Relationship between Path-Goal Theory and Follower Motivation
Path-Goal theory is a tool for leaders that are flexible enough to adjust their leadership model in order to motivate employees to perform in a certain way. Such motivation comes from the leader-inspired belief that all the efforts will be fruitful (Dixon & Hart, 2010). The probable cause for a person to choose this paradigm as his or her team-management approach is the desire to make employees see the outcomes of their work and motivate them for achievements. In addition, path-goal theory application mainly requires a follower who is oriented towards the result. They want their employees to have the same vision and give them the reasons why they should strive for achieving the goal. Landrum and Daily (2012) do not identify a clear correlation between the situation and follower’s motivation arguing that companies have always struggled for success and better result. Therefore, leaders are generally motivated towards the result, which does not require them to use only the path-goal theory.
Leadership Behavior and its Impact on Employees
One of the leadership behaviors the theory identifies is directive. It is described as a model that requires setting clear objectives and removing obstacles arising before employees so that they can successfully accomplish the task at hand (Landrum & Daily, 2012). Ideally, it should provide team members with an understanding of the goals and the path towards them in an unclear or ambiguous situation. This style is supposed to work with highly dogmatic employees who need clear guidance on the task. With a defined and strictly set objective, instructions on the process and an outline of what is expected of them, the group members are to be fully equipped and prepared to perform at full capacity. However, Landrum and Daily (2012) argue that in practice this paradigm does not concern itself with the question of employee accountability. In this model, subordinates do not know about the standards and codes that relate to the tasks in ambiguous situations.
Strengths and Weaknesses of a Path-Goal Theory
Path-Goal theory has a number of positive sides that are outlined in Landrum and Daily’s article. The most obvious and strong point in it is result-motivated employees. When the members of the team understand what they do and why they do it, they tend to be more effective. The theory also provides certain flexibility in the choice of appropriate leadership style depending on the situation. It seems to be a positive feature as there appears to be no universal approach to team management and the variety of tasks requires different models of operation. As a tool designed for leaders to become more effective, the theory provides a useful insight into how different leadership styles can be applied to team members depending on their characteristics and what results they will achieve (Landrum & Daily, 2012).
The theory also has certain weaknesses. The main disadvantage is that it might be quite complex to apply in practice as it encompasses many concepts of management and leadership to consider. Moreover, the theory’s effectiveness is hard to assess, and because of it, its acceptance in the managerial society is not universal. Another flaw in the theory’s design is that it only deals with the influence of a leader on an employee giving little attention to the reverse process. Landrum and Daily (2012) also suggest that the absence of a clear code of conduct and supervisory agents makes the leadership models provided by the theory somewhat unstructured. In addition, sustainable businesses need to have clear guidance on the responsibility of each team member, which the theory does not provide.
References
Dixon, M. L., & Hart, L. K. (2010). The impact of path-goal leadership styles on workgroup effectiveness and turnover intention. Journal of Managerial Issues, 22(1), 52-69.
Landrum, N. E., & Daily, C. M. (2012). Corporate accountability: A path-goal perspective. International Journal of Business Insights & Transformation, 4(3), 50-61.