Path-Goal Theory, developed by Martin Evans and Robert House, related to the contingency approach, is derived from the expectancy theory of motivation.
It extracts the essence of the expectancy theory of motivation and the Ohio State leadership research on initiating structure and consideration.
Let’s understand the path-goal theory of leadership;
What is Path-Goal Theory?
Path-Goal Theory states that the leader is responsible for providing followers with the information, support, or other resources necessary to achieve their goals.
Path-Goal theory indicates that a leader must properly set a path to a goal and guide and explain how to achieve the goal successfully to followers.
The term ‘path-goal’ denotes that a leader must illuminate the path to the goal and explain how to make the journey successful to the followers.
The path-goal theory of leadership indicates that a leader is in charge of clarifying the subordinates about the actions and behavior, which, if followed, will lead to goal attainment.
Four Components or Types of Path-Goal Theory
Path goal theory suggests 4 various styles which can be and are used by the same leader in different situations.
Four components or types of the path-goal theory are;
Directive Leadership
A directive leader lets subordinates know what is expected of them, gives guidance and direction, and schedules work according to the expectation.
Directive leadership gives greater satisfaction to ambiguous or stressful tasks when they are highly structured and well laid out.
However, it is likely redundant among employees with high ability or considerable experience.
Supportive Leadership
A supportive leader is friendly and approachable. He is concerned for the subordinate welfare and treats members as equals.
For performing structured tasks, supportive leadership results in high performance and satisfaction from the employees.
Participative Leadership
A participative leader always consults with subordinates, asks for suggestions, and allows participation in decision-making.
Participating in leadership could fail if the employees are not experienced and skilled.
Also, if the number of employees is large, it may slow down the decision-making system and, therefore, the production and performance.
Achievement Oriented Leadership
An Achievement-oriented leader sets challenging goals and expects subordinates to perform at high levels. Encouraging subordinates and showing confidence in subordinates’ abilities is necessary for him.
Achievement-oriented leadership may encourage continued high performance, but it could backfire if the targets are unclear and vague.
Situational Factors Path-Goal Theory
In path-goal theory, leaders can change their style or behavior to meet the demand of situations. What style a leader should select depends on a complex analysis of the situation.
Two situational factors identified by the path-goal theory are;
Subordinates’ characteristics and the Environmental characteristics of the workplace.
Subordinates’ Characteristics
Important personal characteristics include the subordinates’ perception of their abilities and locus of control. If people think they lack ability, directive leadership is the preferable method to lead them.
Participative leadership is preferable if a person has the focus of control. Managers may not be able to change the personal characteristics or the personnel but can shape their approach to leading and managing by understanding them.
Environmental characteristics of workplace
Task structure and workgroup are the two environmental factors. When the structure is high, directive leadership is less effective than when the structure is low.
The nature of the workgroup also affects leadership behavior. The leader must provide support in the workgroup that is incapable of supporting itself.
Using one of the styles contingents upon situational factors, the leader attempts to influence subordinates’ perceptions and motivate them, leading to subordinates’ role clarity, goal expectancy, satisfaction, and performance.
Research on this theory supported the hypothesis that the higher the task structure of the subordinates’ job, the higher the relationship between supportive leaders’ style and subordinates’ satisfaction.
With respect to the second hypothesis—the higher the task structure of the subordinates’ job, the lower the correlation between directive leadership style and subordinates’ satisfaction—received mixed support.