crucial in preparing students for technical careers, but accreditation and cybersecurity program enrollments are at risk.
Countdown begins—my book launches June 2025!
Situational Leadership Theory, now called the Situational Leadership Model, was developed by Dr. Paul Hersey and Dr. Ken Blanchard while working on the textbook “Management of Organizational Behavior.” It was introduced in 1969 as the “Life Cycle Theory of Leadership,” later renamed in the mid-1970s. Both theorists created their versions: Hersey’s is known as the Situational Leadership Model, while Blanchard’s is called Situational Leadership II (SLII). Hersey and Blanchard defined leadership styles based on the balance of task and relationship behavior, categorizing them into four styles (S1 to S4) that vary in title depending on the version used.
SLL has a direct influence on developing and leading a security environment. This is where the leaders understand capabilities and security states– are we failing or having success? The intersection amounts to Situational Awareness (SA) – where leaders must know their environment or risk failing!
Strategic teams and CISOs must learn onboard environmental knowledge, which drives decisions. Every CISO has had some involvement with SLII and SA. They use the information gained to influence decision-making, generate monthly reports, deliver status updates, and answer critical questions during executive meetings. As CISOs, the information serves as their knowledge base and decision-making authority – such as how to delegate, coach, or support teams. All which leads to accomplishing business objectives. Imagine a corporation where the CISO is unknowledgeable about internal security teams. When emergent situations arise, the ability to make tactical decisions may fail or cause serious risks. Alternatively, when the CISO understands their technology landscape and has accurate information, they are positioned to improve security.
Techbical Expertise
Influnencer
The leadership paradigm presents challenges, especially in environments filled with misinformation and disorganized practices. During my career, I was involved with leadership assignments and experienced various leadership styles. We see similar patterns in the cybersecurity domain as professionals transition between corporations and government agencies.
While serving in the military, one of my responsibilities was to provide professional development training. The curriculum was 40 hours long and offered unique opportunities to learn leadership. It was often described as a “meeting of the minds,” as junior sailors brought various perspectives on what constitutes trustworthy leadership. Topics such as Situational Leadership, Conflict Management, Responsibility, Authority, and Accountability (RAA), and motivational theories were discussed. What I remembered most was that people became leaders through experience and learning. This set the stage for self-leadership and serving others. One fact: when issues arise, it is often a question concerning leadership since they carry the “sword”. Today, we confront similar concerns in the cybersecurity domain.
The cyber domain faces numerous challenges, including incidents, technological changes, workforce demands, and evolving business objectives. Despite these challenges, the environment has made significant strides, and leadership maturity is needed. With a wealth of information available through industry engagements, speaking events, podcasts, and writing, the public continues to wonder: Are we safe, or are we doomed?
Join me on a journey that transforms cybersecurity leadership!
Historically Black colleges and universities are crucial in preparing students for technical careers, but accreditation and cybersecurity program enrollments are at risk.
Top-tier organizations practice and drive cybersecurity protection as a daily requirement.
In this article, I’ll explain the role of cybersecurity leadership in driving internal teams to become “cyber-focused.”