The Path-Goal Theory: A Framework for Leadership
We need a mentality change. This was a recurring statement made at both LGP Design Workshops I had the privilege of attending, one of which I took notes and the other of which I facilitated. Since those workshops, the concept of shifting mentalities has stayed with me. But the blank stares I often get—mine included—when asked for practical steps to make this happen shows just how tricky the challenge is. With this in mind, I approach Northouse’s Leadership: Theory & Practice with optimism, hoping to uncover leadership approaches to cultivate meaningful change.
Definitions of leadership have been evolving since the early 20th century.[1] As Northouse observes, “While many have a gut-level grasp of what leadership is, putting a definition to the term has proved a challenging endeavor for scholars and practitioners alike.”[2] His book offers a practical definition: “Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.[3] Reflecting on insights from the recent Design Workshops, participants emphasized the importance of shifting mindsets to better prioritize the needs of the population. This aligns with the principles of Northouse’s Path-Goal Theory, which I found particularly resonant with the leadership challenges I’ve observed. Northouse describes the theory as one that emphasizes how leaders can adapt their behaviors [4] to support and guide their teams toward achieving shared objectives. While no single theory can produce a mentality shift, I believe the Path-Goal Theory offers a valuable framework for leaders to assess and address the unique needs of their followers, guiding them effectively through obstacles.
The essence of the Path-Goal Theory lies in the idea that effective leaders empower their followers by addressing gaps in their environment and providing support to overcome any deficiencies in their abilities.[5] Northouse writes, “In brief, the path-goal theory is designed to explain how leaders can help followers along the path to their goals by selecting specific behaviors that are best suited to followers’ needs and to the situation in which followers are working.”[6] I found this theory particularly intriguing, as it aligns with my belief that there is no “one size fits all” approach, especially in North Africa. A good friend who works in a similar field once shared valuable advice: “We cannot generalize because everyone is unique. It’s not helpful to conclude, ‘This is the best.’ People from the Global North often try to simplify and generalize, but the solution is not always the same.” This perspective highlights how important it is for leadership to be customized to meet the unique needs of each follower. Northouse writes, “In simple terms, it is the leader’s responsibility to help followers reach their goals by directing, guiding, and coaching them along the way.”[7] Ultimately, the theory suggests that leadership should be adapted to suit the unique follower[8] and task characteristics.[9]
Northouse emphasizes the Path-Goal Theory’s strengths as a valuable framework for understanding how leadership behaviors impact follower satisfaction and performance. It effectively evaluates follower motivation and offers a practical leadership model. However, the theory has been criticized for its complexity, which makes it difficult to apply all its elements, its limited empirical support, its lack of consideration for gender differences in leadership, and its focus on leader behavior as the primary driver of follower motivation.[10]
In a conversation with a friend serving as the Regional Director of a nonprofit in North Africa, we reflected on the significant challenges facing our host countries and discussed strategies to inspire communities to rally around a shared vision for their future. A recurring theme emerged: the need for a fundamental shift in mentality. This complex and multifaceted issue extends far beyond this post’s scope.
Our reflections led me to question whether the leadership behaviors commonly employed in certain situations truly address the specific needs of individuals, especially given their unique tasks and challenges. Personally, I gravitate toward a supportive leadership style, emphasizing approachability and the well-being of those I work with. While this approach has strengths, the Path-Goal Theory has challenged me to reconsider its universal applicability. The theory highlights that effective leadership is not about adhering to a single style but about adaptability—adjusting one’s behaviors to meet the distinctive needs of followers and the demands of the context. This insight has prompted me to rethink the emphasis on shifting the mentality of followers. Perhaps the first step should be for leaders to critically examine their own behaviors and ask: Are we truly meeting the needs of those we aim to lead?
[1] Peter G. Northouse, Leadership: Theory and Practice, 9th ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2022), 2.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid, 6.
[4] In 1996, House introduced a revised version of the Path-Goal Theory, expanding it to include eight distinct leadership behaviors: (a) directive, (b) supportive, (c) participative, (d) achievement-oriented, (e) work facilitation, (f) group-oriented decision-making, (g) work-group representation and networking, and (h) value-based leadership.
[5] Peter G. Northouse, Leadership, 139.
[6] Peter G. Northouse, Leadership, 133.
[7] Peter G. Northouse, Leadership, 132.
[8] Follower characteristics determine how a leader’s behavior is interpreted by followers in a given work context. Researchers have focused on followers’ needs for affiliation, preferences for structure, desires for control, and self-perceived level of task ability. Peter G. Northouse, Leadership: Theory and Practice (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2019),137.
[9] Task characteristics include the design of the followers’ task, the formal authority system of the organization, and the primary work group of followers. Collectively, these characteristics in themselves can provide motivation for followers. Peter G. Northouse, Leadership: Theory and Practice (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2019),138.
[10] Peter G. Northouse, Leadership, 132.
About the Author
Elysse Burns
6 responses to “The Path-Goal Theory: A Framework for Leadership”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi Elysse, thanks for your post! Regarding the path-goal theory and a needed mentality change, have you been able to identify any of the barriers to changing mentalities and do you have any thoughts on how these can be addressed?
Great post Elysse. How are you reassessing your default leadership style in the context you’re in in light of what you’ve read?
Elysse,
I’ll jump in here also and piggyback off of Ryan’s comment. How has your own leadership style shifted in the time you have been in overseas? Have you found that your leadership there is different than it was in the States?
Nice work, Elysse. When a general leadership approach wouldn’t work, how have you had to adapt your behaviors to meet the unique needs of your “followers” (clients/friends, etc.) in Mauritania? So many nuances are rooted in the need for trust first and foremost.
Hi, Elysse, thank you for your post and sharing about your thoughts on path-goal theory. I did skip over it in the text, but I now learn about it. I like what you said about the ‘one-size fits all’ or ‘one size- does not fit all theory.’ Do think context, or environment is essential in deciding or design around our leadership style? Thanks again.
Hi Elysse,
Thank you for your blog and teaching me about path-goal theory. Did your reading of this theory provide insight into how to determine the ‘goal’? I’m also wondering about making a path of little goals to work towards one large goal.