House’s Path-Goal Theory

                               House’s Path-Goal Theory

1. Introduction 

          Arising out the open system approach is an essentially “pragmatic theory” which agrues that  there is no one theory at present which can guarantee the effectiveness of an organization. Management has to select a mix of theories which seem to meet the needs of the organization and its internal and external pressures at a particular period in its life. This has been termed a contingency approach to management.(G A Cole,1996)

                    

          House’s path-goal theory is a well-know situational contingencies approach that developed by Robert House which has its root in the expectancy model of motivation-Situational or contingency  leadership theories including contingency leadership theory, leadership continuum, path-goal theory, normative leadership theory,and situational leadership that some theories had been presented and some theories will be also learned. The term “path-goal” is used because of its emphasis on how a leader influences subordinates’ perceptions of both work goals and personal goals, and the links, or paths, found between these two sets of goals.

        

2. Review Literature

            The theory assumes that leader’s key function is to adjust his or her behaviors to complement situational contingencies. Robert House developed the path-goal leadership model which used to determine employee objectives and to clarify how to achieve them using one of four style(Directive , Supportive , Achievement-oriented ,and Participative Leadership Style). (Lussier,2000) It focuses on how leaders influence employee’s perceptions of their goals and the path they follow toward goal attainment. As shown in Figure 1. (Schermerhorn,2011)

Leadership Factors		Contingency Factors		Subordinate Outcomes
Leadership Behaviors: Directive Supportive Achievement-oriented Participative		Follower Attributes: Authoritarianism Internal-external orientation Ability   Work-Setting Attributes: Task Formal authority system Primary work group		Job Satisfaction: Job leads to valued rewards   Acceptance of Leader: Leader leads to valued rewards   Motivational Behavior: Expectancy that effort leads to performance Instrumentality that such performance is the path to valued rewards

Figure 1 : Summary of major path-goal relationships in House’s leadership approach.

 

The figure shows four types of leader behavior are :

1. Directive leadership  has to do with spelling out the subordinates’ tasks; it is much like the initiating structure mentioned earlier.
2.  Supportive leadership focuses on subordinate needs and well-being and on promoting a friendly work climate; it is similar to consideration.
3. Achievement-oriented leadership emphasizes setting challenging goals, stressing excellence in performance, and showing confidence in the group members’ ability to achieve high standards of performance.
4. Participative leadership focuses on consulting with subordinates, and seeking and taking their suggestions into account before making decisions.

                  

              The figure 2 provides a summary of when directive, supportive, participative, or achievement-oriented leadership styles should be used.

	Path-Goal Theory: When to Use Directive, Supportive, participative, or Achievement-Oriented Leadership
	Directive Leadership Unstructured task Inexperienced workers Workers with low perceived ability Workers with external locus of control Unclear formal authority system	Supportive Leadership Structured, simple, repetitive tasks Stressful, frustrating tasks When workers lack confidence Clear formal authority system
	Participative Leadership Experienced workers Workers with high perceived ability Workers with internal locus of control Workers not satisfied with rewards Complex tasks	Achievement-Oriented Leadership Unchallenging tasks

The figure2 : provides a summary of  directive, supportive, participative, or achievement-oriented leadership styles

 

          Two categories of situational contingency variables were  covered  :   subordinate attributes and work-setting attributes

           1. Subordinate attributes

House argues that when the leader is able to compensate for thing lacking in the setting, subordinates are likely to be satisfied with the leader. For example, the leader could help remove job ambiguity or show good performance could lead to an increase in pay. Performance should improve as the paths by which (1) effort leads to performance—expectancy—and (2) performance leads to valued rewards—instrumentality—becomes clarified. The leader behaviors are adjusted to complement the situational contingency variables in order to influence subordinate satisfaction, acceptance of the leader, and motivation for task performance.

            2. Work-setting attributes

          Important subordinate characteristics are authoritarianism (close-mindedness, rigidity), internal-external orientation (i.e., locus of control), and ability. The key work-setting factors are the nature of the subordinates, tasks (task structure), the formal authority system, and the primary workgroup.

 

3. Discussion

           Path-Goal Theory (Schermerhorn,2011)Just as its name suggests, path-goal theory states that leaders can increase subordinate satisfaction and performance by clarifying and clearing the paths to goals and by increasing the number and kinds of rewards available for goal attainment. Said another way, leaders need to make clear how followers can achieve organizational goals, take care of problems that prevent followers from achieving goals, and then find more and varied rewards to motivate followers who achieve those goals. 

          However, leaders must meet two conditions in order for path clarification, path clearing, and rewards to increase followers’ motivation and effort. First, leader behavior must be an immediate or future source of satisfaction for followers. Therefore, the things you do as a leader must please your followers today or lead to future activities or rewards that will satisfy them in the future.

          In contrast to Fiedler’s contingency theory, path-goal theory assumes that leader can change and adapt their leadership styles. Figure 3 illustrates this process, showing that leader change and adapt their leadership styles contingent on the subordinate they are leading or the environment in which that subordinate works.

	Basic Assumptions of Path-Goal theory
	To Increase Subordinate Satisfaction and Performance, leaders need to: Clarify paths to goals. Clear paths to goals by solving problems and removing roadblocks. Increase the number and kind of rewards available for goal attainment. Do things that satisfy followers today or will lead to future rewards or satisfaction. Offer followers something unique and valuable beyond what they’re experiencing or can already do for themselves.
	Sourse: R.J. House & T.R. Mitchell, “Path-Goal Theory of Leadership,” Journal of Contemporary Business 3 (1974): 81-97

Figure 3 : illustrates this process, showing that leader change and adapt their leadership styles contingent on the subordinat

 

4. Conclusion

          Path-goal theory specific that leader behaviors, should complement rather than duplicate the characteristics of follower’s work environments. There are three kinds of environment contingencies: task structure, the formal authority system, and the primary work group. ( As in Fiedler’s contingency theory, task structure is the degree to which the requirements of a subordinate’s task are clearly specified. When task structure is low and tasks are unclear, directive leadership should be used, because it complements the work environment. However, when task structure is high tasks are clear, directive leadership duplicates what task structure provides and is not needed. Alternatively, when tasks are stressful, frustrating, or dissatisfying, leaders should respond with supportive leadership.) (Chuck Williams,2000) Path-goal theory suggesting that the primary functions of a leader are to make valued or desired rewards available in the workplace and to clarify for the subordinate the kinds of behavior that will lead to those rewards. Managers can use four types of leader behavior to clarify subordinates’ paths to goal attainment. Personal characteristics of the subordinate and environmental characteristics within the organization both must be taken into account when determining which style of leadership will work best for a particular situation.(Griffin,1993)

            Although Path-goal theory is more complex and specific than the leadership continuum, it also has been criticized because it is difficult to know which style to use when. As we can see,many situations occure in which the six situational factors are exactly as presented. (Lussier,2000)

 

5. Reference

Chuck Williams.2000.Management : South-Western College

          Publishing United States of  America :708-713.

G A Cole.1996. Management Theory  Practice : Ashford Colour  Press.

          Great Britain :74.

Ricky W. Griffin. 1993. Management : Houghton Mifflin  Company.

          United States of  America :403-404.

Robert N. Lussier.2000. Management Fundamentals (Concepts  

          ,Application,Skill Development):South-Western College

          Publishing.United States of  America :464-467.

Schermerhorn;Hunt;Osborn;andUHL-Bien.2011.Organizationl Behavior

        : John Wiley and Sons,Inc. United States of  America:313-315.