oral 510

PART 1. Scholarly Entry

1. What is the main premise of the article or chapter? (summarize in a few sentences)

This week we discussed Path-Goal Theory in our textbook,  Leadership: Theory and Practice, which emphasizes a leader’s approach in reference to a follower’s motivation and task characteristics. Like the Situational Approach, the Path-Goal Theory identifies four distinct leadership styles when working with followers. In addition to considering followers' characteristics, the theory encourages leaders to assess task characteristics before selecting an appropriate leadership behavior. However, unlike the Situational Approach, Path-Goal Theory places less emphasis on supportive behavior. Instead, it prioritizes analyzing followers' attributes and the specific task requirements to determine the most effective leadership approach.

  2. What are your reactions (both positive, negative, and/or neutral) to the readings, including the theories, premises, methods, findings, implications, arguments, etc.?

This theory was somewhat challenging to grasp in the textbook, which is why I chose it for this assignment. Although the concept was difficult to connect, it was interesting because it focused primarily on how the leader was responsible for outcomes due to the emphasis and making sure their followers had clear direction and a path to achieve their goals. However, I did not find a clear explanation of how this theory connects to leadership behavior. In  Leadership: Theory and Practice (Northouse, 2021), the description of Path-Goal Theory was somewhat ambiguous in explaining how a leader can adapt based on a follower’s motivation and task characteristics.

Additionally, this theory appears to be more rigid and less flexible than the Situational Approach discussed in the previous chapter. Reduced flexibility in leadership seems incongruent with today’s leadership climate. Furthermore, since Path-Goal Theory considers follower motivation as a key variable, it would seem necessary to incorporate greater flexibility to respond effectively to different motivational factors and task characteristics.

  3. What questions, confusions, and/or ideas for future research emerge as you read?

Table 6.1 presents leadership styles as if each type is exclusively paired with one follower characteristic and one task characteristic. However, how do we determine the correct leadership behavior when a follower characteristic from the first row and a task characteristic from the fourth row intersect? Would these elements ever overlap, and if so, how should a leader navigate these intersections?

Additionally, while addressing follower characteristics, task characteristics, removing obstacles, and creating a clear path for followers, how does a leader implement growth tasks? As leaders, our role is to help others navigate their positions, but if we do not give them opportunities to make decisions and find solutions independently, are we truly leading? Are we teaching them to fish, or simply fishing for them? I am specifically considering this theory from the perspective of an executive or upper-level manager, though it could be applied to all levels of management.

   4. What is one position you would take or discussion question you would pose to get your classmates talking?

From an employee perspective, it seems that many followers are driven by self-serving motivations rather than the organization's broader goals. These motivations often include monetary incentives, personal obligations such as family, and career advancement. How can a leader effectively motivate followers in this situation beyond their self-serving interests and align their motivation with organizational success?

Does Path-Goal Theory place too much responsibility on the leader, requiring less engagement from the follower? If so, how does this approach empower followers to develop leadership skills and adopt a leadership mindset?

 

PART 2. Personal Reflection Entry

Path-Goal Theory was not exactly what I expected, but I can see how certain aspects of the theory can be highly beneficial in specific situations. In my personal experience as both a follower and a leader, I connected the idea of finding self-motivation with an annual review process that asked employees to share their professional and personal goals. The first time I completed one of these reviews at my first marketing job after college, my boss ripped it up in front of me. She said, “I love that you want to align your personal goals with the company’s goals, but that’s not what I want for your life.” Her name is Hilary Halstead-Scott, and you may hear me refer to her often in my program because she truly inspired me to become a leader.

What was unique about this moment was that she understood my long-term aspirations. She recognized that my ultimate career goal was not to become the best marketer for a wholesale jewelry supply company, but rather that this role was a stepping stone toward my next position. In a motivational and empowering way, she showed me that she was realistic about my true motivations, and that was okay. Moving forward in our reviews, my personal and professional goals reflected a growth mindset, and she encouraged that.

If I had to guess, Hilary likely applied aspects of Path-Goal Theory in these reviews. She understood what motivated me while also recognizing that, as a new employee, the tasks she assigned required clear direction and structure. Additionally, for me, this approach served as an effective retention strategy because it reinforced that the company was a safe place for growth. It was clear that my personal motivations were acknowledged and supported in a way that ultimately contributed to the broader goals of the organization.