1

MODULE 4 PAPER

Module 4 Paper:

Path-Goal Theory and Leader-Member Exchange Theory Rachel Rodriguez

Arizona State University

OGL 300: Theory and Practice of Leadership

2
MODULE 4 PAPER

Step 1

In this essay, I will compare the path-goal leadership theory and the leader-member

exchange theory (LMX). The path-goal theory has a focus on what motivates followers to attain

the set goals a leader lays out for them, while the LMX theory focuses on the interactions

between leaders and their followers (Northouse, 2016, p. 115 & p. 137).

First, I will focus on the path-goal theory. The path-goal theory “emphasizes the

relationship between the leader’s style and thee characteristics of the followers and the

organizational setting” (Northouse, 2016, p. 115). When applying this theory, the leader must be

able to assess what leadership style is needed based on the followers needs, the goals of the

group, and the particular situation at hand. The goal of leader using path-goal theory is to adjust

their behaviors in a way that motivates their followers and makes them feel that their efforts will

result in positive outcomes (twh5202, 2013).

In contrast, the leader-member exchange theory focuses on the interactions between

subordinates and their leader. This view focus on the dyadic relationship between leader and

followers (Northouse, 2016, p. 138). The LMX theory focuses on followers being part of an “in-

group” or “out-group” and which group the follower belongs to is heavily dependent on how

well they interact with their leader (Northouse, 2016, p.138). Followers in the in-group are more

dependable, receive more information, have more confidence and influence, while members of

the out-group do not. Members of the out-group are less compatible with their leader and

thereby, less motivated to work hard.

An example of a leader I’ve interacted with that used the path-goal theory would be the

female CFO of a company I formerly worked for. She was great at letting her team know what
3
MODULE 4 PAPER
was expected of them and had great directive leadership behaviors, but she was also very

personable and made herself available no matter how busy she was. My former CFO always

took the time to greet you and check-in with you personally and showed a great deal of

supportive leadership behaviors. In addition, she always did things like catered lunches or offsite

events after a big goal was accomplished and she made each member of the team feel heard and

respected. Overall, this leader was able to switch or combine leadership behaviors to suit what

was needed by the follower and the situation.

My current boss very clearly uses the LMX theory, perhaps, without being aware. He

tends to hold in-group and out-group relationships with his followers; often to the extreme. The

members of the in-group are those that he views as equal to him, while the out-group are those

that the sees as “below” him. While he isn’t using the theory. In a positive light, it is interesting

to now understand how dyadic his relationships are with his followers. While it is great that

those that fall within the executive or Ph.D. level are part of the in-group, it would be beneficial

if he took the time to make others in his group feel like they are too. Those that are in the in-

group have their opinions heard, don’t feel rushed when giving their input, and are treated less

like, “the help”. While those in the out-group must deal with being rushed, talked over, or

pushed aside for more important things.

Reference List

Northouse, P.G., (2016). Leadership Theory and Practice. United States. Sage Publications, Inc.

twh5202. 2013 February 15. When Does the Path-Goal Theory Work?. Retrieved from
https://sites.psu.edu/leadership/2013/02/15/when-does-the-path-goal-theory-work/
4
MODULE 4 PAPER

Step 2

Case 6.2

1. Daniel is an effective leader according to path-goal theory because he understands

that he must adjust his leader behaviors according to the followers he is leading, the

situation and task at hand.

The copy center doesn’t require much skill and isn’t as customer oriented. I would

imagine this job is better suited for the younger students since it is a more casual

atmosphere that involves a lot of socializing. Daniel understands that letting the students

that work in the copy center wear casual clothing, choose their own background music,

and socialize encourages excitement and happiness around their mundane tasks

(Northouse, 2016, p. 128). He balances a mostly supportive leadership style with an

occasional directive leadership style seamlessly by giving clear instructions (when

needed) but always making each follower feel valued.

The followers that work in the desktop publishing area of the copy center are

required to be more customer oriented and the work is more complex. Most of the people

who work in this area are full-time employees and are more independent, self-motivated,

and confident (Northouse, 2016, p. 128). I would imagine that an employee that works in

this department is an older student, perhaps graduate level, or not a student at all. Daniel

takes a more hands-off approach because of this and plays a more supportive leadership

role but occasionally switches to directive behavior if an employee gets stuck.

2. Daniel’s ability to sense what is leader behavior is needed to lead his team effectively

creates a successful and happy work environment.

5
MODULE 4 PAPER
3. As mentioned in the response to question one, Daniel exhibits the characteristics

of an effective leader by intuitively understanding what is needed in the copy center

versus the desktop publishing area. By remaining flexible, understanding the tasks

required and the needs of his followers, Daniel is able to switch his leadership behaviors

accordingly.

4. Daniel could improve follower motivation by finding ways to make work more

challenging and creative (achievement-oriented), encouraging input (participative),

creating career paths, and finding ways to make everyone feel like their work is making a

difference. If his followers felt like their work was leading to something bigger or it was

meaningful, their morale would most likely increase.

Case 7.2

1. Based on the LMX model, I would classify Jenny’s leadership style as

encouraging of all employees to be at in-group status. She works hard to make sure that

each employee feels equal, regardless of their role and discourages a hierarchal

atmosphere by not partaking in social lunches, not engaging with her best friend (the

company’s loan officer) unless it is a business matter and listening to everyone’s input

with genuine interest.

2. The employees at City Mortgage seem to feel at ease in their work environment

and all-inclusive according to the case study (Northouse, 2016, p. 151). Jenny’s hard

work as a leader that promotes her followers to be in-group has paid off. Her employees

treat each other with respect, and everyone feels valued and listened to.

3. If I were asked to follow in Jenny’s footsteps, I would definitely take on some of

her leadership styles. She is effective and her employees are happy and respect her. My
6
MODULE 4 PAPER
only concern is that she doesn’t seem to have work/life balance since she is burnt out

(Northouse, 2016, p. 152). I don’t think she will be able to remain effective if she

doesn’t take the time to take care of herself.

Step 4

Take the LMX 7 Questionnaire (also attached) – first describing your relationship TO a
follower THEN describing your relationship AS a follower. Is your follower part of your
“in-group” or “out-group”? Why? Are you part of your leaders “in group” or “out group?”
Why do you think that is? Did either result surprise you?
Report your results as part of your module 4 paper. 

Scores:

Item Follower Leader

1 3
2 3
3 3
4 5
5 3
6 4
7 2
Total: 23 30

The score I received as a follower is moderate and I believe this to be a true assessment.

I am the executive assistant to the CEO of my company and while I often feel like I am part of

the out-group with him and some of the other executives, I often feel part of the in-group with

those that support the executive team. I believe this is because most of the executive team are

MDs with prestigious ivy league degrees. Often times, it feels like they are a bit pompous and

feel like a person in my position is just the “help”. This makes sense, given their affluent

backgrounds and childhoods spent in the world’s top boarding schools and universities.

However, the Chief Product Officer of my company comes from a humble family and holds a
7
MODULE 4 PAPER
degree in chemical engineering from a less prestigious university and I feel like I am part of his

in-group because my ideas and opinions are taken seriously and he seems genuinely interested in

me as a whole.

I also act as the lead executive assistant at my company and manage a group of four other

administrative staff. I feel quite close to my team and they seem to flourish under my guidance.

Therefore, I am not surprised by the very high score received. My team comes to me to air their

concerns, grievances, and thoughts on everything. Our team is well-functioning and supportive. I

think this is because I always make sure to set a good example, provide a supportive

environment, hold weekly check-ins, established strong communication in regard to what our

overall and individual goals are, and take my time to cultivate interpersonal relationships with

each person.