Study questions:

• What are the two primary goals of a leader/manager?
• Think of the most common categories of situations that might prevent workers from achieving these goals?
• For each category of goals, what can the leader do to remove the barrier and get the worker back on the path toward the goal?
• When might people prefer directive leadership (relate this to locus of control)

• Offering rewards for achieving  performance goals
• Clarifying paths towards these goals
• Removing obstacles to performance

• Directive leadership: Specific advice is given to the group and ground rules and structure are established. For example,  clarifying expectations, specifying or assigning certain work tasks to be followed.
• Supportive leadership: Good relations are promoted with the group and sensitivity to subordinates' needs is shown.
• Participative leadership: Decision making is based on  consultation with the group and information is shared with the  group.
• Achievement-oriented leadership: Challenging goals are set and high performance is encouraged while confidence is shown in the groups' ability.

There is also evidence that more directive leadership is preferred by certain people under some circumstances as shown in the figure below:

• Self assessment: Locus of Control--

Supportive behavior increases satisfaction by the group, especially in stressful situations, while directive behavior is suited to uncertain and ambiguous situations. It is also proposed that leaders who have influence upon their superiors can increase group satisfaction and performance.

The figure below shows how environmental and subordinate contingency factors may moderate leadership behaviors to produce task and interpersonal outcomes.

House's 1971 article on Path-Goal Theory argued that a subordinates' motivation, satisfaction and work performance are dependent on the leadership style chosen by their superior. Multiple dimensions of leadership behavior were examined in the theory including: leader initiating structure, consideration, authoritarianism, hierarchical influence, and degree of closeness of the supervision. Each of the dimensions was "analyzed in terms of path-goal variables such as valence and instrumentality" (House, 1971, pp.321). "Initiating structure" was defined as the extent to which the leader imposes psychological structure on subordinates, such as clarifying their expectations, specifying or assigning certain work tasks for them to follow. Consideration was defined as the degree to which a leader provides a friendly, supportive, and helpful environment for subordinates. There were two principal findings from this classic study: Subordinate role ambiguity was considered to have a negative correlation with initiating structure. That is, if a subordinate has a habitual or accustomed job, then a high level of initiating structure will decrease employee satisfaction. In contrast, an employee has a highly ambiguous role with the organization then a high level of initiating structure by the leader would lead to high levels of employee satisfaction. In terms of consideration, for subordinates who have routine jobs, a greater consideration by the leader should result in increased job satisfaction. For professional individuals and those whose position is less determined by specific job duties, consideration has been found to have almost no effect.  (Adapted from Dick Ecelbarger's Educational Leadership Portfolio, University of Arizona)

Links

• Application to Jesse Ventura's administration--
• Robert House biography--
• Path-Goal reformulated theory (technical paper)

House, R. J. (1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Leadership Review, 16, 321-339.