In the 1980s, the term ‘glass ceiling’ was introduced to describe the situation in a business environment in which it is more difficult for women to reach top executive positions than for men (Northouse, 2013). This invisible barrier preventing women from achieving the top of a ‘glass escalator’ could be clarified by several sets of explanations (Northouse, 2013). The most popular explanations for this problem are gender differences in investments in human capital such as in education, work experience, training, gender differences in leadership styles, and finally the existence of prejudice and discrimination against female leaders (Northouse, 2013). This first set of explanations rests on the presumption that women have less human capital investment in work experience and development. This explanation is vastly related to the problem of juggling a top level leadership position with the family needs of children and a husband. Unfortunately, unresolved tensions between family and career still exist in our society and we have to change the norms and rules in order to achieve a higher representation of women in the upper echelons of business and government.

Anne-Marie Slaughter (2012) brought the very debatable topic that a woman still cannot be an attentive parent and high-profile career professional at the same time to the attention of the public. The author, who was a high government official (the director of policy planning at the State Department under the Secretary Hillary Clinton), argued that with the “way America’s economy and society are currently structured” there is no promise to believe that women can have both a high-profile career and ‘happy’ family at the same time (Slaughter, 2012). Slaughter (2012) at the highest point of her career realized that ‘having it all’ entirely depended of what type of job she had. Any high government office, as well as a top executive position, is a very time-demanding job that keeps an incumbent away from home for long work hours and this situation prompts many women to step down from a position of power for the sake of their family. The author provided a vivid example about the public attitude toward a woman in power who decided to leave her job to spend more time with her family. When Michele Flournoy, the third-ranking official in the U.S. Department of Defense, announced her resignation from the office and explained to the public that she wanted to spend more time at home with her three children, the press interpreted this explanation as a euphemism for being fired (Slaughter, 2012). Many women who have taken top management positions make tremendous sacrifices in their families such as relying on nannies and completely abandoning household chores or even deciding not to have family at all. There is, of course, no one right way how to delegate or share parental and other family responsibilities, but the real commitment to family takes a lot of time and leads to unavoidable work-family conflict. The author pointed out several issues that our society should resolve in order to provide more opportunities for women to find the work-family balance. These issues include, but are not limited to inflexibility of work schedules, school schedules that do not match work schedules, unrelenting travel related to work, and constant pressure to be in the office and attend out-of-office meeting after work hours. Slaughter (2012) believed that these issues would be resolved when more women will occupy the higher ranks of government jobs that create national policies.

The conflict between a career and a woman’s responsibilities outside of work often leads to a career gap that in its own turn negatively influences a woman’s advancement in climbing the career ladder. In order to help women to mitigate the negative impact on their families when they choose to pursue high-powered careers, society has to change its attitude alongside with its norms and rules that would help women to find the balance between career and family without sacrificing either.

References:

Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE.

Slaughter, A. M. (2012, June 13). Why women still can’t have it all. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/07/why-women-still-cant-have-it-all/309020/

The servant leadership approach emphasizes increased service to followers, empowering them, and promoting a sense of community and society at large (Northouse, 2013). This holistic approach to work puts employees first and assigns the role of servant to a leader. Many leaders and organizations have embraced this approach and built their corporate philosophy based on the values of the servant leadership approach (for example, Southwest Airlines, Starbucks, and the Men Warehouse) (Northouse, 2013).

Ton (2014), in her book “The Good Job Strategy,” investigates how four retail companies achieved business success – Costco, Mercadona, QuikTrip, and Trader Vic’s. After ten years of research, the author found that two major factors contributed to the long sustained high profitability and admiration by employees and customers; operational excellence and investing in people (employees). Investing in people means that a company puts employees first as a main priority and its value. This idea alludes to servant leader behaviors that include “putting followers first” (Northouse, 2013, p.228). A company should place employees’ interests first during its decision making. For example, Southwest Airlines after 9/11 decided not to lay off any employees even though all airline companies around the States cut jobs on an average of 16% in response to the economic decline. This decision boosts the employees’ confidence that the company puts its employees first.

Ton’s ‘good strategy’ also involves training employees for their growth and success in a company and encouraging them to reach their potential at work, as well in society. Moreover, empowering them in decision making contributes to the happiness of the employees as well as to the company’s success. Ton (2014) argues that employees are more innovative in the companies where they are valued most and they have discretion in decision making. These points again refer to servant leader behaviors that encompass helping followers to accomplish their aspirations and goals and “allowing followers the freedom to be independent” (Northouse, 2013, p.229). This decision boosted the employees’ confidence that their company put employees’ interests first.

Another issue that Ton (2014) touches upon is valued-guide decisions to which leaders should stick; she identifies this process as the ‘virtuous cycle of retailing.’ This process means that leaders should behave ethically and with empathy toward employees who would in their own turn care about the customers who would be more attracted to this service, and customers in their own turn would be loyal to a company; more customers means more profit for a company. This kind of attitude of leaders toward employees spurs a change in society as a whole because happy employees contribute to a good experience for customers. This idea is consistent with the servant leader behaviors such as that a servant leader should behave ethically and create “value for the community” (Northouse, 2014, p.229).

Finally, Ton (2014) mentions in her book that the servant leader behavior helps employees in low paid jobs, such as janitors in retail stores, find meaning and dignity in their jobs. The power of servant leadership is to transform ordinary job tasks to remarkable opportunities for employees. This approach has a tremendous impact on how employees perceive their jobs.

Ton (2014) provides some insights on how servant leadership works in work settings and what outcomes of this approach are produced within organizations and society at large. The above mentioned servant behaviors can be developed and nourished in leaders, and what is more important these behaviors produce a ripple effect in society by creating more servant leaders (Northouse, 2013).

References:

Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE.

Ton, Z. (2014). The good job strategy: how the smartest companies invest in employees to lower costs and boost profits. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company.

 
We very often describe a leader as a person who wields power over followers. House (1984) defined power as “the capacity to produce effects on others” (PSU WC, 2014, PSYCH 485, L.7, p.2). The researchers French and Raven (1959) identified five main sources of an individual’s power as knowledge and expertise (expert power), strong interpersonal relations (referent power), an organizational role and position (legitimate power), a control over desired resources (reward power), and a potential to impose negative sanctions and remove positive rewards (coercive power) (PSU WC, 2014, PSYCH 485, L.7). Additionally, there are many factors that can affect an individual’s power such as clothing, office space, furniture, and situation. One situational factor that can produce a change in an individual’s potential to influence others is the existence of a crisis situation (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 2012). Researchers found that leaders can exert more power during a crisis than during a normal situation (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 2012). In crisis situations, leaders usually use their legitimate and coercive powers to influence their followers.
One of the leaders who exploited a crisis situation in order to gain more control and power over followers is the former President George W. Bush who exceeded his presidential power on several occasions. Firstly, he ordered the post 9/11 detainees held at Guantanamo to be put on trial before military commissions which violates the Geneva Convention (the Supreme Court ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006)). Secondly, Bush approved direct access to all telephone calls of all U.S. private citizens by the National Security Agency; this decision is an apparent abuse of the Presidential power. Finally, but not last, there are Patriot Act provisions that clearly infringe the rights of the citizens guaranteed by the First Amendment. President Bush manipulated an emergency situation (9/11) in order to exercise his excessive legitimate and coercive power. Even though followers are more willing to accept the increased direct power in a crisis situation, it is not an excuse for a leader to abuse it.
There are, however, some crisis situations that require the profound use of legitimate and coercive power in order to avoid a catastrophe. I would like to use an example of a leader who has a reputation of a villain, Stalin. Nevertheless, Stalin was a very effective military leader who was able to mobilize the country in the face of destruction by the Nazi army. Stalin, in less than one year from the moment of the Nazi’s invasion, created a very effective Russian army and built the military industry that produced advanced ammunition and weapons. This leader was effective in this crisis situation because he achieved his goal – the Russian army destroyed the Nazi army. Definitely, he used his legitimate and coercive power to a great excess. Even though many of his influential tactics were illegal and brutal, the Russian veterans of the World War II (my two grandfathers were the veterans) admired him and respected him as one of the most effective Russian military leaders.
The situational factor plays an important role in what type of power a leader uses. Leaders are more apt to exert legitimate and coercive power in the presence of a crisis than in absence of a crisis to influence subordinates. Leaders, however, should not abuse this power and when the situation changes should switch to expert and referent power.

References
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006).
Hughes, R. L., Ginnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J. (2012). Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2014). PSYCH 485. Lesson 7: Power and influence. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/ fa14/psych485/001// content/07_less/01_page.html

 
The path-goal theory suggests that a leader directs followers’ behavior by motivating them to accomplish goals (PSU WC, 2014, L.6). The effective leader compensates for deficiencies of his/her followers in order to overcome obstacles toward a goal, which in its turn increase followers’ intrinsic motivation (House, 1996). According to this theory, the four leadership styles that function to minimize role ambiguity and provide reward for the followers are directive, supportive, participative, and achievement oriented behaviors (PSU WC, 2014, L.6). Different organizational environments, situations, and tasks dictate to the leaders which of the four path-goal styles to choose in order to be effective.

I would like to discuss about how this theory has been reformulated and evolved over time. Even though this theory was developed in the 1970s by Evans (1970) and was later modified by House (1971), House (1996) admitted that the theory should be reformulated in light of the development of organizational structure in business. The original path-goal approach concerns the relationships between formally appointed supervisors and their subordinates on a personal basis; therefore, a leader should act in the way that boosts the valence of outcomes that relate to a person’s work-goal attainment (House, 1971). There have been major changes in organizational structure that brought forward a group as a unit with which a leader should build relations and modify their own behavior toward achieving group goals; for this reason, a leader should primarily consider the coordination of work of the whole group and facilitating the group goal accomplishments (House, 1996). Moreover, some professionals noted that the clear structure of organizations with precise instructions of how to perform the tasks have abated and a new structure with more discretion for decision making, creativity, and responsibilities has taken the place of the old structure. Therefore role ambiguity increases and role clarification decreases in this structure. The original path-goal approach assumes that a reduction of employee’s role ambiguity and increased role clarification will lead to heightened motivation. Yukl (1994), however, pointed out that these two conditions might increase expectancies and as result would change a follower’s perception about the task performance and a goal achievement that they are more difficult than they were originally recognized (Yukl, 1994, cited in House, 1996). In that event, removing uncertainty might decrease an employee’s motivation. House (1996) addressed this potential problem by the proposition that uncertainty and unpredictability require “a personal rather than formal planned coordination of work” that might include reciprocal coordination by members of a work group (p.339). Hence, House (1996) included the principal of delegation of authority and responsibilities to the followers by a leader in all types of behaviors; he called it “a theory of work unit empowerment” (p.347).

Finally, I want to mention a recent study that pertains to the role of leader’s gender in path-goal theory. Polston-Murdoch (2013) found “no gendered differences and perceptions of leadership style in relation to subordinates’ commitment” to their leader (p.36). These findings reflect the advance of women in business; even though there is still a preponderance of males in top-positions in business, we can observe the emerging tendency toward more females as business leaders (Marissa Mayer, CEO of Yahoo; Meg Whitman, CEO of Hewlett-Packard). We slowly get rid of our stereotypes that while a male leader exhibits more directive behavior, a female leader engages in participative behavior; the top management positions sometimes require a directive leadership style and female leaders demonstrate that they can be as directive and controlling as males.

Even though the path-goal theory was developed in the 1970s, it was refined and contemporized over time. House (1996) included predictions of efficiency of a leader in a group performance. A leader can enhance the performance and motivation of a whole work group. Other researchers also contributed to the development this theory by investigating how moderating variables such as a leader’s gender might influence the relations between leadership style and subordinates’ commitment. This theory has the potential to be further developed and to continue galvanizing empirical research.

References
House, R. J. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory. Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 323-352.

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2014). PSYCH 485. Lesson 6: Contingency and Path Theories. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/ fa14/psych485/ 001/content/06_lesson/01_page.html

Polston-Murdoch, L. (2013). An investigation of path-goal theory, relationship of leadership style, supervisor-related commitment, and gender. Emerging Leadership Journeys. Retrieved from www.regent.edu/…/2elj_vol6iss1_polston_murdoch.pdf.

The psychodynamic approach to leadership “focuses on the personality of the leader and of followers” (Northouse, 2013, p.320). This approach is often criticized for its subjectivity of the main concepts of this theory and is dubbed as ‘unscientific’ since it cannot be scientifically tested. Nevertheless, this approach offers understanding and acceptance of personal characteristics to both leaders and followers (Northouse, 2013). In addition, this approach studies the relationship between a leader and followers as well. One of the several ideas that comprise this approach is a hypothesis that all human being share a collective unconscious that is characterized as innate dispositions to certain behavior (PSU WC, 2014, PSYCH 485, L.3). These “patterns in the human psyche that persist over time” are known as archetypes (PSU WC, 2014, PSYCH 485, L.3, p.4). The two archetypes that might be related to leadership are known as the ‘warrior’ and the ‘sage.’
The ‘warrior’ type of leader is characterized by his (I use the male gender since the archetype usually associated with masculinity, but a female may also be a representative of this type) extreme power that is directed toward achieving his goals. This type imposes his will on others and does not tolerate challenging his authority (PSU WC, 2014, PSYCH 485, L.3). This main goal is to achieve greatness that is expressed though respect by others and financial gain (PSU WC, 2014, PSYCH 485, L.3). One example of the ‘warrior’ type is Russian President Vladimir Putin. He has pursued and finally has achieved unsurpassable power in Russia. Occasionally, he demonstrates his power on the world stage (annexation of Crimea is the last example). Definitely, he imposed his power on his followers and he destroyed all his political rivals in Russia. With the annexation of Crimea, he gained the respect and even admiration of many of his followers (Russians have always dreamed to take this peninsula back). We can observe during TV interviews how he is emotionally detached. He never publicly expresses fear or any doubt in his actions (Russia Today, 2014, July 30). Regarding the ‘warrior’s’ desire to achieve wealth, Putin has acquired enormous financial assets and, according to Bloomberg.com he is the richest man on Earth (Bershidsky, 2013, Sept.17). As all archetypes, the ‘warrior’ has shadow that is leader’s negative aspects that he doesn’t admit according to the psychodynamic approach (PSU WC, 2014, PSYCH 485, L.3). Putin displays his cruelty to his rivals as his shadow. For instance, in the battle with his political rival, Khodorkovsky, Putin employed immoral and cruel means such as the fabricated criminal charges against Khodorkovsky and his company (BBC News, 2013). Putin has never admitted that this case was politically motivated. From this example, we can see how the energy of the ‘warrior’ can be destructive.
The second archetype is the ‘sage,’ that is characterized by wisdom and intelligence. This type of leader is full of passion to change the world around him/her in a positive way. In my opinion, Oprah Winfrey is an example of the ‘sage’ leader. She became a coach for many her followers. She has reached and inspired people around her to change and to do good things. She has become very influential and she uses this influence in a noble way such as encouraging followers to improve themselves and overcome their life adversities. For instance, Oprah is a co-founder of the leadership academy for girls from impoverished areas in South Africa (The Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy, 2014). Oprah helps followers to make their dreams true. She, however, also has her shadows. In my opinion, her endorsement of Obama as a Presidential candidate demonstrated that she used her position as leader manipulatively. She subjectively exercised her profound influence to direct her followers in particular direction in an area where she is not an expert.
The psychodynamic approach encourages us to look at the leaders’ and the followers’ “psychological makeup” (PSU WC, 2014, PSYCH 485, L.3, p.2). We can determine the archetype for a leader and make an analysis of his/her actions based on his/her dispositions. These archetypes affect the way how leaders interact with their followers. Recognizing and understanding these archetypes might benefit us in building effective relations with these leaders.

References:

BBC News (2013). Profile: Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Retrieved from
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12082222
Bershidsky, L. (2013, September 17). Vladimir Putin, the richest man on Earth. Bloomberg View.
Retrieved from http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2013-09-17/vladimir-putin-the-richest-man-on-earth
Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2014). PSYCH 485. Lesson 3:
Psychodynamic Approach. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/fa14/psych485/001/content/03_lesson/01_page.html
Russia Today (2014, July 30). Vladimir Putin on US sanctions and Ukraine. [Television
broadcast]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBSzJ2wzb0s
The Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls (2014). Mission and vision. Retrieved from
http://www.owla.co.za/