I find many odd and quirky things about this theory.

For example, Northouse says: “…leadership generates motivation when it increases the number and kinds of payoffs that followers receive from their work.” Doesn’t that seem strange and limited? I would think it might have more to do with the accuracy of the payoff—providing the workers with what they really want. By way of example, I was teaching in Halifax, Nova Scotia back in the 1990’s. A conversation revealed that a gentleman’s workers at a local shipyard did NOT want to work during Thanksgiving for holiday pay—they expressed a definite preference for compensatory days off instead. They were looking to “bank” more time off at Christmas time instead of banking more money at Thanksgiving.

Additionally, Northouse assert: “In addition, supportive leaders treat followers as equals…”

Question #1:

What could go wrong with treating followers “as equals”? This begs the larger question: Should you be friends with your subordinates?

Northouse observes: “Similarly, it suggests that leaders should be participative when followers need control and that leaders should be achievement oriented when followers need to excel.”

Question #2:

When, exactly, would you want your followers “not to excel”? Don’t you want them to excel all of the time? Shouldn’t you be motivating your followers to excel ALL of the time?