MSLD 511 - Module 4 - Locus of Control - Madeline Campbell
This week my class and I learned about the Path-Goal Theory,
which boils down to how a leader motivates his/her followers to achieve goals
(Northouse, 2016, p. 115). Within our studies, it reveals that there are
numerous ways to lead and motivate others, and often it can simply depend on
the situation. I completed the Rotter’s Locus of Control Scale Test, which
measures expectancy of internal or external control for reinforcement. The test
results revealed that my locus of control is internal. As Rebecca Vandegrift
and Jonathan Matusitz defined in their article, Path-Goal Theory: A successful Columbia Records Story (2011),
“Locus of Control is a psychological term that refers to a person’s personal
belief on what causes good or bad. An internal locus of control means they
openly take responsibility for their wrongs” (p. 353).
First and foremost, I fully agree with the results as I
subscribe to the belief that individuals should always take responsibility for
their actions. Only I can control how I act and how I respond to different
situations. If I make mistakes within my work, then I accept them as my own
fault as I was the one responsible for seeing that task through to completion.
If I become an unhealthy weight (and have no medical issues) it is due to my
eating choices and poor exercise. I am responsible for my actions and would
never want to put the blame on my spouse, family members, friends or
colleagues. Due to the fact that my locus of control is internal, this will
directly affect my leadership style, as well as my responses to others
leadership styles.
Having an internal locus of control will directly affect how
I lead in any given position. Hypothetically, if I am wanting my company to go
from point A to point B, I will want to motivate my team and encourage/help us
to get to that point of growth. I believe that we can get there by how I help
and support my team. With an internal locus control, I feel that the end result
is within my own power of how I lead. This is a byproduct of my somewhat
achievement-oriented outlook on leadership. As House describes in his article,
“Individuals who are highly achievement motivated are motivated to make
accomplishments through their own personal efforts rather than through
influencing others or delegation of responsibility for achievement” (House,1996,
p. 338).
While not totally an achievement-oriented leader, I do still value my
own input as a main factor in how the goal is achieved. As a subordinate, the Path-Goal
Theory is not the leadership style that I respond to best because it is highly
individualized leadership style which seems unnecessary to me. Path-Goal Theory
is, “… about how leaders motivate followers to accomplish designated goals”
(Northouse, 2016, p. 115) but as a subordinate, if the goals are clearly
defined I am very self-motivated and do not feel the need for a leader to cater
their leadership style directly to me.
While not my preferred leadership method, I do believe that I
can and will adapt to the different types of leadership styles with the
Path-Goal Theory. Having an internal locus of control, I require little motivation
to achieve a goal, I take responsibility for my actions and am driven. This makes
me a better team member because I actively take responsibility in my team role
and do not expect other members to pick up any of my slack. However, this can
impact how I lead others who may not have an internal locus of control as I do.
In those situations, I must learn to adapt my leadership style to their
personality so that they can feel encouraged and supported in the best possible
way to maximize the potential for the team’s success.
References
House,
R. J. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a
reformulated theory. The Leadership Quarterly,7(3), 323-352.
doi:10.1016/s1048-9843(96)90024-7
Northouse,
P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. Los Angeles, Calif.:
SAGE.
Vandegrift,
R., & Matusitz, J. (2011). Path-Goal Theory: A Successful Columbia Records
Story. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment,21(4),
350-362. doi:10.1080/10911359.2011.555651
Comments
Post a Comment