Situational Leadership Theory And The Path-Goal Theory Of Leadership

In order to ensure that I function as an effective leader, I must observe and reflect upon major leadership theories and models. I believe the Situational Leadership Theory, the Path-Goal Theory of Leadership, and Vroom and Yetton’s Normative Decision Model may help me achieve this high quality leadership that I seek. These theories and models are not without their faults, but studies have proven them to provide some level of effectiveness. Further reflection on each will help to determine what theory/model or what combination of these theories and models will yield me the best results.

The Situational Leadership Theory was interesting to me due to its adaptive nature. I firmly believe that to be an effective leader you anticipate different

It draws its basis from the expectancy theory of motivation which states that employees apply effort to produce high performance levels which are rewarded with something they find worthwhile, a theory that I agree with for the most part. It is this promise of reimbursement that keeps them motivated. As a leader, this theory states that I must ensure that these conditions are met, so as to keep the employees motivated and satisfied. It also lists four leadership styles- directive, supportive, participative, and achievement-oriented. Each style should be applied to different situations. I like that this theory takes into account that different situations should be dealt using different leadership styles. However, I find that this theory focuses too heavily upon the leader and less on the employees- it assumes that groups must be led because they “do not know what is good for them” (Leadership-central,

It asks the leader questions that they rate high or low, the path they take helps decide what course of action should be taken- should they decide consult individually, consult as a group, facilitate, or delegate? It gives leaders decisions ranging from more authoritative approaches to more democratic approaches. Despite looking complicated, once understood it is simple to follow. It takes into account the competence of the group and of you as a leader. However, the model does that take into account to size of the group. Small groups and large group should be dealt with in different ways due to the specific complexities and challenges they may present. It may also be too mechanical and may not take into account the psyche and emotions of the participants. Despite this, it does have research supporting its