Chapter15-ContingencyTheoriesofLeadership

PAGE

15-

PAGE

1

Copyright2022?McGraw-HillEducation.Allrightsreserved.NoreproductionordistributionwithoutthepriorwrittenconsentofMcGraw-HillEducation.

Part4:FocusontheSituation

Followers

Leader

Situation

Chapter15:ContingencyTheoriesofLeadership

LearningObjectivesforChapter15

LO15-01:GeneralizetheLeader-MemberExchangeTheory.

LO15-02:ArticulatetheSituationalLeadershipModel

LO15-03:ReviewtheContingencyModel.

LO15-04:DescribethePath-GoalTheory.

Chapter15BriefOutline

Introduction

Leader-MemberExchangeTheory

ConcludingThoughtsabouttheLMXModel

TheSituationalLeadershipModel

LeaderBehaviors

FollowerReadiness

PrescriptionsoftheModel

ConcludingThoughtsabouttheSituationalLeadershipModel

TheContingencyModel

TheLeastPreferredCoworkerScale

SituationalFavorability

PrescriptionsoftheModel

ConcludingThoughtsabouttheContingencyModel

ThePath-GoalTheory

LeaderBehaviors

TheFollowers

TheSituation

PrescriptionsoftheTheory

ConcludingThoughtsaboutthePath-GoalTheory

Summary

ExtendedOutlineforChapter15

Introduction

Part1discussedtheprocessaspects,whilePart2wasdevotedtotheleaderandPart3focusedonthefollowers–thepreviouschapterlookedatsituationalcomponentsofleadership

Whileattemptingtofocusonthecomponentofinterestineachsection,therewereoftenoverlappingareasintheleader-follower-situation(L-F-S)model

Also,followingthetraditionofparsimony,theL-F-Smodelattemptedtoprovidethegreatestexplanatorypowerwhileusingthefewestpredictorvariablesaspossible

Theauthorsbelievethethreemostpowerfulpredictorvariablesaretheleader,thefollowers,andthesituation

ReadersshouldrecognizetheL-F-Smodelbynomeansencompassesallpotentialvariablesoroutcomesinunderstandingleadership

Itissafetosaytheworldofleadershipisacomplexone

EvenintheL-F-Smodel,multipleaspectscomeintoplay

Leadershipiscontingentontheinterplayofallthreeaspectsofourmodel,andthesecontingenciesarethefocusofthischapter

Thischapterreviewsfourwell-knowncontingencytheoriesofleadership

Thefirst,leader-memberexchange(LMX)theory,focusesonthecontingenciesandinteractionsbetweentheleaderandthefollowers

Theremainingthreetheoriesaddresscertainaspectsoftheleader,thefollowers,andthesituationandshareseveralothersimilarities

First,becausetheyaretheoriesratherthansomeone’spersonalopinions,thesemodelshavebeenthefocusofaconsiderableamountofempiricalresearch

Second,allimplicitlyassumeleaderscanaccuratelydiagnosekeyaspectsofthefollowersorsituations

Third,all(exceptFiedler’smodel)assumeleadersareflexiblewithrespecttotheirbehavioralrepertoire

Fourth,allassumethatamatchbetweenleaderbehaviorandfollower/situationfactorswillhaveapositiveeffectongroupororganizationaloutcomes

Thesetheoriesmaintainthatleadershipeffectivenessismaximizedwhenleaderscorrectlymaketheirbehaviorscontingentoncertainsituationalandfollowercharacteristics

Thetheoriesaremoresimilarthandifferent

Theydifferprimarilyintermsofthetypesofsituationalandfollowercharacteristicsuponwhichvariousleaderbehaviorsshouldbecontingent

Leader-MemberExchangeTheory

Leader-MemberExchangeTheoryisacontingencytheorythatpositsleadersdonottreatallfollowersasiftheywereauniformgroupofequals

Theleaderformsspecificanduniquelinkageswitheachsubordinate,creatingaseriesofdyadicrelationships–linkagestendtobedifferentiatedintotwomajorgroups

Intheout-group,orlow-qualityexchangerelationships,interpersonalinteractionisrestrictedtofulfillingcontractualobligations

Withothersubordinates(thein-group),leadersformhigh-qualityexchangerelationshipsthatgobeyond“justwhatthejobrequires”

Thesehigh-qualityrelationshipsareindeed“exchanges”asbothpartiesbenefit

Inexchangeforhigherlevelsoftaskperformance,leaderscontributetofollowersempowerment,sponsorshipinsocialnetworks,andmentoring

TherehasbeenconsiderableevolutioninLMXresearchandthinkingovertime

Earlyon,thefocuswasonstagesofdevelopmentastheprocessoftherelationshipdeveloped

Thesestagestypicallyweredescribedasfollows

Role-takinghappensearlyinafollower’sworkexperience

Theleaderoffersopportunitiesandevaluatesthefollower’sperformanceandpotential

Role-makingisthestagewherearoleiscreatedbasedonaprocessoftrustbuilding

Thisisafragilestage,andanyperceivedbetrayalscanleadtothefollowerbeingdroppedfromthedevelopingin-groupandassignedtotheout-group

Routinizationoccursastherelationshipbecomeswellestablished

Itisinthisphasethatsimilarities(forthein-group)anddifferences(oftenaccentuatedfortheout-group)becomecemented

Thebiggestleapforwardcame25yearsafteritsintroduction

Researchersexpandedthedescriptiveportionofthemodel,whichcontinuedtofocusonthedyadicprocessesbetweenleaderandfollower

Themodelalsochangedfrommerelydescribingtheprocesstoproposingaprescriptiveprocessenhancingorganizationaleffectiveness

Nowthemodel

Suggestsbehaviorstheleadershouldengageintoactivelydeveloprelationships

Hencetheprescriptivelabel

Andbuildmorein-grouprelationsacrossthefollowerpool

ThisprocessofleadershipisoutlinedinTable15.1

TheLMXleadership-makingprocessmovesfromlefttorightinthetable

Themodelfocusesontheleader’sresponsibilitytodevelopmorein-groupsandreducethenumberofout-groupmembers

Theleadersshouldworktodevelopspecialrelationshipswithallfollowers

Shouldoffereachfolloweranopportunityfornewroles,responsibilities,andchallenges

Shouldnurturehigh-qualityexchangeswithallfollowers

Shouldfocusonwaystobuildtrustandrespectwithallsubordinates

Resultingintheentireworkgroupbecominganin-groupratherthanaccentuatingthedifferencesbetweenin-groupsandout-groups

ConcludingThoughtsabouttheLMXModel

LMXislargelyabouttheprocessofrelationshipbuildingbetweentheleaderandthefollower

Thesituationhasbarelycreptin,andonlyifweconsiderthemaximizingofthenumberofin-groupstheleadermightdevelop

PerhapsthebiggestlimitationoftheLMX(fromanapplicationprocess),isthatitdoesnotdescribespecificbehaviorsthatleadtohigh-qualityleader-followerrelationships

Ofallthecontingencymodels,LMXcontinuestogenerateresearchaddressing

Followerproactivepersonalities

Theextentoftheleader’ssocialnetwork

Thedegreetowhichemployeesidentifywiththeirsupervisor

Employees’perceptionsofboththeproceduralanddistributivejusticeclimate

Thedegreefollowersperceivetheleaderstreatallmembersfairly–not“equally”–andthattheleaderrepresentsthegroup’snormsandvalues

TheSituationalLeadership?Model

Itseemsfairlyobviousthatleadersdonotinteractwithallfollowersinthesamemanner

Isthereanoptimumwayforleaderstoadjusttheirbehaviorwithdifferentfollowersandtherebyincreasetheirlikelihoodofsuccess?

Andifthereis,whatfactorsshouldtheleaderbasethisbehavioron–thefollower’sintelligence?Personalitytraits?Values?Preferences?Technicalcompetence?

AmodelcalledSituationalLeadershipoffersanswerstothesetwoimportantquestions

LeaderBehaviors

TheSituationalLeadershipmodelevolvedovertime

Itsessentialelementsfirstappearedin1969,withrootsintheOhioStatestudies,inwhichtwocategoriesofleaderbehaviorwereidentified–initiatingstructureandconsideration

AsSituationalLeadershipevolved,sodidthelabels(butnotthecontent)forthetwoleadershipbehaviorcategories

Initiatingstructurechangedtotaskbehaviors,definedastheextenttowhichaleaderspellsouttheresponsibilitiesofanindividualorgroup

Includestellingpeoplewhattodo,howtodoit,whentodoit,andwhoistodoit

Similarly,considerationchangedtorelationshipbehaviors,orhowmuchtheleaderengagesintwo-waycommunication

Includeslistening,encouraging,facilitating,clarifying,explainingwhyataskisimportant,andgivingsupport

Whenactualleaderbehaviorwasstudied,therelativeeffectivenessofthesetwobehaviordimensionsoftendependedonthesituation

NowtheSituationalLeadershipmodelexplainswhyleadershipeffectivenessvariesacrossthesetwobehaviordimensionsandsituations

Itarraysthetwodimensionsanddivideseachofthemintohighandlowsegments

SeeFigure15.1

Certaincombinationsoftaskandrelationshipbehaviorsmaybemoreeffectiveinsomesituationsthaninothers

Sofar,keyfollowerorsituationalcharacteristicsarenotconsidered

Thefourcombinationsoftaskandrelationshipbehaviorswouldincreaseleadershipeffectivenessiftheywerecontingentontheindividualfollower’sreadinesslevel

FollowerReadiness

InSituationalLeadership,followerreadinessreferstoafollower’sabilityandwillingnesstoaccomplishaparticulartask

Anygivenfollowerscouldbelowonreadinesstoperformonetaskbuthighonreadinesstoperformadifferenttask

PrescriptionsoftheModel

Nowthatfollowerreadinessisidentified,letusmoveontocombiningfollowerreadinesslevelswiththefourcombinationsofleaderbehaviors

ThehorizontalbarinFigure15.1depictsfollowerreadinessasincreasingfromrighttoleft

Therearefoursegmentsalongthiscontinuum,rangingfromR1toR4(thehighest)

Assessmentoffollowerreadinesscanbesubjectivealongthiscontinuum

Tocompletethemodel,acurvedlineisaddedthatrepresentstheleadershipbehaviorlikelytobemosteffectivegivenaparticularleveloffollowerreadiness

Toapplythemodel

Leadersfirstassessfollowerreadinesslevelrelativetothetask

Next,averticallineshouldbedrawnfromthecenterofthereadinessleveluptothepointwhereitintersectswiththecurvedline

Thequadrantinwhichtheintersectionoccursrepresentstheleveloftaskandrelationshipbehaviorthathasthebestchanceofproducingsuccessfuloutcomes

Onefurtherstepleadersmaywishtoconsider

Theremaybecaseswhentheleaderwouldliketoseefollowersincreasetheirreadinesslevelforparticulartasksbyimplementingaseriesofdevelopmentalinterventions

Begintheprocessbyassessingthefollower’scurrentlevelofreadiness

Thendeterminetheleaderbehaviorsuitingthatfollowerinthattask

Insteadofusingtheleaderbehaviorprescribed,theleadershouldselectthenexthigherlevelofleadershipbehavior

Thisisdesignedtohelpfollowersintheirdevelopment–seeHighlight15.1

ConcludingThoughtsabouttheSituationalLeadershipModel

Figure15.2showshowthefactorsinSituationalLeadershipfitswithintheL-F-Sframework

Theonlysituationalconsiderationisknowledgeofthetask

Theonlyfollowerfactorisreadiness

Themodelisappealingduetoitscommon-senseapproachandeaseofuse

Unfortunatelythereislittlepublishedresearchtosupportthemodel’suseintheworkplace

The2007modificationofthemodelisfoundtobelesseffectivethantheoriginal

Nevertheless,themodelisusefulingettingleaderstothinkabouthowleadershipeffectivenessmaydependonbeingflexiblewithdifferentsubordinates

TheContingencyModel

Thecontingencymodelofleadershipistheearliestandmostwell-knowntheory,perceivedastheoppositeoftheSituationalLeadershipmodel

SituationalLeadershipemphasizesflexibilityinleaderbehaviors

Thecontingencymodelmaintainsthatleadersaremoreconsistentintheirbehavior

SituationalLeadershipmaintainsthatleaderswhocorrectlybasetheirbehaviorsonfollowermaturitywillbemoreeffective

Thecontingencymodelsuggeststhatleadereffectivenessisdeterminedprimarilyby

Selectingtherightkindofleaderforacertainsituation

Orchangingthesituationtofittheparticularleader’sstyle

Tounderstandthecontingencytheory,wemustlookatthecriticalcharacteristicsoftheleaderandthenatthecriticalaspectsofthesituation

TheLeastPreferredCoworkerScale

Aninstrumentcalledtheleastpreferredcoworker(LPC)scaledeterminesaleader’sgeneralstyleortendency

Thescalehasaleaderthinkofthesingleindividualwithwhomtheyhavethegreatestdifficultyworkingwith–theleastpreferredcoworker

Andthendescribethatindividualintermsofaseriesofbipolaradjectives,suchas

Friendly-unfriendly

Boring-interesting

Sincere-insincere

Thoseratingsarethenconvertedintoanumericalscore

Thescoreisthoughttorepresentsomethingabouttheleader,notthespecificindividualtheleaderevaluated

Currentinterpretationisthattheyidentifyaleader’smotivationhierarchy

BasedontheirLPCscores,leadersarecategorizedintotwogroups

Low-LPCleaders

Motivatedprimarilybythetask

Gainsatisfactionfromtaskaccomplishment

Thus,theirdominantbehavioraltendenciesaresimilarto

TheinitiatingstructureintheOhioStateresearch

OrthetaskbehavioroftheSituationalLeadershipmodel

Iftasksarebeingaccomplishedinanacceptablemanner,low-LPCleadersmovetotheirsecondarylevelofmotivation,formingandmaintainingfollowerrelationships

Leaderswillfocusonimprovingfollowerrelationshipsaftertheyareassuredthatassignedtasksarebeingaccomplishedsatisfactorily

Iftasksarenolongerbeingaccomplishedinanacceptablemanner,low-LPCleaderswill

Refocuseffortsontaskaccomplishment

Andpersistwiththeseeffortsuntiltaskaccomplishmentisbackontrack

High-LPCleaders

Motivatedprimarilybyrelationships

Leadersaresatisfiedbyestablishingandmaintainingcloseinterpersonalrelationships

Dominantbehavioraltendenciesaresimilarto

TheconsiderationbehaviorsintheOhioStateresearch

OrtherelationshipbehaviorsinSituationalLeadership

Ifhigh-LPCleadershaveestablishedgoodfollowerrelationships,theymovetotheirsecondarylevelofmotivation,whichistaskaccomplishment

Ifleader-followerrelationsarejeopardized,high-LPCleaderswillceaseworkingontasksandrefocuseffortsonimprovingfollowerrelationships

ThinkoftheLPCscaleasidentifyingtwodifferentsortsofleaders,withtheirrespectivemotivationalhierarchies–depictedinFigure15.3

Low-LPCleaderswillmove“up”tosatisfyingrelationshipneedswhenassuredthetaskisbeingaccomplished

High-LPCleaderswillmove“up”toemphasizingtaskaccomplishmentwhentheyhaveestablishedgoodfollowerrelationships

TheLPCscalecannotaccuratelyidentifythemotivationhierarchyforindividualswithintermediatescores

Individualswithintermediatescoresmaymoreeasilyorreadilyswitchbetweenbeingtask-orrelationship-orientedleaders

Theymaybeequallysatisfiedbyworkingonthetaskorestablishingfollowerrelationships

SituationalFavorability

Theotherimportantvariableinthecontingencymodelissituationalfavorability

Thisistheamountofcontroltheleaderhasoverthefollowers

Threesubelementsarepresentinsituationfavorability

Leader-memberrelations

Taskstructure

Positionpower

Leader-memberrelationsarethemostpowerfulindeterminingsituationfavorability

Theyinvolvetheextenttowhichrelationshipsbetweenleaderandfolloweraregenerallycooperativeandfriendlyorantagonisticanddifficult

Leaderswhorateleader-memberrelationsashighfeeltheyhavethesupportoffollowersandcanrelyontheirloyalty

Taskstructureissecondinpotencyofdeterminingsituationfavorability

Heretheleaderobjectivelydeterminestaskstructurebyassessing

Whethertherearedetaileddescriptionsofworkproducts,standardoperatingprocedures,orobjectiveindicatorsofhowwellthetaskisbeingaccomplished

Themoretheleadercandeterminetheseaffirmatively,thehigherthetaskstructure

Positionpoweristheweakestofthethreeelementsofsituationalfavorability

Leaderswhohave

Titlesofauthorityorrank

Theauthoritytoadministerrewardsandpunishments

Thelegitimacytoconductfollowerperformanceappraisals

Havegreaterpositionsofpowerthanleaderswholackthem

Therelativeweightsofthesethreecomponents,takentogether,canbeusedtocreateacontinuumofsituationalfavorability

Whenusingthecontingencymodel

Leadersarefirstaskedtorateitemsthatmeasure

Thestrengthofleader-memberrelations

Thedegreeoftaskstructure

Theirlevelofpositionpower

Theseratingsarethenweightedandcombinedtodetermineanoveralllevelofsituationalfavorabilityfacingtheleader

Favorabilitycanbeplottedonacontinuumdividedintooctants,representingdifferentlevelsofsituationalfavorability

TherelativeweightingschemeandeachoftheeightoctantsisshowninFigure15.4

Theoctantsrangefrom1(highlyfavorable)to8(veryunfavorable)

Thehighestlevelsofsituationalfavorabilityoccurwhenleader-memberrelationsaregood,thetaskisstructured,andpositionpowerishigh

Thelowestlevelsoccurwhentherearehighlevelsofleader-memberconflict,thetaskisunstructuredorunclear,andtheleaderdoesnothavethepowerofrewards/punishment

TherelativeweightingofthethreesubelementscanbeseenbytheirorderofprecedenceinFigure15.4–leader-memberrelationsfirst,taskstructuresecond,positionpowerthird

Leaderswithgoodleader-memberrelationswillenjoysituationalfavorabilitynoworsethanoctant4

Leaderswithpoorleader-memberrelationswillfacesituationalfavorabilitynobetterthanoctant5

PrescriptionsoftheModel

Figure15.5describeswhichtypeofleader(highorlowLPC)isfoundtobemosteffective,givendifferentlevelsofsituationfavorability

Thesoliddarklinerepresentstherelativeeffectivenessofalow-LPCleader

Thedashedlinerepresentstherelativeeffectivenessofahigh-LPCleader

Ifthesituationfavorabilityismoderate(octants4,5,6,or7),thengroupsledbyleadersconcernedwithestablishing/maintainingrelationships(high-LPCleaders)seemtodobest

Ifthesituationiseitherveryunfavorable(octant8)orhighlyfavorable(octants1,2,or3)

Thenthosegroupsledbythetask-motivated(low-LPC)leadersseemtodobest

Leaderswilltrytosatisfytheirprimarymotivationwhenfacedwithunfavorableormoderatelyfavorablesituations

Thismeanslow-LPCleaderswillconcentrateonthetask

Andhigh-LPCleaderswillconcentrateonrelationships

Leaderswillbehaveaccordingtotheirsecondarymotivationalstateonlywhenfacedwithhighlyfavorablesituations–seeHighlight15.2

Severalinterestingimplicationofthecontingencymodelareworthadditionalcomment

Sincemotivationhierarchiesandbehaviortendenciesarecreatedoveralifetime,itmaybedifficulttochangethesethroughtraining

Effectivetrainingwouldhelpleadersrecognizeandchangekeysituationalcharacteristicstobetterfirtheirpersonalmotivationalhierarchiesandbehavioraltendencies

Thecontentofleadershiptrainingshouldemphasizesituationalengineeringratherthanbehavioralflexibilityinleaders

Relatedly,organizationscouldbecomemoreeffectiveiftheymatchedthecharacteristicsoftheleaderwiththedemandsofthesituation

Thaniftheytriedtochangetheleader’sbehaviortofitthesituation

High-orlow-LPCleadersinmismatchedsituationshouldeither

Changethesituation

Ormovetojobsbettermatchingtheirmotivationalhierarchiesandbehavioralpatterns

ConcludingThoughtsabouttheContingencyModel

WecanattainaclearerunderstandingofthecontingencymodelbyexaminingitintheL-F-SframeworkasshowninFigure15.6

Taskstructureisafunctionofthesituation

LPCscoresareafunctionoftheleader

Positionpowerisincludedinthesituationalcircle

Leader-memberrelationsareajointfunctionoftheleaderandthefollowers

Theybelongintheoverlappingintersectionoftheleaderandfollowercircles

Predictionsofthemodelareempiricallyvalid,particularlyinlaboratorysettings

Howeverreviewoffieldstudiesshowedsettingsyieldedonlymixedsupportforthemodel

Researchershavecriticizedthemodelfortheuncertaintiessurrounding

ThemeaningofLPCscores

Theinterpretationofsituationalfavorability

TherelationshipsbetweenLPCscoresandsituationalfavorability

However,themodelhasstimulatedconsiderableresearchandisthemostvalidatedofallleadershiptheories

ThePath-GoalTheory

Themostsophisticated(andcomprehensive)ofthefivecontingencymodelsispath-goaltheory

Theunderlyingmechanismdealswithexpectancy–acognitiveapproachtounderstandingmotivationinwhichpeoplecalculate

Effort-to-performanceprobabilities

Performance-to-outcomeprobabilities

Andassignedvalencesorvaluesofoutcomes

Peopleareassumedtomakethesecalculationsonarationalbasis

Path-goaltheoryusesthesamebasicassumptionsasexpectancytheory

Atthemostfundamentallevel,effectiveleaders

Providetheavailabilityofvaluedrewardsforfollowers–thegoal

Thenhelpthemfindthebestwayofgettingthere–thepath

Alongtheway,effectiveleaders

Helpfollowersidentifyandremoveroadblocksandavoiddeadends

Provideemotionalsupportasneeded

Thisincreasesfollowersprobabilityestimatesfor

Effort-to-performanceexpectancies

Performance-to-rewardexpectancies

Thetextfocusesonalaterconceptofthetheorydescribingthreeclassesofvariables

Leaderbehaviors

Followers

Andthesituation

LeaderBehaviors

Thefourtypesofleaderbehaviorinpath-goaltheoryisseeninTable15.2andgivenbelow

Directiveleadership

LeaderbehaviorsaresimilartothetaskbehaviorsinSituationalLeadership

Theytellfollowerswhattheyareexpectedtodo,howtodoit,whenitistobedone,andhowtheyworkfitsinwiththeworkofothers

Theysetschedules,establishnorms,andprovidefollowerexpectations

Supportiveleadership

Thesebehaviorsincludehavingcourteousandfriendlyinteractions

Theyexpressgenuineconcernforfollowers’well-beingandindividualneeds

Theyremainopenandapproachable

BehaviorsaresimilartotherelationshipbehaviorsinSituationalLeadership

Theytreatfollowerequallywhilerecognizingstatusdifferentialsbetweenleaderandfollower

Participativeleadership

Theytendtoshareworkproblemswithfollowers

Theysolicitfollowersuggestions,concerns,andrecommendations

Theyweightheseinputsinthedecision-makingprocess

Achievement-orientedleadership

Theseleaderscanseembothdemandingandsupportive

Theysetchallenginggoals,seekwaystoimproveperformance,andexpectfollowerstoperformattheirhighestlevels

Theyexhibitahighdegreeofongoingconfidencethatsubordinateswill

Putforthenecessaryeffort

Achievethedesiredresults

Assumeevenmoreresponsibilityinthefuture

LikeSituationalLeadership,path-goaltheoryassumes

Leadersnotonlymayusevaryingstyleswithdifferentsubordinates

Butmayusedifferingstyleswiththesamesubordinateindifferentsituations

Path-goaltheorysuggeststhat,dependingonthefollowersandthesituation,thesedifferentleaderbehaviorscan

Increasefollowers’acceptanceoftheleader

Enhancetheirlevelofsatisfaction

Raisetheirexpectationsthateffortwillresultineffectiveperformance

Whichinturnwillleadtovaluedrewards–seeHighlight15.3

TheFollowers

Path-goaltheorycontainstwogroupsoffollowervariables

Thefirstrelatestothesatisfactionoffollowers

Andthesecondrelatestothefollowers’perceptionoftheirownabilitiesrelativetothetasktobeaccomplished

Followerswillactivelysupportaleaderaslongastheyviewtheleader’sactionsasameansforincreasingtheirownlevelsofsatisfaction

Leaderscanonlyincreasefollowers’satisfactionlevelsonlybysomuchbecausesatisfactionalsodependsoncharacteristicsofthefollowersthemselves

Figure15.7showsthatinternal-locus-of-controlfollowersweremoresatisfiedwithleaderswhoexhibitedparticipativebehaviorsthandirectiveleaders

Conversely,external-locus-of-controlfollowersweremoresatisfiedwithdirectiveleaderbehaviorsthanwithparticipativeleaderbehaviors

Followers’perceptionsoftheirownskillsandabilitiescanaffecttheimpactofcertainleaderbehaviors

Followerswhobelievetheyarecapableofperformingataskarenotasapttobemotivatedby,oraswillingtoaccept,adirectiveleaderastheyareaparticipativeone

Theacceptabilityoftheleaderandthemotivationtoperformarepartlydeterminedbyfollowers’characteristics–sobothleaderandfollowerbehaviorsareimportant

TheSituation

Path-goaltheoryconsidersthreesituationalfactorsthatimpacttheeffectsofleaderbehavioronfollowerattitudes–thetask,theformalauthoritysystem,andtheprimaryworkgroup

Eachfactorcaninfluencetheleadershipsituationinoneofthreeways

Asanindependentmotivationalfactor

Asaconstraintonthebehavioroffollowers–eitherpositiveornegative

Orasareward

Path-goaltheorymaintainsthatfollowerandsituationalvariablescanimpacteachother

PrescriptionsoftheTheory

Ingeneral,path-goaltheorymaintainsthatleadersshouldfirstassessthesituationandselectaleadershipbehaviorappropriatedtosituationaldemands

Bymanifestingappropriatebehaviors,leaderscanincreasefollowers’

Effort-to-performanceexpectancies

Performance-to-rewardexpectancies

Orvalencesoftheoutcomes

Theseincreasedexpectanciesandvalenceswillimprovesubordinates’effortlevelsandrewardsattained

Whichinturnwillincreasesubordinates’satisfactionandperformancelevels

Andtheacceptanceoftheirleaders

Perhapstheeasiestwaytoexplainthiscomplicatedprocessiswithanexample

Supposewehaveasetoffollowerswhoareinanewlycreatedworkunitanddonotunderstandtherequirementsoftheirpositions

Thefollowershaveahighlevelofroleambiguity

Accordingtothepath-goaltheory,leadersshouldexhibitahighdegreeofdirectivebehaviorstoreducetheroleambiguity

Theeffort-to-performancelinkwillbecomeclearerwhenleaderstellfollowerswhattodoandhowtodoitinambiguoussituations

Whichinturnwillcausefollowerstoexerthighereffortlevels

Becauseroleambiguityisassumedtobeunpleasant,thesedirectiveleaderbehaviorsandhighereffortlevelsshouldeventuallyresultinhigherfollowersatisfactionlevels

Figure15.8illustratesthisprocess

ConcludingThoughtsaboutthePath-GoalTheory

AsshowninFigure15.9,thecomponentsofpath-goaltheoryfitnicelyintotheL-F-Smodel

Thefourleaderbehav