The Path-Goal Theory

The Path-Goal model emphasizes the significance of the leader’s capacity to interpret followers’
needs precisely and to respond promptly to the necessities of a circumstance. The fundamental
argument the theory offers is the main responsibility of the leader is to motivate the followers to
conclude their assignments, and the leader does that by expelling any impediments in their way
(AlAhmari, 2022). Early improvement of the goal path theory mentions four particular
behavioral styles of a leader including directive, supportive, participatory, and achievement-
oriented, and three subordinate attitudes including work fulfillment, acceptance of the leadership,
and expectations regarding the relationship between business performance and reward (Amelia et
al., 2020). Agreeing with AlAhmari (2022), the directive behavioral style incorporates arranging,
organizing, indicating standard protocols, or making policies based on the assignment.
Supportive leadership comprises being friendly and receptive as a leader and incorporates
attending to the well-being and human needs of subordinates (Northouse, 2021). Leaders using
supportive behaviors go out of their way to make work pleasant for subordinates; in addition,
supportive leaders treat subordinates as equals and provide them respect for their status
(Northouse, 2021). Participative behavioral style is like one-on-one peer sessions in classrooms;
this behavior style asks for inputs from subordinates, empowers an open discussion between
them, and shuffles thoughts in a way that each member has a dynamic association within the
decision-making process (AlAhmari, 2022). Achievement-oriented behavior style's main focus is
on the achievement of the objective or goal (AlAhmari, 2022). Amelia et al. (2020) focused on
the leadership model goal path (path-goal) and expressed the significance of the impact of
leaders on subordinates’ perceptions regarding work purposes, the reason for self-development,
and the way to complete a goal.

Muteme and Adegbite (2022) advocated for Path-Goal leadership recognizing the unique roles of
project leadership with more emphasis on enhancing the team's effectiveness. The authors
recommended the P-G (Path-Goal) leadership approach as the most suitable for project
leadership, especially in the oil and gas industry. According to the authors, this type of leadership
style is effective because it minimizes role and scope ambiguities, provides a roles-efficient
structure, and minimizes project complexities when the project environment changes. The
authors ranked each of the leadership styles of the P-G leadership theory in order: achievement-
oriented, participative, supportive, and directive; achievement-oriented leadership is by far the
most dominant style, followed by participative, then supportive, and finally directive.

Amalia et al. (2020) defined Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) as the voluntary
behavior of an employee or member of an organization outside the job description, not regulated
by company policy, but intended to improve organizational effectiveness that brings significant
benefits to a company and does not require to do with any formal reward system. The authors
added that OCB is an individual's contribution beyond the requirements of their role in the
workplace and is rewarded through the acquisition of mission accomplishment. According to the
authors, OCB includes a range of behaviors, including helping others, voluntarily accepting
additional responsibilities, and following workplace rules and procedures. These behaviors
(helping others, volunteering for extra tasks, complying with rules and procedures) at work
describe "the employee added value" which is one form of prosocial behavior, namely positive,
constructive, and meaningful social behavior (Aldag & Resckhe, 1997; as cited by Amalia et al.,
2020).

According to Amalia et al. (2020), in pharmaceutical companies in Bandung, Indonesia,

organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) can support good labor productivity, and OCB has a
positive and significant impact on employee labor productivity. The authors reported that
leadership style (pathway goal theory) did not significantly affect employee labor productivity in
a pharmaceutical company in Bandung, Indonesia. The Path-Goal Leadership follows biblical
guidelines as found in leaders who guide and support their followers. The Bible gives examples
of leaders sharing their work with their followers. Jesus set an example by engaging in the
important work of washing the feet of his disciples. Jesus said, "And since I, your Lord and
Teacher, have washed your feet, you must also wash one another's feet. I will give you an
example that you can follow. Do what I have done for you.” (The New Bible, John 13:14-15).
Jesus spent his life preparing for his greatest deed, offering salvation to a lost world. Jesus said,
"God loved the world so much. God gave his only son so that those who believed in him would
not perish but have eternal life." (The New Bible, John 3:16).

The Leader-Member Exchange Theory

Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX) conceptualizes leadership as a process that focuses on

interactions between leaders and followers (Nothouse, 2021). According to AlAhmari (2022),
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory suggests that leaders automatically develop
relationships with each of their subordinates and the strength of these relationships influences a
powerful effect on productivity in the organization. AlAhmari (2022) added that LMX includes
two-way communication between leader and team member; the more trust, loyalty, and support
in this relationship, the better the team member’s performance will be. AlAhmari (2022) stated
that LMX completely mediates the relationship between abusive supervision and intrinsic
motivation. The authors continued that intrinsic motivation partially mediates the relationship
between LMX and creativity, and LMX and intrinsic motivation mediate the continuum of the
relationship between supervisory abuse and individual creativity. AlAhmari (2022) believes that
each team member is unique and should be treated differently and that there are different stages
that the leader-subordinate relationship goes through. The stages are- (a) when a team member
joins the group and the leader assesses their skills, the leader is still forming an initial assessment
of the team member, just like in real life when we meet someone new for the first time. This step
is called Role-Playing, (b) based on the assessment of the team leader, he will divide the
employee into two groups, one group is the inner group of employees who have proven their
loyalty or trust, and another group is of outsiders who have not yet formed a strong bond like the
inner group. This step is called Role-Creation.

According to Upadhyay and Kumar (2020), LMX (Leader-Member Exchange) not only affects
the creativity of employees but also their PsyCap (Psychological Capital). The mutual trust,
respect, and obligation that LMX creates between superiors and subordinates transforms the
relationship between them as colleagues or partners (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; as cited by
Upadhyay & Kumar, 2020). As a result, employees exercise more by coming up with new ideas,
implementing them, taking risks, taking on more responsibilities, etc., and in return, they receive
feedback on the development process, discuss issues more freely and have more authority in
decision making and autonomy (Upadhyay & Kumar, 2020). According to Upadhyay and Kumar
(2020), the building of PsyCap of employees, which translates into 'will-power and way power'
(hope), 'confidence in capabilities' (efficacy), 'attribution-intelligence' (optimism), and 'never-
say-never-die’ attitude (resilience), offers the right recipe for the creative contribution of
employees. Concurring with Upadhyay and Kumar (2020), employees’ creativity is sought after
equally by almost all organizations in this uncontrollable intense-competitive world; if the same
can be regulated or developed through enhancing PsyCap or better LMX, then it has much-
needed positive implications for human resource management.

Concurring with Chiamaka et al. (2020), Leader-member exchange and transformational

leadership styles are positive organizational outcomes that help trigger employee satisfaction in
the workplace; therefore, managers and leaders of organizations should always support the views
and opinions of their subordinates. According to the authors, communication between leadership
and members is significantly related to organizational support. The authors recommended that
organizations use transformational leadership styles and also allow members to share ideas and
perspectives with their leaders to give them more opportunities to prosper in their work.
According to Amalia et al. (2020), the leader does not treat all his followers equally; generally,
the group of employees is divided into two parts, namely out-group and in-group. According to
the authors, in the out-groups, the relationship between the leader and the follower is of low
quality, there is no interpersonal relationship during the performance of the obligation; and
within in-groups, the relationship between leaders and followers is of high quality. According to
Kariuki (2020), high self-efficacy leads to high LMX, and improving employee self-efficacy
leads to more effective leadership.

The Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory resembles the lessons of the Great Leader, Jesus.
The concept of “in-groups” and “out-groups” of LMX on how well the leader and follower get
along or how well they work together is the teaching of Jesus, the Lord. Jesus chose 12 disciples.
Within these 12, Peter, James, and John were given special opportunities. Mary, Martha, and
Lazarus housed Jesus, spending time and money to be with him. Martha felt secure sending for
Jesus when he was out of town to heal Lazarus. Crowds followed Jesus when he came into their
area, and he taught, fed, and healed them. Jesus received everyone, from children to governing
officials, from the Jewish people to the Roman occupiers. Jesus used his position of power to
provide a life-giving connection with anyone who desired to follow him.

References

AlAhmari, F. (2022). Innovation Leadership in the 21st Century. In Leadership in a Changing

World-A Multidimensional Perspective. IntechOpen. http://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.101932

Amalia, S., Salam, A., Otong, D., Wibowo, R. A., & Yudapraja, B. (2020). Impact Of
Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Leadership Style (Path-Goal Theory) On Work
Productivity in Pharmaceutical Companies in Bandung City. PalArch's Journal of Archaeology
of Egypt/Egyptology, 17(4), 2656-2671. file:///C:/Users/rowsh/Downloads/3818-Article
%20Text-7335-1-10-20201225-1.pdf
Deshwal, V., & Ali, M. (2020). A systematic review of various leadership theories. Shanlax
International Journal of Commerce, 8(1), 38-43. https://doi.org/10.34293/commerce.v8i1.916

Kariuki, J. K. (2020). The effect of self-efficacy on leader–member exchange (LMX) formation

in leadership effectiveness. http://dspace.pacuniversity.ac.ke:8080/123456789/3361

Northouse, G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (9th ed.). Sage Publications.

The New Bible. (n.d.). John 3:16. Retrieved July 13, 2023, from
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+3%3A16&version=NIV

Umuteme, O., & Adegbite, W. (2022). Project leadership in the oil and gas industry: The case for
path-goal leadership theory. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science,
11(6), 184-195. http://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v11i6.1913

Upadhyay, Y., & Kumar, D. (2020). Leader–Member Exchange, Psychological Capital, and
Employees’ Creativity. Vision (New Delhi, India), 24(4), 406-418.
http://doi.org/10.1177/0972262920925585
Dear Key

Thank you for your interesting discussion on Path-Goal Theory and Leader-Member Exchange
Theory. You have stated that the two theories are alike because they both focus on how leaders
and team members relate to each other. Your deduction about the correlation between the two
theories is accurate. Both theories say that how a leader behaves is important in how well their
followers do their job and how happy they are. This is important for reaching the organization's
goals. But, the two theories are not exactly the same. There are some differences between the
two theories. By analyzing the studies of AlAhmari (2022), Amalia et al. (2020), Deshwal and
Ali (2020), Northouse (2021), and Upadhyay and Kumar (2020), I deduced the following
differences between the two theories.

The Primary Focus: The main focus of Path-Goal Theory is to make followers happier, more
motivated, and perform better by showing them a way to reach their goals and get rid of anything
that might get in their way. The theory suggests that good leaders should change how they lead
based on what their followers need and are like, which leads to good results. Leader-Member
Exchange (LMX) Theory focuses on how good relationships between leaders and team members
can affect how satisfied, committed, and successful the team members are. The idea is that
having good relationships with others can bring good things for both leaders and followers, like
being happier at work, doing better at their jobs, and being more helpful to the organization.

Role of Leaders: Leaders have the job to give advice and help the people who follow them,
according to the Path-Goal Theory. They have to evaluate what their followers want and can do,
and choose the right leadership behaviors (directing, supporting, involving, and encouraging
accomplishment) to help achieve the organizational goals. Proverbs 11:14 advises us to be
attentive, as in the absence of advice or support, errors can occur, whereas the presence of good
guidance can safeguard our well-being. Proverbs 15:22 means that counselors are there to help
someone make smart choices. This is really important for leaders and also applies to everyone's
decision-making in different situations, according to the Proverbs that were mentioned. Leader-
Member Exchange Theory focuses on the idea that leaders should have good relationships or
close contacts with some of their followers and not-so-good relationships with others.

Importance of Followers: The Path-Goal Theory highlights the significance of including the
followers in decision-making and encouraging them to actively take part. Leaders need to think
about what their followers are good at, what they have done before, and what they like to do in
order to decide how to be the best leaders. The Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory
acknowledges that leaders form different relationships with two different types of followers.
People who have strong relationships with the leader are more likely to be included in decision-
making and have more access to resources and help. In our decision-making, we can consider the
lesson of Philippians 2:3–4. Philippians 2:3–4 guides us to avoid doing things for our own selfish
desires or thinking we are better than others; instead, we should treat others as more important
than ourselves and be humble. We should always bear in mind that each person should not only
think about their own needs but also consider the needs of others.

Is anyone interested to continue this discussion?

 References

AlAhmari, F. (2022). Innovation Leadership in the 21st Century. In Leadership in a Changing

World-A Multidimensional Perspective. IntechOpen. http://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.101932

Amalia, S., Salam, A., Otong, D., Wibowo, R. A., & Yudapraja, B. (2020). Impact Of
Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Leadership Style (Path-Goal Theory) On Work
Productivity in Pharmaceutical Companies in Bandung City. PalArch's Journal of Archaeology
of Egypt/Egyptology, 17(4), 2656-2671. file:///C:/Users/rowsh/Downloads/3818-Article
%20Text-7335-1-10-20201225-1.pdf

Deshwal, V., & Ali, M. A. (2020). A systematic review of various leadership theories. Shanlax
International Journal of Commerce, 8(1), 38-43. https://doi.org/10.34293/commerce.v8i1.916

Northouse, G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (9th ed.). Sage Publications.

Philippians 2:3–4. (n.d.). In Holy Bible (New International Version). Retrieved July 16, 2023,
from https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?
search=Philippians+2%3A3%E2%80%934&version=NIV

Proverbs 11:14. (n.d.). In Holy Bible (New International Version). Retrieved July 16, 2023, from
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs+11%3A14&version=NIV

Proverbs 15:22. (n.d.). In Holy Bible (New International Version). Retrieved July 16, 2023, from
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs+15%3A22&version=NIV

Upadhyay, Y., & Kumar, D. (2020). Leader–Member Exchange, Psychological Capital, and
Employees’ Creativity. Vision (New Delhi, India), 24(4), 406-418.
http://doi.org/10.1177/0972262920925585
Dear Yang

Thank you for your in-depth discussion on Path-Goal Theory and the characteristics of the
leaders and the followers. I would like to discuss the issues related to the Path-goal theory and its
impact on both leaders and followers. The path-goal theory looks at how a leader's style and the
followers' traits and work environment affect each other. This is different from the situational
approach, which says that a leader needs to adjust to the skill level of their team members. It is
also different from contingency theory, which focuses on finding a leader whose style matches
the specific situation. Northouse (2021) said that the main idea of the path-goal theory comes
from the expectancy theory. This theory suggests that employees will be motivated if they think
they can do their job well and if they believe their efforts will lead to a positive outcome. It also
says that employees need to feel that they will be rewarded fairly for their work. According to
Deuteronomy 24:14-15, oppressing someone by denying them a fair wage or not paying them on
time is a sin. Romans 4:4 indicates that when someone works for you, they earn their wages;
their salary is not a gift you give them, but rather a debt you owe them.

Besides what you have already discussed, I would like to talk about some qualities that leaders
should have according to the Path-Goal theory. According to Northouse (2021), the Path-Goal
Theory of leadership is complex and can be hard to understand because it includes many
different characteristics of leadership (directive, supportive, participatory, and achievement-
oriented). The author focused that the theory indicates to find which leadership style is best for
different types of tasks, goals, workers, and organizations. Agreeing with Northouse (2021), it
can be scary to consider all the factors at once when choosing a leadership style. According to
the author, the path-goal theory is very broad and includes many related ideas, so it's difficult to
fully use this theory to improve leadership in a specific organization.

Understanding the direct impact of leader-member exchange (LMX) on employees' or followers'

creativity might be valuable. The direct effect of LMX on employees’ creativity, calls for
creating structures and processes that offer equal opportunity to all employees, which eventually
culminates in a high-quality relationship (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; as cited by Upadhyay &
Kumar, 2020); and this high-quality relationship leads to teamwork and creative behavior among
employees (Upadhyay & Kumar, 2020). But, LMX theory has some limitations, that is, leader-
member exchange turns counter to the basic human value of equality (Nothouse, 2021). The
author added that LMX theory divides the work unit into two groups and one group receives
special attention; it gives the appearance of discrimination against the out-group. But it is also
true that paying attention to all groups of followers in a collective way is impractical for leaders.
Northouse (2021) stated that before the LMX theory, researchers treated leadership as something
leaders did toward all of their followers following the hypothesis that leaders treated followers in
a collective way, as a group, using an average leadership style. LMX theory challenged this
assumption and directed researchers’ attention to the differences that might exist between the
leader and each of the leader’s followers (Northouse, 2021). However, LMX shall help in
enhancing knowledge sharing (e.g., Carmeli, Atwater, & Levi, 2011; Kim, Han, Son, & Yun,
2017; Li, Shang, Liu, & Xi, 2014; as cited by Upadhyay & Kumar, 2020), teamwork (e.g., Boies
& Howell, 2006; Tse, Dasborough, & Ashkanasy, 2008; as cited by Upadhyay & Kumar, 2020),
climate for innovation (e.g., Dunegan, Tierney, & Duchon, 1992; Hammond et al., 2011; as cited
by Upadhyay & Kumar, 2020).

We should not just concentrate on the ideas of the Path-Goal Theory or Leader Member
Exchange or other theories. To be successful leaders, we need to come up with new ideas and
understand how things work in real life. According to AlAhmari (2022), Innovative leaders like
Steve Jobs and A.G Lafley lead by example and show the world how the correct choices in
leadership and the perfect alignment of goals could yield massive results. However, leaders
following the principles of the theories of Path-Goal Theory or Leader-Member Exchange
Theory should follow the guidelines of the verse of Eph. 4:11–13. According to Eph. 4:11–13,
Jesus chose certain people, like the apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers, to help
prepare His followers for doing good things. This helps the community of believers grow
stronger and closer to each other, and it helps them understand and trust Jesus better. The leader's
job is to help God's people do good things and grow closer to God. The ultimate goal is for
everyone to grow and become more like Jesus in every way. The goal of helping others to
effectively pursue God's purpose in different areas is important for anyone who wants to lead a
business.

Who is interested to continue this discussion?

References

AlAhmari, F. (2022). Innovation Leadership in the 21st Century. In Leadership in a Changing

World-A Multidimensional Perspective. IntechOpen. http://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.101932

Deuteronomy 24:14-15. (n.d.). In Holy Bible (New International Version). Retrieved July 16,
2023, from https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+24%3A14-
15&version=NIV

Ephesians 4:11–13. (n.d.). In Holy Bible (New International Version). Retrieved July 16, 2023,
from https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?
search=Ephesians+4%3A11%E2%80%9313&version=NIV

Northouse, G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (9th ed.). Sage Publications.

Romans 4:4. (n.d.). In Holy Bible (New International Version). Retrieved July 16, 2023, from
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+4%3A4&version=NIV

Upadhyay, Y., & Kumar, D. (2020). Leader–Member Exchange, Psychological Capital, and
Employees’ Creativity. Vision (New Delhi, India), 24(4), 406-418.
http://doi.org/10.1177/0972262920925585