The questionnaire was directly related to the notion of path-goal leadership theory that “assigns responsibility for a work group’s effectiveness to leaders” that exhibit different behaviors, which may influence the impact of groups (Dixon & Kozloski Hart, 2010, p. 55). The result of the questionnaire for the directive style was 21, which is considered common. I find this result surprising because, in my everyday interactions with other people, I can sometimes be very demanding of those who rely on me for support or instructions, so I expected a higher score. While I have never thought of my followers as servants, I do sometimes expect others to complete assignments according to my instructions.
Regarding the supportive style, the score was 23, which falls into the category of being quite low. I have always thought of myself as a person who supports other people and helps in situations that they cannot manage themselves. Therefore, getting 23 as a score for the supportive style is the most surprising result because my leadership philosophy has always been to offer help. On the other hand, I have to mention that in some cases being supportive can be complicated for me since I prefer working by myself to reach the set goals. This score made me reconsider my views about supporting other people when being a leader; in my everyday life, I will try to pay attention to offering help to those in need to develop as an all-rounded leader.
For participative leadership style 20 points were received, with a common score for the style being 21. This score probably links to my directive and authoritative tendencies in leadership. Despite being ready to give advice and support people when asked to, I often struggle to engage in group work since I feel more confident doing work on my own. On the other hand, I make myself aware of the followers’ suggestions and ideas since they could become instrumental later on in projects; however, I am hesitant to give important tasks to other people who may not be as successful in completing them as I could have been.
As to the score for the achievement-oriented style, 19 is considered a common score, with which I agree. While it is impossible to fulfill every goal, it is important for me to identify what assignments should be completed, how I should approach them, and what time they should take. My achievement orientation is the most prominent feature of my leadership philosophy because, from the earliest age, I have been quite a determined person who liked to achieve every set goal.
According to Landrum and Daily (2012), the task of the leader under the Path-Goal Theory perspective is defining organizational goals, identifying the path to their achievement, and removing any performance obstacles that get in the way. All four approaches included in the questionnaire were related to the Path-Goal Theory and allowed me as a leader to assess my attitudes towards my role and the role of my followers in reaching the established objectives.
The characteristics of the Path-Goal Theory had a positive influence on my personal leadership style. Combining directiveness, support for other people, achievement orientation, and participative leadership will allow me to work on my leadership skills to become a well-rounded leader who can use different approaches depending on the situation at hand.
Dixon, M., & Kozloski Hart, L. (2010). The impact of path-goal leadership styles on work group effectiveness and turnover intention. Journal of Management Issues, 22(1), 52-69.
Landrum, N., & Daily, C. (2012). Corporate accountability: A path-goal perspective. International Journal of Business Insights and Transformation, 4, 50-62.