Path-Goal Theory
INSTRUCTIONS
After reading Chapter 6, Path-Goal Theory, complete the following exercise.
- Pick one (1) of the leaders depicted in the short video titled “Leadership Styles Through Movie Scenes” above. https://youtu.be/cYA7eMoxUBA
- Explain how their style motivates their follower(s). It may not be a style you agree with, but in some way, each style serves to motivate and influence.
YOU SHOULD SUBMIT
- Submit your responses in the Write Submission box and only include the questions and answers. Make sure to copy the questions above and paste them into the submission box. Then, provide your answers below the questions, and do not forget to use in-text citations where applicable. Do not write in the assignment Comments box.
APA Citation for reference page: Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (9th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. In-Text Citation: (Northhouse, 2021)
In-Text Citation: (Northhouse, 2021)
Chapter 6 Path-Goal Theory
“Path–goal theory discusses how leaders motivate followers to accomplish designated goals. Drawing heavily from research on what motivates followers, path–goal theory first appeared in the leadership literature in the early 1970s in the works of Evans (1970), House (1971), House and Dessler (1974), and House and Mitchell (1974). The stated goal of this theory is to enhance follower performance and follower satisfaction by focusing on follower motivation and the nature of the work tasks. At its inception, path–goal theory was incredibly innovative in the sense that it shifted attention to follower needs and motivations, and away from the predominant focus on tasks and relationships.
In contrast to the situational approach, which suggests that a leader must adapt to the development level of followers (see Chapter 5), path–goal theory emphasizes the relationship between the leader’s style and the characteristics of the followers and the organizational setting. For the leader, the imperative is to use a leadership style that best meets followers’ motivational needs. This is done by choosing behaviors that complement or supplement what is missing in the work setting. Leaders try to enhance followers’ goal attainment by providing information or rewards in the work environment (Indvik, 1986); leaders provide followers with the elements they think followers need to reach their goals. According to House (1996), the heart of path–goal theory suggests that for leaders to be effective they must “engage in behaviors that complement subordinates’ environments and abilities in a manner that compensates for deficiencies and is instrumental to subordinate satisfaction and individual and work unit performance” (p. 335). Put simply, path–goal theory puts much of the onus on leaders in terms of designing and facilitating a healthy and productive work environment to propel followers toward success.
According to House and Mitchell (1974), leadership generates motivation when it increases the number and kinds of payoffs that followers receive from their work. Leadership also motivates when it makes the path to the goal clear and easy to travel through coaching and direction, removing obstacles and roadblocks to attaining the goal, and making the work itself more personally satisfying (Figure 6.1). For example, even in professions where employees are presumed to be self-motivated such as in technical industries, leaders can greatly enhance follower motivation, engagement, satisfaction, performance, and intent to stay (Stumpf, Tymon, Ehr, & vanDam, 2016). Relatedly, research (Asamani, Naab, & Ansah Ofei, 2016) indicates that follower satisfaction and intent to leave are greatly impacted by a leader’s communicative style. In other words, employing path–goal theory in terms of leader behavior and the needs of followers and the tasks they have to do could hold substantial implications for organizations that seek to enhance follower engagement and motivation while also decreasing turnover.”
“Summary
Path–goal theory was developed to explain how leaders motivate followers to be productive and satisfied with their work. It is a contingency approach to leadership because effectiveness depends on the fit between the leader’s behavior and the characteristics of followers and the task.
The basic principles of path–goal theory are derived from expectancy theory, which suggests that followers will be motivated if they feel competent, if they think their efforts will be rewarded, and if they find the payoff for their work valuable. A leader can help followers by selecting a style of leadership (directive, supportive, participative, or achievement oriented) that provides what is missing for followers in a particular work setting. In simple terms, it is the leader’s responsibility to help followers reach their goals by directing, guiding, and coaching them along the way.
Path–goal theory offers a large set of predictions for how a leader’s style interacts with followers’ needs and the nature of the task. Among other things, it predicts that directive leadership is effective with ambiguous tasks, that supportive leadership is effective for repetitive tasks, that participative leadership is effective when tasks are unclear and followers are autonomous, and that achievement-oriented leadership is effective for challenging tasks.
Path–goal theory has three major strengths. First, it provides a theoretical framework that is useful for understanding how various styles of leadership affect the productivity and satisfaction of followers. Second, path–goal theory is unique in that it integrates the motivation principles of expectancy theory into a theory of leadership. Third, it provides a practical model that underscores the important ways in which leaders help followers.
On the negative side, several criticisms can be leveled at path–goal theory. First, the scope of path–goal theory encompasses so many interrelated sets of assumptions that it is hard to use this theory in a given organizational setting. Second, research findings to date do not support a full and consistent picture of the claims of the theory. Third, path–goal theory does not account for gender differences in how leadership is enacted or perceived. Fourth, path–goal theory does not show in a clear way how leader behaviors directly affect follower motivation levels. Also, the theory assumes that leaders have the skills to allow them to switch between various leadership behaviors needed by differing followers, and it assumes that leader behavior is the primary means to motivate followers. Last, path–goal theory is predominantly leader oriented and fails to recognize the interactional nature of leadership. It does not promote follower involvement in the leadership process.”
