For nearly ten years, I worked as an administrative assistant at a behavioral and mental health non-profit organization. The satellite office that I worked at had approximately 38 employees. There was a case manager and a program director who worked in the office along with me. They also employed therapeutic staff support (TSS), mobile therapists (MT), behavioral specialist consultants (BSC), and outpatient therapists. One would think that managing an office of only 38 employees would be relatively easy. However, during my employment, the company went through five program directors. This was primarily due to the company hiring individuals who met the educational requirements for the position but lacked the ability to motivate and effectively lead staff. Essentially, these people showed up for a paycheck.
That was until the agency hired Cathy to be the program director. Cathy was without a doubt the best boss that I ever had, and her leadership practices were a great example of the path-goal theory. Path-goal theory refers to how leaders are able to motivate their followers, which causes the follower to be more productive and have increased job satisfaction (Northouse, 2016). There are four styles of leadership which include directive, supportive, participative, and achievement oriented. Some leaders may display one of these styles of leadership, while others are able to adjust their leadership behaviors depending on the needs of the employee and the situation. Cathy displayed all of these leadership styles and was able to competently assess what obstacles were blocking employees from achieving their goals.
As a directive leader, Cathy knew that not all staff were able to be given a task and be able to complete it without specific instructions. She would provide them with clear details and a deadline for completion. Most staff were responsible for making their own schedules but when she noticed certain employees were not fulfilling their weekly hours, she began creating a schedule for them. “A directive leader sets clear standards of performance and makes the rules clear to subordinates” (PSU WC, 2016, L.6.).
Cathy was unlike previous program directors who kept their office door shut and required staff to schedule appointments to speak to them. She had an open-door policy, was very approachable, and made herself available to employees. Supportive leaders “respect their followers and treat them as equals” (PSU WC, 2016, L.6.). In return, subordinates also respected her.
Cathy showed that she was a participative leader by holding a weekly supervision meeting with all staff. During these meetings, she would discuss any changes with client cases, company policies, and staff issues or concerns. When there was a new client case, she would explain the situation to the staff and listen to recommendations regarding which employee would be the best fit for working with the client. Other directors did not hold meetings and would put memorandums in employees’ mailboxes rather than communicate with them as a team. They also randomly assign client cases without consulting with staff and it was often counterproductive to treatment.
In addition to holding weekly meetings, Cathy offered opportunities for staff trainings at least twice per month. As an achievement-oriented leader, Cathy set a requirement for staff to participate in at least six trainings per year. “This leader establishes a high standard of excellence for followers and seeks continuous improvement” (Northouse, 2016, p.118). The trainings would help staff with everything from improving therapeutic techniques to personal development.
“Path-goal theory suggests that leader behaviors will be acceptable to the followers to the degree followers see the leader’s behavior will lead to satisfaction to them” (PSU WC, 2016, L.6.). Employee morale was at an all-time high when Cathy was the program director. She saw the hard work and efforts that each employee made and implemented an employee of the month program as well as a bonus system. She gave credit where it was due, and staff were motivated because they felt appreciated and respected. The theory also suggests, “followers’ perceptions of their own skills and abilities to perform tasks can also affect the impact of certain leader behaviors” (PSU WC, 2016, L.6.). Cathy’s ability to assess the needs of staff was great because she knew what tasks to assign certain employees and how much detail to give them. Her willingness to communicate made staff comfortable because they knew she would be available to them if further direction was needed.
Unfortunately for the agency, Cathy resigned when she was offered a higher paying job opportunity at another company. Interestingly, she was not seeking other employment, but her leadership capabilities were obvious in her interactions with outside agencies. I think it is safe to assume that it is not often that people can say a company made the effort to track down and recruit them, which is exactly what happened with Cathy.
References
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage
Publications.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2016). PSYCH 485 Lesson 6: Contingency &
Path-Goal Theories. Retrieved from
https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2008237/modules/items/27074682
jxt338 says
I can definitely see how Cathy is your favorite boss. Cathy’s hiring by an outside company attests to her leadership quality and efficiency. What really stood out in her leadership style was her commitment to participative leadership and achievement-oriented leadership. These two leadership behaviors help your workers grow as individuals and as employees.
As you mentioned, a participative leader invites “followers to share in the decision making” (Northouse, 2016, p.117). When followers are allowed to start thinking about decisions for the group, they start gaining those skills needed for leadership roles in their future. Personally, I like to include my guys in decision making and troubleshooting processes. For our job working in maintaining multi-million-dollar aircrafts, it’s crucial to gain critical thinking skills when trouble shooting the jets. I’ve been in squadrons where the supervisor hoards all the aircraft knowledge to themselves so that they remain the “go-to” guy, but this has drastic negative effects once that supervisor leaves the command. When they transfer commands or even take vacation, the guys left behind are left struggling to fix jets. Our departmental and command leaders stress “train your relief.” For any organization it’s imperative to train your relief.
Cathy upholds the “train your relief” standard by exhibiting the achievement-oriented leadership behavior. The achievement-oriented leadership concept “challenges followers to perform work at the highest level possible” (Northouse, 2016, p.118). When leaders are able to challenge their employees the right way, they can get the most out of them. Cathy does this by conducting staff training and allowing the staff to attend at their own pace. Mandatory meetings tend to be mundane simply because they’re mandatory. The option to attend the trainings at their own pace give the workers a sense of autonomy and a desire to learn. I try to get my workers to get more qualifications so they can be more marketable if they decide to leave the service. Unfortunately, the idea of getting qualifications seems mandatory so it’s difficult to motivate. Cathy’s method to motivate workers to train and achieve higher levels make her a great leader. I’m not surprised she was recruited and hired by an outside company. I’m curious to see her impact on the company in terms of how the employees grew as individuals.
References
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc