Week 10 of approximately 130 is in the books in my doctorate program.
This week we are studying path-goal theory and the leader member exchange theory and how they apply to leadership. I found some really good articles to support my arguments on the discussion posts and one in particular on how friendly relationship can erode over time in a leader/follower relationship, especially in the outdoors.
To read the paper:
No paper available
One of the key components of the discussion board posts is to promote dialogue from other students in our program. Our replies must be substantial and contain new research questions. The following is one example of a great reply to my post about the leader member exchange theory.
You stated something that is powerful beyond its words. You stated ” Leadership must be fluid when you are dealing with dangerous situations, a hundred miles from the nearest person and hours away from the nearest rescue”. This statement is the ultimate response of both LMX and path-goal theories. Although the methods of each said theory is different, they should be conducted with the end result in mind,. That end result is that they remember what they learn from their leaders and carry out the duties assigned to them, regardless of factors such as distance. Your example of Jesus to differentiate between the two theories was an excellent portrait for other readers to be able to connect with the differences. Do you feel that it is possible to be able for a leader to devote a significant amount of time with all employees equally? Is there a specific measured amount of time that has to be put in by the leader for each particular follower? In what way do you feel that the outcomes for each theory can be measured? I ask these question because I think your comment described above holds leaders to a standard and in order for leaders to reach such a powerful stance in each of their followers, it takes time to pour that significant amount of knowledge into another person (Northouse, 2019).
For example, Jesus reported to have spent the equal amount of time with all of his disciples, to include Judah. Why didn’t LMX work in Jesus’ favor when it came to Judas? Did he not receive the same loyalty, respect, and knowledge that the others did? What was different? What could Jesus have done more, as a leader, to ensure that this didn’t happen if he could? Considering Martin et al (2016), is there anything that the leader could have done to better prepare himself for the result of his leadership?
Martin, R., Guillamume, Y., Thomas G., Lee, A., & Epitropaki, O. (2016). Leader-member exchange (LMX) and performance. A meta-analystic review. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 67-121. DOI:10.1111/PEPS.12100
Northouse, P.G. (2019). Leadership: theory and practice. (8th Edition). Sage Publications, Inc. ISBN:9781506362311.