The LMX and the Path-Goal Theory - Assignment Example

Statement of Understanding Introduction Several leadership theories have been proposed that helps in understanding the behavior, traits, skills, knowledge, and abilities required to become a successful leader. All theories such as the modern theories of different kinds of leadership such as the transformational leadership theory and the early theories of traits of leaders, all try to explain what is necessary for a leader to become successful. This paper will focus on two different kinds of theories, the LMX (Leader Member Exchange Theory) and the Path Goal Theory. This paper will address the different perspective of leadership offered by those who created these theories and the strengths and weaknesses of these theories. Body Leader Member Exchange Theory Leaders have a dyadic relationship with their followers; this means that leaders treat different followers in different ways. The leader member exchange theory focuses on worth and importance of leaders and followers relationship with each other and the importance of this relationship to the organization. Researchers have stated through their study that leaders do not treat all followers equally; they instead treat different followers in different ways. In certain cases leaders have a high quality and in other cases leaders have a low value relationship with their followers. It is seen that those members of a group that have higher status in the group and are of more importance have a high quality relationship with the leader and those followers who are of lower status and of less value to the leader has a low quality relationship with the leader (DuBrin, 2001, 159). A number of factors are taken into account by the LMX theory to identify whether certain followers have a lower or higher quality of relationship with the leader. These factors includes: locus of control, need for authority and self esteem (Eisenberger, 2010). The way an individual perceives his own control over his own life and the events taking place around him is referred to as locus of control. Person who believes that he is control of all the happenings around him, who believes that all the good and the bad that happens to him and the projects he is working on is due to his own effort is said to have a internal locus of control. On the other hand, if the person believes that all the good and bad things happening around him is due to others or a third-party, this person is said to have an external locus of control. A person who craves for authority tries to conduct following activities: tries to gain employment in areas that are of high importance to the organization, tries to look for opportunities where he can lead and tries to obtain feedback for the way he/she has performed. Self esteem is the worth that an individual perceives of himself. If an individual is said to have high self-esteem, he believes that he is a high performer in the organization, if an individual is said to have low self esteem, this person believes that he is a low performer for the organization. Path Goal Theory Path Goal Theory is one of the theories of contingency theories that focus on how leaders can influence behavior of followers within an organization. The theory states that when followers are performing structured or tasks that have a set way of performing, followers does not need much assistance. On the other hand if followers are performing new and unstructured tasks they require ample amount of guidance from their leaders to perform such tasks. If a leader is implementing path goal theory to influence the behavior of their followers, they can do so by involving the followers in the process of making decisions for the organization (House, 1971). Transactional and Transformational Leadership Burns and Bass were the ones who initiated and conducted in-depth research for the theory of transformational-transactional leader (Winkler, 2010). The main focus of the theory is upon the alignment of the aims and objectives of the individuals within the organization with the goals and objectives of the organization, and the theory believes that this alignment is beneficial for both the members of a group and the group’s leader. The component on which this theory is based upon includes: idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, contingent incentives, passive and active management by expectations and inspirational motivation. Idealized influence refers to engagement of group member’s emotional side in the achievement of the leader’s vision. Intellectual stimulation refers to the change from the negative way the follower perceives the world to the positive way of viewing the world as perceived by the leader. Individualized consideration refers to the exchanges that take place between the follower and the leader in order to gain assistance, motivation, and direction. Contingent incentives refer to those incentives used by the leader to influence the behavior of the follower. Passive management by objective is used by the leader to correct deviant behaviors of the followers. Active management by expectation refers to the directions provided by the leader to influence the behaviors of the followers (Odetunde, 2005). Effectiveness of Each Theory and Their Uses The theory of leader-member exchange focuses solely on the connection between one leader and one follower, this theory is unique from other leadership theories as it only focuses on individual leader and follower’s relationship with the leader needed to achieve organizations aims and objectives. How effective is the relationship between a leader and the follower is identified through how satisfied the follower is and the way the follower believes he controls the environment. On the other hand, the path goal theory focuses less on the relationship that a leader and a follower has with each other and pays more attention to managing the organization by setting objectives and correcting behavior of the follower if the follower fails to attain the set objectives. According to the study conducted by Sagie and Koslowski, employees are highly satisfied with their jobs and are more motivated towards achieving organizations aims and objectives if they are allowed to take part in the decision making process and if they are delegated the authority to achieve aims and objectives of the organization (Sagie, 1994). Their study even shows that delegation of authority and higher involvement in the decision making process has little or no impact on followers perception but has positive relationship with future tasks and incentives. On the other hand, path goal theory has a higher and positive impact on productivity because in path goal theory existence of rewards for higher performance motivates the follower to perform in a positive manner. On the other hand, the benefits that leaders gain through using LMX theory in practice are cognitive benefits of higher self esteem, locus of control, perception of authority of the follower. A leader who is using transactional approach can only use the path goal theory during the process of influencing, while a transformational leader has the advantage of using both the path goal and leader member exchange theory for the purpose of influencing followers. Transformational leaders can apply the four components of idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, and inspirational motivation to obtain engagement of the employees in creating a vision and attaining the created vision for the organization (Gerstner, 1997). The transformational leader can even use the components of a transactional leader of incentives and management by objective to motivate the followers (Schriesheim, 2006). Transformational leaders can inform the followers about the future benefits that can be availed by followers for achievement of future vision and provide them direction of how the vision can be accomplished. Weak Sides If path goal theory is used in isolation by a leader, the leader will only be able to influence by means of rewarding and providing incentives for the performance and the emotional side of the employees may not be tapped by the leader. Path goal theory may fail or prove to be counterproductive if the tasks are novel. In certain scenarios, employees know more and have higher level of intellect and have the ability to perform novel tasks easily, thus in this kind of situation a directive sort of leadership where leader provides direction may be counterproductive. If leader member exchange theory is used in isolation, employees and members of the groups may become de-motivated. Leader member exchange theory focuses on one to one leader follower relationship. Therefore those members who do not have a high quality relationship might not get equal rewards as those that have a high quality connection with the leader although they may be working equally hard, this will eventually lead to job dissatisfaction (Peng, 2010). Conclusion The LMX and the path goal theory clearly help leaders in motivating followers through different means. The LMX is more physiological oriented and influences the cognitive side of employees and the path goal helps in improving the performance of the employees through rewards. In isolation these theories may not work well, thus these theories can be used by a transactional leader to achieve organization’s aims and objectives. Leaders have to use both these theories depending on the situation, if the problem in question is of performance, leaders can apply path goal and if the question is about shaping strategies and objectives, they can make use of LMX (Lussier, 2010). References DuBrin, A. J. (2001). Leadership: Research findings, practice, and skills. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Eisenberger, R., Karagonlar, G., Steiger-Mueller, M., Stinglhamber, F., Neves, P., Becker, T. E., & Gonzalez-Morales, M. G. (November 01, 2010). Leader-Member Exchange and Affective Organizational Commitment: The Contribution of Supervisor's Organizational Embodiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 6, 1085-1103. Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (January 01, 1997). Meta-Analytic Review of Leader-Member Exchange Theory: Correlates and Construct Issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 6, 827. House, R. J. (September 01, 1971). A Path Goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness.Administrative Science Quarterly, 16, 3.) Lussier, R. N., & Achua, C. F. (2010). Leadership: Theory, application, skill development. Australia: SouthWestern/Cengage Learning. Odetunde Oladimeji Jamiu; Department of Psychology, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria. (2005). Transformational and transactional leadership conceptualization: empirical validation in the Nigerian applied settings. (IFE PsychologIA; Vol 13, No 2 (2005); 73-92.) IFE PsychologIA. Peng, W., & Rode, J. (January 01, 2010). Transformational leadership and follower creativity: The moderating effects of identification with leader and organizational climate.Human Relations, 63, 8, 1105-1128. Sagie, A. and Koslowski, M. (1994). Organizational attitudes And behaviors as a function of participation in strategic and tactical change decisions: An application of path-goal theory. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 37-47. Schriesheim, C. A., Castro, S. L., Zhou, X. T., & Dechurch, L. A. (January 01, 2006). An investigation of path-goal and transformational leadership theory predictions at the individual level of analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 1, 21. Winkler, I. (2010). Contemporary leadership theories: Enhancing the understanding of the complexity, subjectivity and dynamic of leadership. Berlin: Physica-Verlag. Read More