Environments

How can leaders create conditions for high performance?

Andy Weeger

Neu-Ulm University of Applied Sciences

February 13, 2026

Introduction

Today’s session

• Rotating pairs warm-up 15 min
• Path-goal theory 30 min
• From extrinsic to intrinsic motivation 25 min
• Break
• Engaging leadership 30 min
• Digital × disengaging leadership 20 min
• Reflection & closing 10 min

135 minutes total.

The session is designed as a flipped classroom — students have pre-read House (1996) and answered four guiding questions about the essence of path-goal theory, leader behavior classes, personal experiences, and empirical evidence.

• The activation uses rotating pairs (speed-dating format) — students change partners every 2 minutes, discussing different aspects of the pre-reading each round.
• The leader behavior class exercise uses a learning stations format — groups rotate through 4 stations, each focusing on a different behavior cluster.
• The SDT block uses brainwriting + gallery walk instead of Think-Pair-Share — silent idea generation followed by physical movement.
• The engaging vs. disengaging exercise uses a structured debate — two sides argue their position.

Learning objectives

After completing this unit, you will be able to:

1. Explain Path-Goal Theory and how leaders clarify the path to follower goal achievement
2. Compare extrinsic and intrinsic motivation using Self-Determination Theory’s need framework
3. Describe engaging leadership and how it operationalises SDT’s basic psychological needs
4. Contrast engaging and disengaging leadership and their effects on work engagement

Activation

Latticework check-in

Which mental models from previous units might help us think about motivation?

05:00

Rotating pairs — Round 1 (2 min).

Students stand and find a partner. Prompt on screen: “Which mental models from previous units might help us think about motivation?” After 2 minutes, signal to switch partners. This physical movement energizes the start and ensures everyone speaks immediately.

Expected connections they should surface across rounds: - Incentive structures — how do rewards and punishments shape follower behavior? - Feedback loops — how does engagement create performance which reinforces engagement? - Behavioral complexity from Unit 3 — leaders must adapt their motivational approach to the situation - CVF — the collaborate quadrant is fundamentally about motivating through people

Individual reflection

Write down your findings.

1. The essence of path-goal theory in one sentence.
2. One leader behavior class from House (1996) that you have experienced personally.

04:00

Rotating pairs — Round 2 (4 min).

Students switch to a new partner. Each person shares: (1) their one-sentence essence of path-goal theory and (2) the leader behavior class they experienced. Two minutes per person. This forces concise articulation and exposes students to a second perspective before the plenary.

Students who did the reading should be able to articulate that path-goal theory is about leaders adapting their behavior to complement follower abilities and environmental conditions.

Pair share

Turn to your neighbor
and compare your findings.

04:00

Which leader behavior class resonated most? Why?

Rotating pairs — Round 3 + Plenary (4 min).

Final partner switch (2 min). New prompt: “Which behavior class resonated most across your conversations?” Then brief plenary (2 min): “Which behavior class came up most often across your rotating conversations?” Hands-up polling — count mentions. This gives you a quick frequency map of what resonated and what to emphasize in Block 1.

The energy of three successive conversations creates a buzz that carries into Block 1.

Path-goal theory

Core proposition

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

Mini-lecture start (3 min).

Path-goal theory emphasizes that leaders need to clarify paths to goals, remove obstacles, and provide necessary support. The leader’s primary role is to coach and guide followers toward goal achievement by selecting behaviors that best fit followers’ needs and the working environment.

Connect to Unit 3: situational leadership told us to match style to follower readiness. Path-goal theory goes further — it specifies which behaviors work when and why (through motivational mechanisms).

Path-goal clarifying behaviors

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

Leaders who are goal-oriented must clarify:

• 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 have of them
• How to use rewards and punishment contingent on performance

Mini-lecture (5 min).

Walk through each clarifying behavior with a concrete example. The key insight: path-goal theory is fundamentally about reducing uncertainty for followers. When people know what is expected, how to get there, and what the payoff is, they are more motivated and effective.

Probe: “Which of these clarifying behaviors is most often neglected by leaders you’ve observed?” This connects to the reading.

Leader behavior classes

Which behavior class fits which situation?

In groups of 3–4, take the seven behavior classes from House (1996) and:

1. Match each behavior class to a concrete leadership scenario.
2. Identify the follower and environmental conditions that make each behavior effective.
3. Connect at least two behavior classes to CVF quadrants from Unit 3.

10:00

Learning stations (15 min total: 10 min rotation, 5 min plenary).

Set up 4 stations around the room (tables or wall posters). Each station focuses on 1–2 behavior classes: - Station A: Achievement-oriented & value-based - Station B: Work facilitation/supportive - Station C: Interaction facilitation & group-oriented decision process - Station D: Representation/networking & shared leadership

At each station, a flip chart with the three questions. Groups of 3–4 spend 2.5 minutes per station, adding their answers below what previous groups wrote. After 4 rotations, each group ends at a different station and summarizes the collective answers.

In plenary, one spokesperson per station presents the synthesized findings. Push on CVF connections: “Which behavior class maps to the collaborate quadrant? The compete quadrant?”

Transition: “Path-goal theory tells leaders what to clarify. But how do you create the conditions where followers are intrinsically motivated to walk the path?”

Main propositions

Leaders’ behavior complements subordinates’ environments and abilities

and leaders’ path-goal clarifying behavior adapts to different situations.

Mini-lecture (3 min).

Two key propositions:

1. Effective leaders engage in behaviors that align with and support their subordinates’ environments and abilities. The higher subordinates’ self-perceived ability, the less they view path-goal clarifying behavior as acceptable.
2. Effective leaders adjust their behavior based on circumstances, tasks (e.g., ambiguity), and follower characteristics (e.g., preference for independence).

Transition: “Path-goal theory focuses on how leaders clarify the path. But what about the deeper question: what makes people want to walk the path in the first place?”

From path-goal to motivation

Bridging the theories

Path-goal theory tells leaders what to clarify — goals, means, standards, expectancies, and rewards. But how do you create the conditions where followers are intrinsically motivated?

Self-Determination Theory and engaging leadership address exactly this: the psychological mechanisms that turn external guidance into internal drive.

Framing (2 min).

This bridge is important. Path-goal theory is largely about extrinsic motivation — clarifying what followers get for performing. SDT shifts the focus to intrinsic motivation — creating conditions where followers perform because the work itself is meaningful.

Expectancy theory

Vroom (1964) proposed that motivation is a function of three beliefs:

• Expectancy — “If I try, can I perform?” (effort → performance)
• Instrumentality — “If I perform, will I be rewarded?” (performance → outcome)
• Valence — “Do I value the reward?” (outcome attractiveness)

Motivation = Expectancy × Instrumentality × Valence

Mini-lecture (5 min).

Connect naturally to path-goal theory: a leader who clarifies goals and removes obstacles increases expectancy. A leader who links performance to outcomes increases instrumentality. A leader who understands what followers value ensures high valence.

However, expectancy theory primarily explains extrinsic motivation. What about the deeper drive from the work itself? Transition to SDT.

Three basic psychological needs

Self-Determination Theory [SDT; Deci & Ryan (2000)] proposes three basic psychological needs that fuel intrinsic motivation:

• Autonomy — the need to feel volitional and self-directed
• Competence — the need to feel effective and capable, to master challenges
• Relatedness — the need to feel connected to others, to experience belonging

Mini-lecture (5 min).

SDT distinguishes motivation along a continuum from external regulation (“I do it because I’ll be paid”) through identified regulation (“I do it because it matters to me”) to intrinsic motivation (“I do it because I find it fascinating”).

As motivation moves from external to intrinsic, it becomes more autonomous, more sustained, and more associated with well-being and performance. Leaders play a critical role in creating environments that support this internalization process.

SDT in practice

Think about your current study or work environment.

1. Which of the three needs (autonomy, competence, relatedness) is best satisfied?
2. Which is most thwarted?
3. What would a leader do to address the thwarted need?

05:00

Brainwriting + gallery walk (7 min total).

Phase 1 — Brainwriting (3 min): Each student writes their answers on a sheet of paper — one need per sticky note or section. Silence enforced. This generates more ideas than verbal discussion because introverts contribute equally.

Phase 2 — Gallery walk (4 min): Students post their sheets on the wall or place them on tables. Everyone walks around reading others’ responses. Students place a checkmark next to responses that resonate. After 3 minutes, reconvene briefly: “Which thwarted need got the most checkmarks? What does this tell us about our learning environment?”

Expected pattern: autonomy is most often thwarted. Probe: “What would a leader do to address this?” This sets up engaging leadership perfectly.

Transition: “SDT provides the motivational logic. Engaging leadership tells us what leaders actually do to satisfy these needs.”

Engaging leadership

What is engaging leadership?

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

Engaging leadership is leadership behavior that facilitates, strengthens, connects and inspires employees to increase their work engagement (Schaufeli, 2021, p. 4).

Mini-lecture start (3 min).

Engaging leadership operationalizes SDT for the leadership context. It answers: “If I’m a leader who wants to satisfy my team’s basic psychological needs, what exactly should I do?”

Four engaging behaviors

• Facilitating satisfies the need for autonomy — giving team members the feeling that they are psychologically free to make their own decisions.
• Strengthening satisfies the need for competence — delegating tasks, giving challenging jobs, stimulating talents.
• Connecting satisfies the need for relatedness — encouraging collaboration and creating good team spirit.
• Inspiring satisfies the need for meaning — enthusing team members about a vision and recognizing their contribution.

Mini-lecture (5 min).

Walk through each behavior with a concrete example from a workplace context. Emphasize the SDT connection: each engaging behavior maps to a specific psychological need.

Key point: engaging leadership builds on SDT (Deci & Ryan, 2008). When these needs are satisfied, people experience greater intrinsic motivation and well-being.

Work engagement

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

• Vigor — high energy and mental resilience, willingness to invest effort, persistence in the face of difficulties.
• Dedication — being strongly involved, experiencing significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride, and challenge.
• Absorption — being fully concentrated and happily engrossed, time passes quickly.

Work engagement differs from work addiction: engaged employees have a positive (approach) motivation; workaholics have a negative (avoidance) motivation (Taris et al., 2014).

Mini-lecture (3 min).

The distinction between engagement and workaholism is important. Engaged employees enjoy their work and know when to stop. Workaholics are driven by an irresistible inner need to work. The former are attracted by work because it is fun; the latter are driven to work to avoid negative feelings associated with not working.

Engaging vs. disengaging

Analyse real leadership scenarios.

For each scenario, diagnose:

1. Is the leader behavior engaging or disengaging?
2. Which specific behavior is at play (facilitating, strengthening, connecting, inspiring — or coercive, eroding, isolating, demotivating)?
3. Which psychological need is being satisfied or thwarted?
4. What would the opposite approach look like?

10:00

Structured debate (15 min total: 8 min debate, 2 min switch, 5 min synthesis).

Split the room into two halves. Provide 4–5 brief scenarios on cards or slides (prepare in advance):

1. “A manager checks in daily with each team member to ask how she can remove obstacles to their work.” (Facilitating → autonomy)
2. “A team lead assigns only routine tasks to junior members, saving interesting projects for senior staff.” (Eroding → thwarting competence)
3. “A director celebrates team successes publicly but handles failures privately with individuals.” (Connecting + strengthening)
4. “A manager uses monitoring software to track employee productivity every 15 minutes.” (Coercive → thwarting autonomy)
5. “A leader rotates meeting facilitation so every team member leads at least one meeting per quarter.” (Strengthening → competence)

Side A argues: “This behavior is engaging — here’s why.” Side B argues: “This behavior is disengaging — here’s why.” For each scenario, give 90 seconds per side. After 3 scenarios, switch sides (A now argues disengaging, B argues engaging) for the remaining 2 scenarios. The forced perspective-switch mirrors the behavioral complexity theme from Unit 3.

Synthesis (5 min): “Which scenarios were hardest to argue? Why?” Build the pattern: engaging and disengaging behaviors are context-dependent — the same action can be either, depending on how it’s experienced.

Disengaging leadership

Disengaging leadership is characterized by:

• Coercive behavior — authoritarian behavior that restricts and controls employees
• Eroding behavior — hindering professional development and diminishing competence
• Isolating behavior — disconnecting staff from the team and pitting them against each other
• Demotivating behavior — creating the impression that employees’ work is meaningless

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

Mini-lecture (3 min).

This is the dark mirror of engaging leadership. Each disengaging behavior maps to a specific SDT need being thwarted: coercive → autonomy, eroding → competence, isolating → relatedness, demotivating → meaning.

Digital × disengaging leadership

The digital × disengaging leadership

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

08:00

Group discussion (12 min total: 8 min discussion, 4 min plenary).

Steer the conversation toward examples:

• Surveillance software that thwarts autonomy (coercive)
• Algorithmic task assignment that erodes competence (eroding)
• Remote work isolation that undermines relatedness (isolating)
• Automated feedback that strips meaning from work (demotivating)

Push groups to also propose counter-strategies using the engaging leadership framework: - How do you facilitate in a digital environment? - How do you connect distributed team members? - How do you strengthen when you can’t observe performance directly?

This bridges to virtual team leadership in Unit 5.

Reflection & closing

Synthesis

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, p. 348)

Plenary synthesis (3 min).

Connect the full arc: path-goal theory → expectancy theory → SDT → engaging leadership. Each framework adds a layer of understanding about how leaders create conditions for high performance.

The key insight: effective leadership is not about a single behavior but about reading the situation and selecting the right approach. This is behavioral complexity (Unit 3) applied to motivation.

Latticework update

Which new models have you added to your latticework?

• Intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivation continuum
• Path-goal contingency thinking
• Feedback loops: engagement → performance → engagement

Plenary closing (5 min).

Collect these on the board alongside earlier models. Ask: “How do these connect to what we already had?”

Expected connections: - Behavioral complexity (Unit 3) now includes a motivational dimension — different situations require different motivational approaches. - Trait paradoxes (Unit 2) connect to engaging/disengaging — the same leader trait can produce engaging or disengaging behavior depending on context. - CVF quadrants each imply different motivational strategies.

Closing quote

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

Let this sit. Then transition to homework.

Homework

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

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

This reading prepares for Unit 7 on stakeholder management and coalition building, where social capital theory becomes the theoretical backbone for understanding how leaders build and leverage networks.

“As you read, think about which types of relationships — strong or weak ties — are most valuable for leaders. We will return to this later in the course.”

Q&A

Open the floor for remaining questions.

Literature

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 49(3), 182.

House, R. J. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 323–352.

Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.

Schaufeli, W. (2021). Engaging leadership: How to promote work engagement? Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 754556.

Schaufeli, W., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V., & Bakker, A. (2002). The measurement of engagement and bournot and: A confirmative analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71–92.

Taris, T., Beek, I. van, & Schaufeli, W. (2014). The beauty versus the beast: On the motives of engaged and workaholic employees. In Heavy work investment (pp. 159–177). Routledge.

Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. Wiley.