Leadership behavior

How can leaders show the path to goal achievement?

Andy Weeger

Neu-Ulm University of Applied Sciences

April 6, 2025

Path-goal theory

A path to what?

Figure 1: Dilbert comic strip on goal setting

Discussion

What have you learned about the path-goal theory?

What is the essence of the theory and
what classes of leader behavior does it specify?

Opening remarks

Leaders must guide and support their followers along the path to achieving their goals (House 1996).

A leader is “one or more people who selects, equips, trains, and influences one or more follower(s) who have diverse gifts, abilities, and skills and focuses the follower(s) to the organization’s mission and objectives causing the follower(s) to willingly and enthusiastically expend spiritual, emotional, and physical energy in a concerted coordinated effort to achieve the organizational mission and objectives” (Winston and Patterson 2006, 8).

Path-goal theory emphasizes that leaders need to clarify the paths to goals, remove obstacles, and provide necessary support to help followers reach their objectives efficiently. It highlights the importance of adapting leadership behaviors to suit the needs of followers and the situation they are working in. Ultimately, the theory reminds leaders that their primary role is to coach and guide followers towards goal achievement by selecting behaviors that best fit followers’ needs and the working environment.

Path-goal clarifying behaviors

The path-goal theory assumes that under conditions role and task demands that are ambiguous and intrinsically satisfying, goal-oriented behavior by superiors is helpful and instrumental to task performance.

Leaders who are goal-oriented must clarify the following things:

• subordinates performance goals,
• the means by which they can effectively carry out tasks,
• the standards by which their performance will be judged,
• expectancies that others of them and how to respond appropriately, and
• how to use rewards and punishment in an intelligent manner, contingent on performance.

Main propositions

Leaders’ behavior complements subordinates’ environments and abilities and leaders’ path-goal clarifying behavior adapts to different situations.

Leaders’ behavior complements subordinates’ environments and abilities — effective leaders engage in behaviors that align with and support their subordinates’ environments and abilities. The higher the degree of subordinates self-perceived ability relative to task demands, the less subordinates will view path-goal clarifying behavior as acceptable (motivational) (House 1996).

Leaders’ path-goal clarifying behavior adapts to different situations — effective leaders adjust their behavior based on the specific circumstances, tasks (e.g., ambiguity), and characteristics of their followers (e.g., preference for independence). This adaptability ensures that leaders can effectively guide and motivate their subordinates towards achieving goals (House 1996).

Leader behavior classes

Achievement-oriented,
work facilitation/ supportive,
interaction facilitation,
group oriented decision process,
representation and networking,
value-based, and shared leadership

Leadership behavior classes refers to types of actions and conduct that leaders incorporate into their management styles in order to effectively lead their teams, motivate them, and achieve their goals (House 1996).

Achievement-oriented leader behavior

sets challenging goals, emphasize excellence, and demonstrate confidence in employees’ abilities.

Work facilitation/supportive leader behavior

plans, schedules, organizes, and coordinates the work; provides mentoring, coaching, counseling, and feedback to assist employees in developing their skills.

Interaction facilitation

collaboratively removes obstacles that prevent interaction, including dispute resolution, facilitation of communication, and listening to all voices.

Group oriented decision process

focus on decisions that affect group dynamics and production and on increasing acceptance of such decisions.

Representation and networking

address the need of leaders to network and actively represent the function of the work unit (e.g., to establish the legitimacy of the work unit)

Value-based leader behavior

helps establish extraordinary follower commitment by appealing to values and sentiments held dear by subordinates (requires and ideological goal)

Shared leadership

shares responsibility for leadership to increase unit cohesiveness (functions bes in an interdependent environment)

Group work

Think about situations where you have either led or been led, whether formally or informally. Analyse how these situations can be characterised and explain why they were or weren’t effective.

Take about 10 minutes for reflection and discussion with your neighbour(s).

Engaging leadership

One of the principal responsibilities of leaders is to motivate their followers so that they will perform well. Wilmar Schaufeli (2021)

Engaged employees invest highly in their job because they enjoy it,
nevertheless they know when to stop (Wilmar Schaufeli 2021).

Work engagement

Work engagement refers to “a positive, fulfilling, work related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption” (W. Schaufeli et al. 2002, 74)

• Vigor refers to high levels of energy and mental resilience while working, the willingness to invest effort in one’s work, and persistence even in the face of difficulties.
• Dedication refers to being strongly involved in one’s work, and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride, and challenge.
• Absorption refers to being fully concentrated and happily engrossed in one’s work, whereby time passes quickly and one has difficulties with detaching oneself from work.

Work engagement differs from work addiction. Workaholics are driven by an irresistible inner need to work, and when they don’t, they feel useless, nervous, uneasy, restless and guilty.

Taris, Beek, and Schaufeli (2014) argue that engaged employees have a positive (approach) motivation and workaholics a negative (avoidance) motivation. The former are attracted by work because it is fun, whereas the latter are driven to work in an attempt to avoid the negative thoughts and feelings that are associated with not working.

Effects of work engagement

Research shows that work engagement is good for employees as well as for the organizations they work for (see e.g., W. B. Schaufeli 2013).

• Engaged employees suffer less from all kinds of stress complaints (e.g., depression).
• They run a lower risk of cardiovascular disease and, hence, their show lower sickness absenteeism.
• Engaged employees also feel strongly committed to their organization and therefore show lower turnover intentions.
• They often show a growth mindset (e.g., like to learn and develop themselves, take personal initiative, and are innovative).
• Engaged employees perform better (e.g., make fewer mistakes).

Engaging leadership

Engaging leadership is defined as leadership behavior that facilitates, strengthens, connects and inspires employees in order to increase their work engagement (Wilmar Schaufeli 2021, 4)

• Facilitating team-members satisfies the need for autonomy by giving them the feeling that they are psychologically free to make their own decisions.
• Strengthening team-members satisfies the need for competence, e.g., by delegating tasks and responsibilities, giving them challenging jobs and stimulating their talents.
• Connecting team-members satisfies the need for relatedness, e.g., by encouraging collaboration and creating a good team spirit.
• Inspiring team-members satisfies the need for meaning, e.g., by enthusing them about a particular vision, mission, idea or plan and recognising their personal contribution to the overall goal of the team or organisation.

Engaging leadership builds on the principles of Self-determination Theory (SDT) (Deci and Ryan 2008), which focuses on three core psychological needs that drive human motivation: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. When these needs are satisfied, people experience greater intrinsic motivation and well-being.

Effects of engaging leadership

Engaging leadership is expected to lead to the satisfaction of basic psychological needs.

Satisfying basic psychological needs subsequently leads to

• strengthened personal job resources (e.g., autonomy, task variety, role clarity, social support),
• an increased effect of HR policies (e.g., regarding training and education) on well-being,
• an increase in work engagement of employees,
• decrease of boredom, and
• increase in individual performance and team performance.

Team effectiveness

Engaging leadership positively effects performance at the individual and team level (Wilmar Schaufeli 2021), thus increases team effectiveness.

According to Hill (2003), an effective team does not only involve team performance, but is characterized by three criteria:

1. The team performs: the output meets the standards of those who have to use it
2. The team members are satisfied and learn (i.e., the team experience contributes to each member’s personal well-being and development)
3. The team adapts and learns (i.e., the team experience enhances the capability of members to work and learn together in the future)

In today’s dynamic environment, engaging leadership should facilitate, strengthen, connect and inspire employees to improve on all three interrelated criteria.

Managing paradox

Committed leaders need to be aware of at least four contradictory forces in team work and deal with these paradoxes (Hill 2003):

• Embrace individual differences ⭤ Embrace collective identity and goals
• Foster support ⭤ Foster confrontation
• Focus on performance ⭤ Focus on learning and development
• Rely on managerial authority ⭤ Rely on team members’ discretion and autonomy

Consequently, engaging leadership requires behavioral complexity.

Behavioral complexity

Consider three distinct organizational cultures you’ve experienced or studied. How do effective leadership practices vary across these cultures, and what does this reveal about the need for behavioral complexity in global leadership?

Figure 2: The competing values in a framework based on Quinn (1988)

Take 15 minutes to reflect and discuss your insights with your neighbour(s).

Leaders are required to demonstrate behavioral complexity—the ability to enact seemingly contradictory behaviors depending on what a situation demands. An engaging leader must be:

• Directive yet empowering
• Strategic yet attentive to operational details
• Results-oriented yet relationship-focused

Figure 3: The competing values in a framework based on Quinn (1988)

This behavioral versatility is essential because engaging followers with diverse motivations and in varied contexts requires different approaches. Truly engaging leadership, thus, requires proficiency in all CVF quadrants. For example:

• Clan culture: building trust relationships that satisfy relatedness needs
• Adhocracy culture: creating vision that inspires autonomous contribution
• Hierarchy culture: establishing structures for competence development
• Market culture: focusing energy toward meaningful achievement

A leader who can integrate these seemingly competing approaches is better positioned to engage followers by addressing their diverse psychological needs in various contexts.

Disengaging leadership

According to Wilmar Schaufeli (2021), engaging leadership can be contrasted with its opposite disengaging leadership.

Disengaging leadership is characterized by:

coercive behavior, eroding behavior, isolating behavior, and demotivating behavior.

• Coercive behavior, which refers to authoritarian behaviour that restricts and controls employees.
• Eroding behavior that aims to hinder staff members’ professional development and diminish their sense of competence
• Isolating behavior that disconnects staff from the rest of the team and pits them against each other
• Demotivating behavior that aims to create the impression that employees’ work is meaningless and that their work does not contribute to anything important.

People that exhibit these behaviors thwart the basic needs for autonomy, competence, relatedness, and meaning.

Discussion

The digital x disengaging leadership

• How might “the digital” promote disengaging leadership, albeit unnoticed?
• How can leaders prevent those they lead from disengaging?

Conclusion

Leaders, to be effective, engage in behaviors that complement subordinate’s environments and abilities in a manner that compensates for deficiencies and is instrumental to subordinate satisfaction and individual and work unit performance. House (1996, 348)

Q&A

Homework

Read Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) and answer following questions:

• What is social capital?
• What advantages does social capital bring?
• How does social capital relate to leadership?

Literature

Deci, Edward L, and Richard M Ryan. 2008. “Self-Determination Theory: A Macrotheory of Human Motivation, Development, and Health.” Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne 49 (3): 182.

Hill, Linda Annette. 2003. Becoming a Manager: How New Managers Master the Challenges of Leadership. Harvard Business Press.

House, Robert J. 1996. “Path-Goal Theory of Leadership: Lessons, Legacy, and a Reformulated Theory.” The Leadership Quarterly 7 (3): 323–52.

Nahapiet, Janine, and Sumantra Ghoshal. 1998. “Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage.” Academy of Management Review 23 (2): 242–66.

Quinn, Robert E. 1988. Beyond Rational Management: Mastering the Paradoxes and Competing Demands of High Performance. Jossey-Bass.

Schaufeli, Wilmar. 2021. “Engaging Leadership: How to Promote Work Engagement?” Frontiers in Psychology 12: 754556.

Schaufeli, Wilmar B. 2013. “What Is Engagement?” In Employee Engagement in Theory and Practice, 29–49. Routledge.

Schaufeli, W, M Salanova, V Gonzalez-Roma, and A Bakker. 2002. “The Measurement of Engagement and Bournot and: A Confirmative Analytic Approach.” Journal of Happiness Studies 3 (1): 71–92.

Taris, Toon, Ilona van Beek, and Wilmar Schaufeli. 2014. “The Beauty Versus the Beast: On the Motives of Engaged and Workaholic Employees.” In Heavy Work Investment, 159–77. Routledge.

Winston, Bruce E, and Kathleen Patterson. 2006. “An Integrative Definition of Leadership.” International Journal of Leadership Studies 1 (2): 6–66.