Another approach to understanding leadership is path-goal theory, which states that the leader’s job is to assist followers in attaining their goals and to provide direction or support needed to ensure that their goals are compatible with the goals of the group or organization. Developed by Robert House, path-goal theory takes key elements from the expectancy theory of motivation (see Chapter 12).22 The term path-goal is derived from the belief that effective leaders clarify the path to help their followers get from where they are to the achievement of their work goals and make the journey along the path easier by reducing roadblocks and pitfalls.

House identified four leadership behaviors:

• Directive leader: Lets subordinates know what’s expected of them, schedules work to be done, and gives specific guidance on how to accomplish tasks.

• Supportive leader: Shows concern for the needs of followers and is friendly.

• Participative leader: Consults with group members and uses their suggestions before making a decision.

• Achievement-oriented leader: Sets challenging goals and expects followers to perform at their highest level.

In contrast to Fiedler’s view that a leader couldn’t change his or her behavior, House assumed that leaders are flexible and can display any or all of these leadership styles depending on the situation. For instance, Bono, U2’s leader, lead singer, and lyricist, uses the supportive and participative approaches of the path-goal theory. He includes band members in decision making, believing that their input is necessary to achieve excellence. And he supports them by expressing his appreciation for their talents in contributing to the band’s success and for their role in helping achieve the band’s goal of improving the world through its music and influence.23

As Exhibit 13–4 illustrates, path-goal theory proposes two situational or contingency variables that moderate the leadership behavior–outcome relationship:

Exhibit 13–4

Path-Goal Model

1. those in the environment that are outside the control of the follower (factors including task structure, formal authority system, and the work group) and

2. those that are part of the personal characteristics of the follower (including locus of control, experience, and perceived ability).

Environmental factors determine the type of leader behavior required if subordinate outcomes are to be maximized; personal characteristics of the follower determine how the environment and leader behavior are interpreted. The theory proposes that a leader’s behavior won’t be effective if it’s redundant with what the environmental structure is providing or is incongruent with follower characteristics. For example, some predictions from path-goal theory are:

• Directive leadership leads to greater satisfaction when tasks are ambiguous or stressful than when they are highly structured and well laid out. The followers aren’t sure what to do, so the leader needs to give them some direction.

• Supportive leadership results in high employee performance and satisfaction when subordinates are performing structured tasks. In this situation, the leader only needs to support followers, not tell them what to do.

• Directive leadership is likely to be perceived as redundant among subordinates with high perceived ability or with considerable experience. These followers are quite capable so they don’t need a leader to tell them what to do.

• The clearer and more bureaucratic the formal authority relationships, the more leaders should exhibit supportive behavior and deemphasize directive behavior. The organizational situation has provided the structure as far as what is expected of followers, so the leader’s role is simply to support.

• Directive leadership will lead to higher employee satisfaction when there is substantive conflict within a work group. In this situation, the followers need a leader who will take charge.

• Subordinates with an internal locus of control will be more satisfied with a participative style. Because these followers believe that they control what happens to them, they prefer to participate in decisions.

• Subordinates with an external locus of control will be more satisfied with a directive style. These followers believe that what happens to them is a result of the external environment so they would prefer a leader who tells them what to do.

• Achievement-oriented leadership will increase subordinates’ expectancies that effort will lead to high performance when tasks are ambiguously structured. By setting challenging goals, followers know what the expectations are.

Research findings on the path-goal model have been mixed because the theory has so many variables to examine. Although not every study has found support, we can still say that evidence supports the logic underlying the theory.24 That is, an employee’s performance and satisfaction are likely to be positively influenced when the leader chooses a leadership style that compensates for shortcomings in either the employee or the work setting. However, if the leader spends time explaining tasks that are already clear or when the employee has the ability and experience to handle them without interference, the employee is likely to see such directive behavior as redundant or even insulting.