Path-Goal Leadership Theory Literature Review
TABLE OF CONTENTS
No | Item | | Page No | 1.0 | Introduction | - | 1 | 2.0 | Background of Path-Goal Theory | - | 3 | 3.0 | Formulation & Development of Path-Goal Theory | - | 7 | 4.0 | Basic Concept an Analysis of Path-Goal Theory | - | 18 | 5.0 | Issues & Criticisms of Path-Goal Theory | - | 22 | 6.0 | Impact of Path-Goal Theory | | 24 | 7.0 | Related Examples | - | 25 | 8.0 | Recommendation | - | 28 | 9.0 | Conclusion | - | 30 | | References | - | 31 |
1.0 INTRODUCTION Path Goal Theory also known as the path–goal theory of leader effectiveness or the path–goal model is a theory proposed by Martin Evans and Robert House, which is then developed by Robert House who is an Ohio State University graduate, in 1971 and revised it in 1996. This theory suggests how leaders of any organization can be effective towards their subordinates in order to achieve organizational goals. The theory also states that a leader's behavior is contingent to the satisfaction, motivation and performance of her or his subordinates. The revised version also argues that the leader engages in behaviors that complement subordinate's abilities and compensate for deficiencies. The path–goal model can be classified both as a contingency or as a transactional leadership theory.
This theory was first introduced in 1971 which was created based on Victor Vroom’s ‘Expectancy Theory of Motivation’. The name ‘Path-Goal’ itself shows that the leader should clarify their follower’s performance and remove any obstacle which comes between them and their goals. It is best when the leader focuses on each of the follower’s individual goals and helps them to improve their positive behavior towards achieving the organizational goal as a whole.
In 1996, a reformulated theory has been presented by Robert J. House from The Wharton School of Management which specifies leader behaviors that enhance subordinate empowerment and satisfaction and
No | Item | | Page No | 1.0 | Introduction | - | 1 | 2.0 | Background of Path-Goal Theory | - | 3 | 3.0 | Formulation & Development of Path-Goal Theory | - | 7 | 4.0 | Basic Concept an Analysis of Path-Goal Theory | - | 18 | 5.0 | Issues & Criticisms of Path-Goal Theory | - | 22 | 6.0 | Impact of Path-Goal Theory | | 24 | 7.0 | Related Examples | - | 25 | 8.0 | Recommendation | - | 28 | 9.0 | Conclusion | - | 30 | | References | - | 31 |
1.0 INTRODUCTION Path Goal Theory also known as the path–goal theory of leader effectiveness or the path–goal model is a theory proposed by Martin Evans and Robert House, which is then developed by Robert House who is an Ohio State University graduate, in 1971 and revised it in 1996. This theory suggests how leaders of any organization can be effective towards their subordinates in order to achieve organizational goals. The theory also states that a leader's behavior is contingent to the satisfaction, motivation and performance of her or his subordinates. The revised version also argues that the leader engages in behaviors that complement subordinate's abilities and compensate for deficiencies. The path–goal model can be classified both as a contingency or as a transactional leadership theory.
This theory was first introduced in 1971 which was created based on Victor Vroom’s ‘Expectancy Theory of Motivation’. The name ‘Path-Goal’ itself shows that the leader should clarify their follower’s performance and remove any obstacle which comes between them and their goals. It is best when the leader focuses on each of the follower’s individual goals and helps them to improve their positive behavior towards achieving the organizational goal as a whole.
In 1996, a reformulated theory has been presented by Robert J. House from The Wharton School of Management which specifies leader behaviors that enhance subordinate empowerment and satisfaction and
References: 4.3 During Initial Formulation of Path-Goal Theory (1971) The first complete description of path-goal leadership theory was provided by House in 1971 These behaviors were described generally but not defined operationally as part of the theory. 4.4 During First Refinement of Path-Goal Theory (1974)