The Sensibilities of Path-Goal Leadership

Being a budget and finance professional, I keep an eye on the dollars, and I gladly accept any monikers that go with that. As a public servant, I focus on offering quality services to my constituents in the most cost-effective manner possible. Part of being cost effective is being able to hire and retain fellow professionals to
efficiently and effectively run government operations.  While I believe in maximizing the dollars that are
entrusted in me by the taxpayer, I also believe that you must offer a competitive total compensation package as one of the means of retaining quality staff. The cost of providing public services can be reduced by minimizing staff turnover. As an administrator, one way of reducing staff turnover is by doing what is necessary to promote satisfaction in the workplace, and promoting satisfaction means that leaders must understand the motivating factors of the staff in our organizations. While this can be a complex endeavor, it is not impossible when proper efforts are applied. It requires multiple aspects of leadership theories, such as those provided in the path-goal theory.


This week I read about the leadership concept of the path-goal theory. This subject intrigued me as it speaks to something we all strive for as leaders: to effectively understand and serve the needs of our employees. The theory seems like a win-win situation for the employee and the manager alike. This week I will focus on the employee aspects of the path-goal theory.

The foundation of path-goal theory is that it focuses on the ability of a manager to motivate their employees to accomplish the goals set forth by the organization.  This is a different approach than managers using contingency theory, where the goal is to survey an organizational problem and apply the appropriate management style best suited to solve the problem. Peter Northouse writes that path-goal theory focuses an employee’s characteristics, the work setting, and the appropriate leadership style. One example of an employee characteristic would be experience. For example, let’s say that there are two employees that work in similar jobs for the same employer. Employee A has been with the agency for 3 months, while employee B has been with the agency for 6 years.  Both employees were assigned to work together on a project.  The two get along great, but are struggling to complete the project. As a manager, what would you do?

Obviously, that would depend on the circumstances surrounding why the project has not been completed.  If the problem is due to the lack of training, then as a manager you would need to decide the proper course of action using a directive and/or supportive leadership style. Would you provide your employees the necessary training, or would you replace one or both employees with someone who already has the training? How would you address the problem if it is due to motivational factors?  As a leader, the solution can be complicated, but you have numerous options. Will you employ a directive style, and provide coaching to the employee, explaining the expectations?  Or, would you employee a supportive style, where you would coerce the employee to perform and reassure them that their skillset is more than adequate to complete the task at hand?   Would you use a participative style, where you could involve the employees in the decision process that determines why the problem exists and work together to determine the best solution? Lastly, would you try to utilize an achievement-oriented approach to establish the expectation of high performance and success? Using any of these leadership theories is highly dependent on the situation and the employee you are working with.  A leader needs to possess an understanding of their organization and the idiosyncrasies of their staff they are working with.

One of the strengths of the path-goal concept is that the leader’s approach to organizational problems are customized based on the employee, as it provides a useful theoretical framework for how the behaviors of leadership affect the satisfaction of your employees. Satisfied employees are content and motivated employees. Content employees will more than likely be retained; saving thousands of dollars in recruiting, hiring, and training staff. Motivated employees become higher performing employees. If you are a achievement-oriented leader, you gotta love that!

Situational Leadership – Deciding when to think outside of your box

This week, one of the subjects I read about was situational leadership. This style of leadership speaks to me because I have always believed that different situations call for different solutions …and styles.

Situational leadership teaches us that there are four main styles that are driven by low and high supportive and directive behaviors. Along the bell curve of the situational leadership model lies each of the four styles; directing (S1), coaching (S2), supporting (S3), and delegating (S4). The key is for a leader to possess advanced understanding each management style as well as the interpersonal skills to properly read their employee’s socioemotional needs.  Once these needs have been identified, an effective leader will employ the most appropriate management style accordingly.  Doesn’t this just make sense?  In my opinion, it just makes sense for a leader to have enough management savvy to customize their approach to each employee. Let’s discuss each of the four management styles.

Directing (S1). The directing management style lies within the lower right portion of the situational leadership model, within the quadrant defined as low supportive and high directive management behaviors. A leader exhibiting this style will focus almost solely on completing organizational tasks, and very little on the socioemotional needs of their staff.  This does not mean that a directing style leader is uncaring about staff needs; but their focus is on communicating organizational needs, defining what has to be accomplished, and closely monitoring progress until the goal is obtained.  This style of leadership would shine in a couple of situations. The first would be a crisis situation, where everyone’s focus must be one solving the crisis, and once the crisis has been removed, a leader can transition back into a role that is more employee-centric. The second would be in an environment with new staff where they have yet to develop an understanding of organizational needs, and thus need very direct guidance on what to do and even sometimes, how to do it.

Coaching (S2). The coaching management style lies within the upper right portion of the situational leadership model, within the quadrant defined as high supportive and high directive management behaviors. A leader exhibiting the coaching leadership style will place primary foci on both achieving the task at hand and developing staff and their socioemotional needs. A coaching leader will communicate the goals and tasks to their staff, solicit feedback on what the employee thinks is the best solution to the problem, but making a final decision falls upon the manager. Training or staff development is supported, but a coaching leader’s support of this could potentially be focused on task at hand.  This style seems to be where the most concessions would occur, and in my mind, would be the most difficult management style to sustain because this leadership style require a continuous juggling between organizational need and employee desires. The coaching leadership style would test the savviness of an effective leader, but it is a skill that one needs to develop and perfect in order to work within the situational leadership continuum.

Supporting (S3). The supporting management style lies within the upper left portion of the situational leadership model within the quadrant defined as high supportive and low directive management behaviors. A leader exhibiting a supportive management style will place a greater emphasis on developing their staff and their socioemotional needs than completing the task at hand.  This does not mean that the leader with this style does not have the task in mind, just that they believe that the best way to accomplish the task is through developing their employees. This is not a bad management style for a couple of reasons. Developing your staff yields immediate and future benefits to an organization, as the employee can use their newly acquired skills for both the current task at hand, as well as tasks that come down the road.  In addition, developing staff can boost an employee’s self-confidence and dedication to the organization. Granted, leaders that develop employees will potentially provide them with the skills needed to seek advancement opportunities, and that is ok. The benefits reaped from developing your employees far outweigh any concerns of them moving on.

Delegating (S4). The delegating management style falls at the bottom left portion of the situational model within the quadrant defined as low supportive and low directive management behaviors. The delegating style really has to do with a matter of a leader’s trust in their employees to be able to act autonomously in the
workplace.  A delegating leader would trust staff to make decisions regarding how the work gets done, and then watch them employ those decisions accordingly. This is a hands-off approach to management that would require a very, very special group of employees who have a true interest and investment in their jobs to want to go above and beyond the job description.  In the government arena, I would argue that this type of management does not occur on most levels, and would really only be successful on the director to manager level. At the manager to staff level there are many obstacles that prevent a delegating style, such as labor contracts and policies that limit what a line employee can do without being considered to be working out of their job classification.

So... which leader should you be? Depends on situation.

Have a great week, and go do great things!

Traits, Skills, and a Strong Back.

First of all, Happy Father’s Day to all of your dads. If you are involved in your kid’s lives (regardless of age), great job! If you are not involved, it is never too late. Society needs kids that have a positive father’s presence in their lives. I have two wonderful adult children who both are in college. I still do my best to be a positive role model to them, provide them guidance, and I am their biggest cheerleader! I love them dearly, and am very proud of them. Someday, I hope and pray that both of them are just a big of a pain in the butt to their kids as I have been to them. If they are, then I feel in some way that I have done my job well.

This weekend was an interesting Father’s Day weekend for me. In the past two days, my kids decided that this was the week for both of them to move apartments. I couldn’t help but think “really, both of you are going to move... the same weekend?!!” Needless to say, my wife and I have spent this weekend moving our kids. What a wonderful Father’s Day present: boy, am I tire sore!

You are probably thinking: where is he going with this? Well, this week I read about two different theories/approaches to leadership: the trait approach and the skills approach. Northouse discusses that the trait approach describes leadership traits that are inherent traits exhibited by great leaders, and that true leaders were born with the ability to exhibit them. The trait approach teaches us that there are core qualities defining true leadership, such as intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability. By contrast, the skills approach emphasizes skills and abilities that can be learned and developed, such as problem-solving, social judgment, as well as other knowledge-based attributes. The skills approach also stresses the need for technical, personal, and conceptual skills as an important foundation for effective leadership.

Which theory do you think correctly addresses what makes up a true leader? My opinion is this: An effective leader will exhibit qualities of both theories. A leader, or anyone who successfully achieves the goals they set for themselves, will have aspects of trait leadership (intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability). However, these successful people also have skill-based skills (as problem-solving, social judgment, perceptiveness, perspective, knowledge, general and crystalized cognitive abilities). The trait and skills approaches form a partnership. It takes determination and drive to gain knowledge and problem-solving skills; and it takes intelligence and confidence to develop cognitive abilities and perceptiveness towards one’s customers and employees. A true leader really must have qualities of one approach to possess the other.

How does this relate to my weekend? It takes trait leadership qualities to be a father. It takes perceptiveness, perspective, integrity, and determination to continue to coach and teach your children when they do not want to listen. It takes self-confidence to teach your kids how to be determined and persistent. It takes intelligence to know when to push, and when to back off and let them push themselves. Most of all, it takes love, patience, and faith.

…and a strong back!

Becoming an Emergent Leader...

Earlier this week I read an interesting article by Paul H. O’Neill titled Truth, Transparency, and Leadership. Paul was the U.S. Secretary of Treasury from January, 2001 through December, 2002, during the early years of the George W. Bush administration. Prior to his stint as Secretary of Treasury, O’Neill was president and CEO for Alcoa for 12 years, transforming them into one of the world’s leading aluminum companies while emphasizing workplace safety. I had found this interesting, because I did not understand how the president and CEO of a major corporation qualified to lead the treasury department for the leader of free world. Later, I read that he had also served as the deputy director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget from 1974 to 1977. Now, I am more at ease with is qualifications. Not that the level of my composer should be of concern for a person’s qualifications, but I digress.

One of the points that Paul’s article makes regards what is considered “real” leadership. This will be my focus today. He discusses how each of our leaderships can be quantified by our staff answering three simple questions every day. Granted, any leader cannot make everyone happy every day, so let’s take averages here. If the majority of the people that each of us influence can answer yes to these three questions the

majority of the time, then we are doing a pretty good job. Answer these questions in your own mind:

• Are our employees treated with dignity and respect every day by everyone they encounter? 
• Are our employees given what they need so they can contribute in a way that brings meaning to their life? 
• Are our employees recognized for their accomplishments? 

Are our employees treated with dignity and respect every day by everyone they encounter?

This is a simple concept that can often be overlooked. Think about it. For example, do you treat your subordinate with the same dignity and respect that you would your director? One thing I must differentiate here is that O’Neill is asking about whether you treat everyone with dignity and respect, not whether you treat different people differently. You may, and undoubtedly do, treat your director differently than you do your subordinate. This is not a bad thing, as long as you are treating both of these people, as well as customers (internal and external), peers, etc., with dignity and respect.

Are our employees given what they need so they can contribute in a way that brings meaning to their life?
Think about the fact that you and your staff spend a very large portion of time at work. Together. Being a valued contributor at work helps bring balance to one’s life. Psychcentral.com (http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2014/02/02/8-ways-to-find-real-happiness-at-work/) discusses eight steps to achieving happiness at work, including finding balance, maintaining concentration, compassion, resilience, communication and connection, integrity, meaning, and open awareness. Being a valued contributor will help your employees reach meaning in their lives, and in order for them to become a valued contributor, you must remove any and all barriers that are in their way. As a leader, do you provide your staff with what they need in terms of education, training, encouragement, tools, and financial resources so they can contribute in a way that brings meaning to their life? If you are providing for the needs of your employees to succeed, then you should ask yourself if you are holding your employees and your organization back from achieving great things.

Are our employees recognized for their accomplishments?
Has there ever been a time when you took credit when one of your employees did something truly great?

Maybe you told them “great job”, but later when your boss told you that you did a great job, you didn't step up and give your employee their much-deserved credit. It may have been unintentional, but it is still unethical. Your boss will still give you due credit if you tell them that one of your employees did a great job, as your employee will get credit for the great work, and you will get credit for doing a great job empowering your employee and providing them with the tools they needed to do great things.

These simple things create a win-win situation for all. Lifting your employees up to praise their work relates directly to what I had spoken of earlier. Show employees respect and dignity. Provide them what they need so they can contribute in a way that brings meaning to their life.

As a result, you look like a “real” emergent leader

Have a great week!

Leaders Are Always Made...

Hello, and welcome to my blog!My name is Leroy Fenn.  I am writing this blog as part of the PA6665 Leadership course at Troy University. This course is part of the Public Administration graduate program at Troy. This course is an elective for my program, and I selected to take it because the knowledge gained regarding leadership will enhance my skill set, giving me additional tools to use in both my personal and professional life. Being a great leader is critical to create a great organization.  When serving as a public servant, being a great leader means being innovative, creative, and empowering. What I hope to take from this class will be to combine the great information I learn with the discussions generated between me and my fellow classmates, and develop this new knowledge into tools that can be incorporated not only in my current workplace, but also into my future, whatever it may hold.

A little about me: I live in Philomath, Oregon with my wife of 26 years and our old dachshund Otto.  We have two children who are both in college; one is in their first year of their master’s program, and the other is in the second year of college.   You might be wondering why someone my age is pursuing their master’s degree, and I often wonder that myself!  I have a thirst for knowledge, and an honest drive to help my community, and to really make a difference in this world. Even at my age, there is still an optimist in me that says “yes, you can make a difference”.  In the end, I think most of us want to help one another and try to leave this world in a better state than we found it.  I work for the Benton County, Oregon as an Office Manager, managing the finance, budget, and grant functions of the Sheriff’s office.  I enjoy working with numbers, so working in the areas of finance, budget, and grants is a natural fit.

What this blog is about: This blog is about leadership.  Each week, I will discuss the weekly activities from class, and provide my own twist to the topic.  What did the readings or weekly topic mean to me? How can (or how would) I use the information I gleaned from the past week in my circle of influence?  Lastly, what local, statewide, or national events relate to the topic?  My goal is to create a posting each week, and as I write my blog, I welcome any feedback that you may have.  If you agree with me, let me know.  If you do not agree with me, let me know.  Feedback is how I learn other perspectives and grow!

This week, we began discussing chapter one of Leadership: Theory and Practice by Peter G. Northouse.  Northouse provides a discussion on assigned versus emergent leadership, and the different bases of power. This provided a foundation for our classroom discussion of whether a person is born with leadership traits, or if these traits are developed through training; or the argument of nature vs. nurture. What a fantastic topic! It provided for some excellent discussions in our class.  

When discussing leadership traits in terms of nature vs. nurture, my opinion is leadership includes aspects of both qualities.  Some people are born leaders.  I think about those people I went to school with, such as the different student body presidents, the debate team leaders, and students who participated in DECA and FBLA. These were the young men and women who went above and beyond to represent our student body by assuming a leadership role to help foster change.  I still see some of those people today, and each of them serve in various professional fields as leaders. Two of them are founders of businesses and serve as the CEO’s of their respective companies.  Others are lawyers and doctors.  All are leaders in their field.  At such a young age, I can’t help to think that these people were born with some level of predisposition towards leadership (nature), as I can’t imagine that there would have been time at such a young age to have obtained sufficient training (nurture). 

Does this mean that an average person (such as me) cannot become a good, or maybe even great, leader without being born with obvious leadership qualities?  Of course they can! In addition to the importance that nature plays in a person becoming a great leader, nurturing plays an equally important role. Without the proper training in leadership, even the most predisposed leader cannot effectively guide his or her organization and gain the moniker or an emergent leader. Along with the attributes of nature and nurture, there is one other attribute that a leader must possess: drive.  A person must be driven to leadership in order to be successful at it. Like other things of value, leadership success is not easy to obtain.  It takes hard work, diligence, studying, self-discipline, and a genuine interest and thorough understanding of the people you lead. After all, you can’t lead without followers, and if you do not understand the needs and motivators of your followers (and nurture them accordingly), there is a good chance they will not follow you for long. 

In my closing thoughts, in reading Three Star Leadership, I found an interesting comment that I think sums it up: 

“Leaders are sort of born, Leaders are always made”. 

Have a great week!