The questionnaire tests the strong, average, and weak style of leadership (Northouse, 2016, p. 132). My results from the path-goal theory are 24 for directive style, which is average; 28 for supportive style, which is also average; 27 for participative style, which is high; and 27 for achievement-oriented style, which is also high (Northouse, 2016, p. 134). These results show that I am a participating and an achievement-oriented leader more often than directing and supporting to the followers.
The transformational leadership also measured through the questionnaire called the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) based seven factors of the leadership model (Northouse, 2016, p. 187). My results from the transformation leadership are 17, which is high; meaning that I motivate and influence followers as well as have positive effects on individualized consideration and intellectual stimulation factors (Northouse, 2016, p. 187). I also score average high o contingent reward; but low on the passive and avoidant leadership style (Northouse, 2016, p. …show more content…
The advantages that I use from both path-goal and transformational leadership style can motivate, participate, friendly, ethical compliance, and influential. Also, involving the team members in the decision-making process, and be able to help my team to achieve the highest potential, as well as provide emotional support and guidance to complete tasks are the quality discovered. On the other hand, I learned that I lack confidence in providing direction and support to my teams in some cases as well as not giving challenging them. The awareness of taking these tests have given me the opportunity to reconsider and make changes in my leadership style such as practice more supportive and directive behavior as well challenging my