Path goal theory leads to faster diagnosis, which is essential in value-based care. The approach fits in employees' work environment in achieving goals. Therefore, through the parallelization of sub-processes, every patient can access care and treatment from the caregivers within the stipulated time. In so doing, the chances of uncertainty created by lagged diagnosis are minimized.
It increases coherence, which is vital in improving the consistency of care. House (1971) argue that the approach encourages leaders to spread a learning culture that connects subordinates' behavior with the outcomes. Still, when there are favorable variances and positive attitude towards work, it minimizes conflict between practitioners.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
However, path goal theory is subject to loss of personal connection between practitioners and patients. Alanazi et al. (2013) suggest that care pathways, lead to the dehumanization of care, making it difficult for patient-practitioner care to thrive. Indeed, when patients are treated as means to achievement of goas and reward, they end up feeling unimportant.
Additionally, when there is the maximum time for each patient, quality is hindered. Some patients require more time for checkups that might not be realized if the path-goal relationship is based on limited time of service as per task.
Nonetheless, for both path goal and situational theories, they have similar leader/ subordinate qualities and readiness level. For instance, in situational theory, the leader acknowledges that performance readiness is vital to task relevance.
They are both based on encouraging subordinates to achieve goals. With clear pathways and identifying various ways of dealing with issues, they shift focus that leads to satisfaction.
However, path goal theory focuses on tasks in achieving goals. In contrast, the situational approach focuses on the subordinates' readiness to do the work and influence the leadership style in place.
Also, path goal theory considers both the task at hand and subordinates' motivation of the entire organization. However, the situational approach is more concerned with a single subordinate's characteristics and not the whole situation.
Path goal theory is a preferred theory is idealistic because it maximizes employee satisfaction. Farhan (2018) outlines that supportive, directive, achievement-oriented, and participative builds on a connection between subordinates and leaders. Although rewards might deter intent, they are necessary for work satisfaction and motivation. Leaders must encourage low-level employees to achieve their own goals, which leads to the achievement of broader organizational goals.
References
Alanazi, T., Ratyana, A., Alharthey, B., & Rasli, A. (2013). Overview of Path-Goal Leadership Theory. Jurnal Teknologi (Sciences and Engineering) . 64. 49-53.
Farhan, B. Y. (2018). Application of path-goal leadership theory and learning theory in a learning organization. Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR) , 34 (1), 13-22.
House, R. J. (1971). A Path-Goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly , 16(3),321–339. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.2307/2391905
