Register to read the introduction…
Source: Leadership Quaterly; Fall96, Volume 7 Issue 3, p317, 5p
Research findings on Robert House’s Path Goal Theory are basically on the relationship between the leader’s style of leadership and the outcomes of the subordinates’ works. Bass once noted that Path Goal Theory is “needs to complement only what is missing in a situation to enhance the subordinate’s motivation, satisfaction, and performance”. However, this theory hasn’t been modified and extended since House develops the theory in 1971. So, it’s not very practical and beneficial for the organizations to apply the theory into their performance.
The author of this article, Linda and Chester suggested ways that might extend the Path Goal Theory. It is a three step method which is: 1. To identify the key functions for subordinates’ motivation, performance and satisfaction. 2. Identify the key points of sources that support the goal achievement other than the leadership style, that is, the task, coworkers, professional training, …show more content…
According to Path Goal Theory, a leader’s behavior should be so motivational to an extent that it makes subordinates contingent for an effective performance. A leader should coach, motivate, guide, support and reward the subordinates whom successfully participated for the achievement of an effective performance.
Directive Leaders should be the ones who guides and let the followers to know what are the expected outcomes to be, schedule their works and show them how to achieve the goals. Supportive Leaders should be friendly and approachable, showing concern towards subordinates, observe them and their needs, prioritize their satisfaction to make their performance better. Participative Leaders talks and interacts with the subordinates and asks support and advice from them, includes their suggestions into decision making. While Achievement Oriented Leaders are the ones who set challenging goals and make the subordinates excited to perform their best performance.
Refer to Appendix 4 (170
Research findings on Robert House’s Path Goal Theory are basically on the relationship between the leader’s style of leadership and the outcomes of the subordinates’ works. Bass once noted that Path Goal Theory is “needs to complement only what is missing in a situation to enhance the subordinate’s motivation, satisfaction, and performance”. However, this theory hasn’t been modified and extended since House develops the theory in 1971. So, it’s not very practical and beneficial for the organizations to apply the theory into their performance.
The author of this article, Linda and Chester suggested ways that might extend the Path Goal Theory. It is a three step method which is: 1. To identify the key functions for subordinates’ motivation, performance and satisfaction. 2. Identify the key points of sources that support the goal achievement other than the leadership style, that is, the task, coworkers, professional training, …show more content…
According to Path Goal Theory, a leader’s behavior should be so motivational to an extent that it makes subordinates contingent for an effective performance. A leader should coach, motivate, guide, support and reward the subordinates whom successfully participated for the achievement of an effective performance.
Directive Leaders should be the ones who guides and let the followers to know what are the expected outcomes to be, schedule their works and show them how to achieve the goals. Supportive Leaders should be friendly and approachable, showing concern towards subordinates, observe them and their needs, prioritize their satisfaction to make their performance better. Participative Leaders talks and interacts with the subordinates and asks support and advice from them, includes their suggestions into decision making. While Achievement Oriented Leaders are the ones who set challenging goals and make the subordinates excited to perform their best performance.
Refer to Appendix 4 (170