At its core, the path-goal theory of leadership asserts that effective leaders

must adapt their behaviour to meet the specific needs of their followers,
guiding them along the path to success. By doing so, a leader can
significantly enhance their team’s motivation, satisfaction, and overall
performance.

The Four Leadership Styles

Effective leadership requires understanding and adapting to the needs of
team members and work environments. The path-goal theory of leadership
identifies four distinct leadership styles that can be employed to enhance
motivation and goal achievement..

1. Directive Leadership
Characterised by clear guidance, established expectations, and specific
goals, directive leadership style greatly influences task structure and
decision-making processes.

A leader who embraces this style uses their formal authority to streamline
tasks and ensure efficiency, providing clear instructions and a structured
approach. This enables team members to navigate complex tasks with ease
and confidence.

2. Supportive Leadership
Emphasising the well-being and motivation of team members, supportive
leadership fosters a positive work environment through approachability,
understanding, and empathy.

A leader who adopt this style prioritise their teams’ needs and offer
encouragement and assistance when needed. This nurturing atmosphere
allows team members to thrive both personally and professionally.

3. Participative Leadership
Participative leadership actively engages group members in decision-making,
encouraging collaboration and open communication.

A participative leader empowers teams to overcome obstacles and develop

creative solutions. It strengthens team dynamics and promotes a sense of
ownership and commitment among team members. Ultimately, this leads to
better performance.

4. Achievement-Oriented Leadership
Achievement-oriented leadership states that leaders must set ambitious
goals and continuously challenge their team members to excel. High-
performance standards are established, fostering a culture of striving for
excellence and overcoming psychological barriers.

These leaders believe in their team’s potential and push them to achieve
remarkable results, instilling a strong sense of accomplishment and pride in
their work.

Factors Influencing Leadership Style

When choosing the most effective leadership style, it’s essential to consider
the follower characteristics and situational factors that impact the dynamics
within a team.

Follower Characteristics
1. Personal characteristics
The personality traits, attitudes, and experiences of team members influence
their prefered leadership style.
For example, some individuals may respond better to a more directive
approach, while others might thrive under supportive or participative
leadership.

2. Internal and external locus of control

The extent to which team members believe they have control over their
circumstances and outcomes also affects their receptiveness to different
leader behavior.

Those with an internal locus of control tend to take personal responsibility for
their actions and may prefer participative or achievement-oriented
leadership. On the other hand, individuals with an external locus of control
may respond better to directive or supportive leadership.

Situational Factors
1. Task goals and task-oriented situations
The nature of the tasks and the goals set for the team can influence the
optimal leadership style.

For instance, tasks that require a high degree of collaboration may benefit
from participative leadership, while clear task goals and structure might be
better suited to directive leadership.

2. Environmental factors
The work environment, including organisational culture, resources, and
external pressures, can also significantly determine the appropriate
leadership style.

In a highly competitive environment, achievement-oriented leadership might

be more effective. On the other hand, supportive leadership may be ideal in
environments where employee well-being is a priority

Transactional Leadership
Transactional leadership is often associated with a more traditional
approach to management. It focuses on maintaining order and
achieving short-term goals through a system of rewards and
punishments. Leaders who adopt this style rely on a clear chain of
command, well-defined roles and responsibilities, and strict adherence
to established procedures.

Characteristics of Transactional Leadership

1. Contingent Rewards: Transactional leaders motivate their team
members by offering tangible rewards in exchange for meeting
specific performance goals. This approach encourages compliance
and often relies on extrinsic motivation, such as bonuses or
promotions.
Explore Executive Programme in Leadership & Management
2. Management by Exception: Transactional leaders monitor their
team's performance closely and intervene when deviations from
established standards occur. They typically address issues through
corrective actions and penalties, reinforcing a culture of accountability.
3. Clarity of Expectations: Team members in a transactional
leadership environment know precisely what is expected of them, as
roles and responsibilities are clearly defined. This clarity can provide a
sense of security and predictability.

Impact of Transactional Leadership

Transactional leadership can be effective in certain contexts, such as
industries with strict regulations or environments where safety and
adherence to established protocols are paramount. However, it also
has limitations. While it may drive short-term results and maintain
order, it can stifle creativity and innovation. Team members may
become motivated solely by rewards, leading to a lack of intrinsic
motivation and limited personal growth. Over time, a transactional
leadership style may hinder an organization's ability to adapt to
change and thrive in dynamic markets.

Transformational Leadership
In contrast to transactional leadership, transformational leadership
focuses on long-term vision and inspiring change. Transformational
leaders seek to motivate and empower their team members by
fostering a shared vision, encouraging creativity, and promoting
personal growth.

Characteristics of Transformational Leadership

1. Inspirational Vision: Transformational leaders articulate a
compelling vision for the future, inspiring their team members to
pursue ambitious goals. They emphasize the significance of the
organization's mission and the role each individual plays in achieving
it.
Explore Senior Management Programme
2. Individualized Consideration: These leaders pay close attention
to the needs and aspirations of each team member, providing
personalized support and mentorship. This approach fosters a sense
of belonging and commitment among employees.
3. Intellectual Stimulation: Transformational leaders encourage
critical thinking and innovation. They challenge the status quo,
promote open communication, and create an environment where new
ideas are welcomed and explored.

Explore Executive Programme in Leadership & Management

Impact of Transformational Leadership
Transformational leadership can have a profound and positive impact
on organizations. By inspiring employees to share a common vision
and take ownership of their work, it can lead to increased job
satisfaction, motivation, and commitment. Employees are more likely
to feel engaged and passionate about their roles, leading to higher
levels of creativity and innovation. Moreover, transformational leaders
are often associated with organizational adaptability, making them
valuable in industries characterized by rapid change and uncertainty.

Contrasting Styles and Finding the Balance

While transactional and transformational leadership are often
presented as opposing styles, they are not mutually exclusive.
Effective leaders can incorporate elements of both styles to suit
different situations. This hybrid approach, known as "transformational-
transactional leadership," allows leaders to provide structure and
clarity when needed while also inspiring and motivating their teams.

Finding the right balance between these two styles depends on

various factors, including the organization's culture, industry, and
specific challenges. In some situations, such as crisis management or
routine tasks, transactional leadership may be more appropriate. In
others, particularly when driving innovation or organizational change,
transformational leadership can be highly effective
The idea that a manager’s attitude has an impact on employee motivation was originally
proposed by Douglas McGregor, a management professor at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology during the 1950s and 1960s. In his 1960 book, The Human Side
of Enterprise, McGregor proposed two theories by which managers perceive and
address employee motivation. He referred to these opposing motivational methods as
Theory X and Theory Y management. Each assumes that the manager’s role is to
organize resources, including people, to best benefit the company. However, beyond
this commonality, the attitudes and assumptions they embody are quite different.

Theory X

According to McGregor, Theory X management assumes the following:

 Work is inherently distasteful to most people, and they will attempt to avoid work
whenever possible.
 Most people are not ambitious, have little desire for responsibility, and prefer to be
directed.
 Most people have little aptitude for creativity in solving organizational problems.
 Motivation occurs only at the physiological and security levels of Maslow’s
hierarchy of needs.
 Most people are self-centered. As a result, they must be closely controlled and
often coerced to achieve organizational objectives.
 Most people resist change.
 Most people are gullible and unintelligent.
Essentially, Theory X assumes that the primary source of employee motivation is
monetary, with security as a strong second. Under Theory X, one can take a hard or
soft approach to getting results.

The hard approach to motivation relies on coercion, implicit threats, micromanagement,

and tight controls— essentially an environment of command and control. The soft
approach, however, is to be permissive and seek harmony in the hopes that, in return,
employees will cooperate when asked. However, neither of these extremes is optimal.
The hard approach results in hostility, purposely low output, and extreme union
demands. The soft approach results in a growing desire for greater reward in exchange
for diminished work output.

It might seem that the optimal approach to human resource management would lie
somewhere between these extremes. However, McGregor asserts that neither
approach is appropriate, since the basic assumptions of Theory X are incorrect.

Drawing on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, McGregor argues that a need, once satisfied,
no longer motivates. The company uses monetary rewards and benefits to satisfy
employees’ lower-level needs. Once those needs have been satisfied, the motivation
disappears. Theory X management hinders the satisfaction of higher-level needs
because it doesn’t acknowledge that those needs are relevant in the workplace. As a
result, the only way that employees can attempt to meet higher-level needs at work is to
seek more compensation, so, predictably, they focus on monetary rewards. While
money may not be the most effective way to self-fulfillment, it may be the only way
available. People will use work to satisfy their lower needs and seek to satisfy their
higher needs during their leisure time. However, employees can be most productive
when their work goals align with their higher-level needs.

McGregor makes the point that a command-and-control environment is not effective

because it relies on lower needs for motivation, but in modern society those needs are
mostly satisfied and thus are no longer motivating. In this situation, one would expect
employees to dislike their work, avoid responsibility, have no interest in organizational
goals, resist change, etc.—creating, in effect, a self-fulfilling prophecy. To McGregor, a
steady supply of motivation seemed more likely to occur under Theory Y management.

Theory Y

The higher-level needs of esteem and self-actualization are ongoing needs that, for
most people, are never completely satisfied. As such, it is these higher-level needs
through which employees can best be motivated.

In strong contrast to Theory X, Theory Y management makes the following

assumptions:

 Work can be as natural as play if the conditions are favorable.

  People will be self-directed and creative to meet their work and organizational
objectives if they are committed to them.
 People will be committed to their quality and productivity objectives if rewards are
in place that address higher needs such as self-fulfillment.
 The capacity for creativity spreads throughout organizations.
 Most people can handle responsibility because creativity and ingenuity are
common in the population.
 Under these conditions, people will seek responsibility.

Under these assumptions, there is an opportunity to align personal goals with

organizational goals by using the employee’s own need for fulfillment as the motivator.
McGregor stressed that Theory Y management does not imply a soft approach.

McGregor recognized that some people may not have reached the level of maturity
assumed by Theory Y and may initially need tighter controls that can be relaxed as the
employee develops.

If Theory Y holds true, an organization can apply the following principles of scientific
management to improve employee motivation:

 Decentralization and delegation: If firms decentralize control and reduce the

number of levels of management, managers will have more subordinates and
consequently need to delegate some responsibility and decision making to them.
 Job enlargement: Broadening the scope of an employee’s job adds variety and
opportunities to satisfy ego needs.
 Participative management: Consulting employees in the decision-making
process taps their creative capacity and provides them with some control over
their work environment.
 Performance appraisals: Having the employee set objectives and participate in
the process of self-evaluation increases engagement and dedication.

If properly implemented, such an environment can increase and continually

fuel motivation as employees work to satisfy their higher-level personal needs through
their jobs.

What is Herzberg's two-factor theory?

Herzberg's two-factor theory is a well-known motivation theory in the field of
business management. The theory comprises two factors: motivation and
hygiene. Motivation factors, such as a sense of achievement and responsibility,
aim to inspire and engage employees. Hygiene factors, such as salary and
working conditions, are necessary for employees to maintain satisfaction in the
workplace. The presence or absence of these factors can significantly impact
employee motivation and engagement, and different combinations of these
factors can affect the employees' job satisfaction level.

Herzberg's two-factor theory is a motivation theory that suggests that

satisfaction and dissatisfaction at work are influenced by two sets of factors:
hygiene factors and motivators.

Hygiene factors are basic job necessities, such as working conditions and
salary, that, if not met, can cause dissatisfaction.

Motivators, such as recognition and achievement, drive job satisfaction and

motivation. The theory asserts that to improve job satisfaction and
motivation, managers must not only provide adequate hygiene factors but also
focus on motivators.

Motivators and hygiene factors combinations in

Herzberg's two-factor theory
Herbzerg's theory suggests that there are two types of factors that affect
employee satisfaction and motivation: hygiene factors and motivators. When
employees have high levels of both hygiene factors and motivators, they are
more likely to be highly engaged and motivated in their work. On the other hand,
when employees have low levels of hygiene factors and motivators, they may
experience low motivation, high dissatisfaction, and turnover. Let's take a look at
more combinations of motivators and hygiene factors:

1. High hygiene and high motivation: This is the combination that will
make employees highly engaged and motivated towards their work.
2. High hygiene and low motivation: This combination will mean that the
employees will still be going to work in the company and achieve set
targets to keep their job. However, employees will not be motivated to
achieve targets beyond the set expectations.
3. Low hygiene and high motivation: This is not the best situation for
employees to be in. Even though employees may be motivated, if the
minimum working conditions are not met, employees may look for another
job with better working conditions.
4. Low hygiene and low motivation: This is the worst combination. This
can result in high staff turnover and high work dissatisfaction.

Example of Herzberg's motivation-hygiene theory

This section will provide an example of how Herzberg's motivation-hygiene
theory can be adapted and implemented in the workplace.

In the workplace, hygiene factors can be used to eliminate employees'

dissatisfaction with work. Adding and improving hygiene factors may not
necessarily lead employees to more motivation, but it can lead to better
performance and lower staff turnover.

In practice, the improvement of hygiene factors in the workplace will look

like this:

 Removing or improving poor business policies

 Show respect to all employees regardless of their position
 Offer higher or competitive salaries
 Implement effective and supportive supervision for all employees
 Improve working conditions
 Provide job security

Additionally, organizations should focus on improving employees' motivation

factors suggested by Herzberg. As these are the factors that will lead to
employee satisfaction, motivation and engagement towards work.

In practice, the implementation and improvement of motivation factors will

look like this:

 The organization provides more growth and development opportunities for

its employees
 Recognition of employees achievements and hard work
 Giving employees more responsibilities than they can handle
 Assign employees to duties that they enjoy and that are fitted with their
skills and experiences
 Make work interesting and engaging so that employees are motivated
towards it

Advantages of Herzberg's two-factor theory

The advantages of Herzberg two-factor theory are:

 Direct focus on employees motivation - Herzberg's theory is focused

on factors that cause motivation and prevent dissatisfaction for employees
 individually rather than concentrating on external factors. This means that
by implementing Herzberg's motivation-hygiene theory organizations can
improve employees' motivation and working environment directly, this will
motivate employees to work more efficiently and lower the staff turnover
rate.

 Companies can solve problems faced by employees - The company

can focus on solving the dissatisfaction problems of employees. This is
because Herzberg's theory provides multiple factors that can cause
dissatisfaction such as the absence of hygiene factors as well as factors
that cause motivation. By eliminating factors that cause dissatisfaction
and implementing satisfactory factors will make employees more
motivated towards work.

 Monetary factors are the secondary focus - Other theories such as

Taylor's theory or managers may consider monetary benefits as a
primary motivator. However, Herzberg found that monetary benefits may
not be as motivational as other factors. In Herzberg's theory salary is
named as a hygiene factor. Low salary may leave employees dissatisfied,
on the other hand, a higher salary may not necessarily make employees
more motivated towards work. Herzberg includes motivation factors other
than monetary benefits such as promotion, recognition, interest in work
and advancement. These factors according to Herzberg's theory will
make employees more engaged and motivated to work than monetary
benefits.

Disadvantages of Herzberg two-factor theory

The main disadvantage of Herzberg's theory is that it does not take into account
that people are motivated by different factors and:

 External factors are not considered - Herzberg's theory does not

consider external factors that may have an impact on employees
motivation. For example, the competitor's company may pay higher
salaries to its employees in similar positions. If the organization does not
consider improving this factor it can make employees dissatisfied and
decrease their motivation towards work.
 Employee job satisfaction and their work efficiency are not directly
related - Even though all the factors of Herzberg's theory are highly
implemented such as a combination of High hygiene and High motivation
 factors, companies can not reassure that employees will become more
productive and efficient towards their work . To put it simply, the theory
does not provide a direct guide on how to make employees more
productive.
 Herzberg's theory does not consider differences in people's social
and cultural backgrounds - People have different priorities, meaning
that they are motivated by different factors.
here are many theories that examine motivation, some of which have
similar elements to McClelland’s theory. For example, in
his Achievement model, McClelland studies those who try and be
better and achieve more. This is similar to both Herzberg’s ideas on
high and low achievers as well as Maslow’s theory of Self-
Actualization.

While his ideas are used primarily to assess work performance,

McClelland conducted other studies that centered on motivation. He
researched how motivation affected one’s health; an individual’s drive
to succeed can cause stress, high blood pressure, or abnormal
hormone levels. This demonstrated that internal factors, i.e. a motive,
can cause a physical response. Some were not convinced, but these
ideas provided a foundation for future studies.

Motivation – Three Needs Theory:

 Need for Achievement (nACH): Personal responsibility,

Feedback, Moderate risk
 Typical behaviors:
 High: Must win at any cost, must be on top, and receive credit.
 Low: Fears failure, avoids responsibility.
 Need for Power (nPOW): Influence, Competitive
 Typical behaviors:
 High: Demands blind loyalty and harmony, does not tolerate
disagreement.
 Low: Remains aloof, maintains social distance.
 Need for Affiliation (nAFF): Acceptance and friendship,
Cooperative
 Typical behaviors:
  High: Desires control of everyone and everything, exaggerates
own position and resources.
 Low: Dependent/subordinate, minimizes own position and
resources.

Source: David McClelland, 1961, The Achieving Society.

The Power Motive

If an individual’s predominant motive is power, they are motivated to
influence others and take control. While the extreme example of Hitler
in Nazi Germany may come to mind, this motive actually takes on a
more mild form of coach or leader. They do not seek to implement a
dictatorship but hope to motivate others, delegate responsibility and
influence those around them.

A coach is a good example because it perfectly illustrates the idea of

letting the players (or in this case, employees), do their job while they
assess the situation and make decisions. The players and employees
are aware of their responsibilities and are highly skilled to perform
them.

McClelland found that power-motivated individuals were best suited

for leadership positions within a company. If they were able to
effectively delegate tasks in the workforce, they were often able to be
successful leaders. This does not mean that all power-motivated
individuals will make good leaders. Each personality is unique and
those who are aggressive and authoritative may actually decrease the
work performance of their employees.

The Power Motive is not without its own disadvantages. Individuals

who are motivated by power are often flighty and frustrate easily. They
have no problem moving locations or changing situations if the
opportunity presents itself. They have a reputation for being “ladder
climbers,” or working their way up the organization as soon as a better
position presents itself. Some believe that they are not invested in
their role, but just simply biding their time until the next one is
available. As they will simply abandon their position in their search for
fame, recognition and wealth, it is difficult to dispel those ideas.

The Achievement Motive

If an individual’s predominant motive is achievement, they are
motivated to do better for the sake of doing so. They hope to exceed
expectations and are pleased when they surpass their peers. These
individuals like challenges and want to be in charge of their success.

Achievement-oriented individuals will change the situation or the

location if they feel like it is not meeting their needs. They do not like
working in groups because they do not like having limited control over
the outcome. Instead, they prefer to do work where the results are
clear and visible.

Many entrepreneurs are motivated by achievement. They have the

drive to be successful and this is, in turn, vital to the economy.
However, this may not mean that they are the best bosses to their
employees. Achievement-motivated individuals often prefer to do
things themselves, leading them to micromanage things in a business.
They prefer not to work in a team and often fail to share the workload
and responsibility. It is a double-edged sword: they experience
success and rise to management positions, but this same personality
is what keeps them from being successful in those roles.

The Affiliation Motive

If an individual’s predominant motive is affiliation, they are essentially
motivated by social connections. They are primarily motivated to fit in
and please others, and value their relationships with their peers.
These individuals appreciate familiar situations and are unlikely to
leave their work location. They also do not like working alone and try
to avoid disappointing their coworkers and managers at all costs.

Even though affiliation-motivated individuals work well in a team, they

are often not the best employees. They are not motivated to do better
as they are content to stay in their position. There is no drive to
improve their employee status or their personal position, which makes
them, in effect, the least effective workers.

How It Is Used
The Three Needs Theory is most often used in business or corporate
settings. It has enabled the use of personality tests in employees.
Originally dismissed as irrelevant, personality tests became more
popular when managers were attempting to discover what motivates
their employees. Personality tests also enable the manager to learn
more about each individual.

People require different things from their workplace. Individuals

motivated by power may need clear expectations and steps needed to
advance in their careers. Individuals motivated by achievement may
need regular opportunities to solve a problem. Individuals motivated
by affiliation may need consistent feedback on the job that they are
doing.

What Is The Reinforcement Theory Of Motivation?

American psychologist Burrhus Frederic Skinner or B.F. Skinner was best known for his
groundbreaking theories on behavior. Along with his associates, Skinner proposed
the Reinforcement Theory of Motivation. It states that behavior is a function of its
consequences—an individual will repeat behavior that led to positive consequences and
avoid behavior that has had negative effects. This phenomenon is also known as the
‘law effect’.

The Reinforcement Theory ignores an individual’s internal motivations and focuses on

environmental factors instead. This is why many organizations dedicate their time and
effort to improve the workplace culture. A healthy work environment has the power to
motivate employees and boost their morale. In many ways, the Reinforcement
Theory becomes a tool for influencing individual behavior.

Types Of Reinforcement In Organizational Behavior

Managers shoulder the additional responsibility of motivating and inspiring their teams
to perform better. This is possible only when employees are willing to make changes.
Reinforcement is an effective way to guide employees and help them differentiate
between positive and negative behaviors. Here are some Reinforcement Theory
examples:
 1. Positive Reinforcement
You positively react to someone’s behavior because it benefits your team and the
organization. This also assures the individual to repeat their behavior and continue
producing desirable outcomes. For example, you can reward an employee for
reaching office early. It increases the probability of the behavior getting repeated.
However, your reward needs to be spontaneous for greater reinforcement value.

2. Negative Reinforcement
Negative reinforcement refers to removing obstacles so that others can respond
positively and perform the way that they’re expected to. For instance, if someone
from your team wraps up early because of a long commute back home, you can
ask them to take some projects home and allow them some flexibility.

3. Punishment Reinforcement
In this type of reinforcement, you impose a negative consequence or remove
positive consequences to prevent someone from repeating undesirable behaviors.
However, punishment doesn’t mean that you reprimand someone or criticize them
harshly. For example, suspending an employee for violating work rules.
Punishment should not be confused with negative reinforcement, where you
withhold negative consequences to encourage good behavior. The ultimate goal
of punishment is to discourage bad behavior.

4. Extinction Reinforcement
It refers to the absence of reinforcements often used by managers to stop learned
behavior. You withhold positive reinforcements or rewards that encouraged the
behavior in the first place. For example, your team is required to work on an
important project. Everyone has to work overtime and even spare their weekends.
You provide them overtime pay for their efforts. After the completion of the project,
you stop providing any incentives and soon this learned behavior of working
overtime ends. However, you need to be careful about how you use this
reinforcement because the employees’ morale shouldn’t get affected.

Using The Reinforcement Theory In The Workplace

For the successful implementation of the Reinforcement Theory, you need to

incorporate both positive and negative reinforcement. There are two ways in which you
can effectively implement the Reinforcement Theory.
 1. Continuous Reinforcement:
You reinforce someone’s actions every time they demonstrate desirable behavior.

2. Intermittent Reinforcement:
There will be times when you can’t spontaneously reward or punish someone’s
behavior. Organizations often follow schedules to offer reinforcement and they do
it in three ways:

 Fixed Interval Schedule:

There is a fixed time period for reinforcement (for example, biweekly
paycheck)

 Variable Interval Schedule:

There is no fixed schedule for reinforcement and you can motivate someone
whenever you think it’s suitable

 Variable Ratio Schedule:

You reinforce someone’s behavior only after they have achieved the
predetermined sets of outcomes (for example, giving a raise after someone
meets all the targets)

Conclusion

The Reinforcement Theory tells you how someone learns certain behaviors. The tools
of reinforcement will help you motivate everyone to pursue their goals with greater
enthusiasm. Before you go ahead and influence anyone’s behavior, you need to
understand how your team functions. Harappa Education’s Managing Teamwork course
will teach you how everything, from team formation to team growth, works. You’ll learn
to navigate different working styles through the Social Styles Model. The Skill-Will
Matrix will help you assess everyone’s willingness to do certain tasks. After all,
motivation is one of the key ingredients of successful leadership.

What is goal-setting theory?

Goal-setting theory is an organizational psychology theory. (It’s also

sometimes called the goal setting theory of motivation). According to this
theory, goals that are clear, specific, and challenging are more motivating
than vague goals or easy goals. And when employees are more motivated,
they’re more successful in hitting their goals.
In the years following the release of Toward a Theory of Task Motivation and
Incentives, Locke would go on to partner with Dr. Gary Latham . Together, the pair
further explored and researched the effects of goal setting. In 1990, Locke and
Latham published A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance . This book
expanded on goal setting theory and created a framework for a more effective goal-
setting process.

Goal-setting theory is generally considered the foundation for SMART goals , a

popular goal setting framework. This acronym suggests goals should be Specific,
Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, and Time-bound for best results.

The purpose of goal-setting theory

The main purpose of goal-setting theory is to better understand the connection

between how the goal-setting process influences work motivation and performance.
From there, people and teams can use that understanding to help employees
become more successful in hitting their goals.

How goal-setting theory works

So now that you know what goal setting is, let’s quickly go into how it works.

Goal-setting theory works by defining what types of goals drive motivation

performance. And when employers understand that? They can ensure their goal-
setting process sets their employees up for success.

It’s simple, but it can also be extremely effective.

The 5 principles of goal-setting theory

As mentioned, according to goal-setting theory, goals need to be both hard and
specific in order to be effective. But Locke & Latham further expanded on that
concept, defining five key principles for effective goals. Those five determinants
include:

1. Clarity

According to this theory, clarity around goal orientation is a must. The more clarity
there is when setting a goal with/for an employee, the less of a chance there is for a
miscommunication or misunderstanding. This then leads to higher levels of success .
To put it another way: effective goals are both clear goals and specific goals.

2. Challenge
Goal difficulty also ties to the effectiveness of goal setting. When goal attainment
presents a challenge, it leads to a higher level of motivation—which, in turn, leads to
a higher chance of success. Or, in other words, challenging goals (or difficult goals)
are more effective.

3. Commitment

Employees need to have a certain level of buy-in and goal commitment. If they’re
not committed, they’re not going to have the follow-through necessary to succeed —
and as a result, they won’t hit their goal.

4. Feedback

In order for employees to successfully hit their goals, they need regular
feedback. That includes feedback on their progress, what they’re doing well, and
where they can improve.

5. Task complexity

If a goal feels too complex or overwhelming, it can negatively impact motivation.

Instead, leaders should break down large goals into smaller, more manageable
tasks. As employees complete each small task, it will deliver a boost of motivation.
And that will ultimately help them progress towards the larger goal

Benefits of goal-setting theory

Using goal-setting theory to motivate employees offers a host of benefits, including:

 Higher levels of engagement. This framework can help employees hit their goals.
That success can lead to higher levels of employee engagement and job
satisfaction.
 Higher levels of performance. When employees regularly hit their goals, their
performance and productivity improves. Employees may also become more effective
at hitting goals within their assigned timeframe.
 Better adherence to deadlines and metrics. Goal-setting theory encourages
measurable goals. This can help employees improve at getting things done within
specified timeframes. It can also help employees better adhere to defined metrics.
 Wide application. Goal-setting theory can be used for a variety of goal types. For
example, you can apply it successfully to personal goals , individual goals, team
goals, learning goals, or an achievement goal.
 Supports a feedback culture. Goal-setting theory supports a culture of feedback.
This gives employees the insights they need to continually improve.
 Leads to self-efficacy. When employees regularly hit their goals, they gain
confidence. This confidence leads to self-efficacy and better self-regulation.

Limitations of goal-setting theory

Clearly, Locke’s goal-setting theory offers some serious benefits. But it’s not without
its drawbacks. There are a number of potential downsides to goal-setting theory,
including:

 Negative impact on performance relationship. According to goal setting theory,

difficult goals inspire higher performance. But there’s a limit to that. If a goal or
complex task is outside of an employee’s skill set, that goal could prove too difficult.
This can negatively impact task motivation—and ultimately, cause performance to
drop.
 Misalignment. If there is a misalignment between the employee’s goals and the
organization’s goals, goal-setting theory may not be as effective.
 Unethical behavior. If goals are too difficult or complex, it can have a negative
impact on employees’ decision making. In an effort to hit their goal, they may
engage in unethical, risky, or questionable behavior

Designing Motivating Jobs

Because managers are primarily interested in how to motivate individuals on

the job, we need to look at ways to design motivating jobs. If you look closely
at what an organization is and how it works, you'll find that it's composed of
thousands of tasks. These tasks, in turn, are aggregated into jobs.25 We use
the term job design to refer to the way tasks are combined to form complete
jobs. The jobs that people perform in an organization should not evolve by
chance. Managers should design jobs deliberately and thoughtfully to reflect
the demands of the changing environment as well as the organization's
technology, skills and abilities, and preferences of its employees.26 When jobs
are designed with those things in mind, employees are motivated to reach their
full productive capabilities. What are some ways that managers can design
motivating jobs?

 What is Job enlargement? A definition

The definition of job enlargement is adding additional activities within the same level to

an existing role. This means that a person will do more, different activities in their

current job. For example, an employee who will now also manage her own planning

where this was formerly done by her manager.

Job enlargement advantages

Job enlargement was popularized in the ’60s and ’70s. During that time there was an

increase in attention on factors that made a job motivational as people realized that the

traditional mass production assembly lines were boring and deeply dissatisfying to work

at.

Enlarging highly specialized jobs leads to a number of advantages.

1. Creating a wider range of activities. In essence, job enlargement is about adding

responsibilities to existing roles. This makes the job more varied, creating a wider range

of activities.

2. Reduces monotony. As a result of the wider range of activities, monotony decreases.

People don’t do the same, highly specialized task 30 times an hour for 9 hours straight.

Instead, they are more involved from end-to-end, taking a single product through

multiple production phases, or even managing an automated assembly belt.

3. Teaches a variety of skills and helping career growth. Additional job responsibilities

require training and help in building additional experience. This teaches employees

additional skills and is helpful in terms of career growth.

4. Earn a higher wage. Adding responsibilities to a role often results in better

compensation. Higher wages are a specific benefit for the employee.

5. Gives more autonomy, accountability, and responsibility. The additional

responsibilities lead to a number of motivational factors. Because the person is now

responsible for multiple related activities, the person has more freedom over how they

do their work leading to more autonomy. In addition, they are more accountable for
 mistakes and product quality as they experience more ownership and responsibility as

they have more interaction with a single product or service (compared to when they were

specialized).

To wrap this up, job enlargement can create more variety for the individual employee,

more ownership over their work, and it can make work a more rewarding experience

Job enlargement drawbacks

Job enlargement also has a number of drawbacks. There are good reasons why in the

early 1900s a wave of specialization made jobs boring and monotonous – the most

important one being an increase in output and profit.

One of the most famous examples is the Ford Motor Company. Because of the highly

specialized assembly line created at its factories, the company was a leader in the

marketplace. As a result, the company was able to offer workers a much higher

minimum wage and give them more time off.

1. Lower efficiency. Job enlargement leads to less specialization, resulting in lower

specialization. Put simply, when you do one activity all day, every day, you get pretty

good and fast at doing it. Job enlargement, therefore, leads to lower efficiency.

2. Lower quality. In line with the previous, enlargement could also decrease quality.

However, this is not undisputed. Doing the same thing all day, every day can also lead to

boredom. Also, if you’re only responsible for a small part of the product, you don’t
 experience responsibility for the whole product. Employees don’t have a whole

product concept, leading to a lack of ownership and willingness to improve.

3. Job creep. Job creep is a continuous increase in workload as more and more tasks are

added to a role. This can result in the job becoming unrealistic and overwhelming. Job

creep happens when a job is continuously enlarged, potentially leading to stress and

burnout.

4. Increased training levels and costs. Because job enlargement involves the adding of

tasks and responsibilities that the employee didn’t have before, it often requires an

increase in training levels and training costs. In addition, the employee will require some

time before reaching the optimum productivity level.

The conclusion here is that job enlargement has both advantages and disadvantages.

Cases should therefore individually be assessed on whether or not enlargement makes

sense. This will depend on the unique circumstances of the job. It is therefore advisable

to have specialists like an HR business partner or an organizational

development specialist consult with managers about whether or not job enlargement (or

any other form of job enrichment) makes sense for an employee

Criteria Job Enlargement Job Enrichment

Focus Horizontal expansion of tasks Vertical enhancement of tasks
Nature of Change Quantity of work increases Quality of work improves
Skill Requirement Broadening of existing skills Development of new skills
Complexity Moderate to high High
Employee Autonomy Limited Increased
Motivational Impact Moderate High
Job Variety Greater variety of tasks Tasks with depth and challenge
Hierarchical Level Maintains the same level Promotes career growth
Organizational Impact Wider job coverage Individual growth and development
Job Characteristics Model
Even though many organizations have implemented job enlargement and job enrichment programs
and experienced mixed results, neither of these job design approaches provided a conceptual
framework for analyzing jobs or for guiding managers in designing motivating jobs. The job
characteristics model (JCM) offers such a framework.29 It identifies five primary job characteristics,
their interrelationships, and their impact on employee productivity, motivation, and satisfaction.
According to the JCM, any job can be described in terms of five core dimensions, defined as
follows:
• Skill variety, the degree to which a job requires a variety of activities so that an employee
can use a number of different skills and talents
• Task identity, the degree to which a job requires completion of a whole and identifiable
piece of work
• Task significance, the degree to which a job has a substantial impact on the lives or work of
other people
• Autonomy, the degree to which a job provides substantial freedom, independence, and

Feed back