Disagreement in leader–follower dyadic exchanges: Shared relationship satisfaction and investment as antecedents

Leaders' mental health and leader-member exchange: Exploring relations on different levels of analysis

INTRODUCTION

Research on leader-member exchange (LMX) has shown that the relation between leaders and followers may be considered from different angles. Leaders may form individual relationships with followers (LMX quality), may agree with their followers on these relationships (LMX agreement), and may form different relationships within their work group (LMX variability). We posit that leaders' mental health may function as an antecedent for these different forms of LMX. We use conservation-of-resources theory as a theoretical model to describe how leaders' mental health may interact with relationship quality with followers on different levels.

METHODS

We operationalized leaders' mental health using depressive symptoms, anxiety, and stress reactivity. Our sample consisted of 322 followers of 75 leaders. Followers rated the LMX quality with their respective leader. Leaders rated depressive symptoms, anxiety, levels of stress reactivity, and LMX quality with their followers.

RESULTS

Results of multilevel modeling showed that stress reactivity was negatively related to LMX quality and anxiety was positively linked to LMX agreement. Depressive symptoms were not related to aspects of LMX.

CONCLUSION

By using multisource data on different analysis levels, we are able to include different perspectives on antecedents of LMX relationship quality. Implications for LMX at different levels of analysis as well as future research are discussed.

Do leaders and followers see eye to eye? Exploring patterns of congruent expectations and self-views in leader-follower relationships

Purpose

The authors examine mutually exclusive sub-groups of congruent expectations for leader and follower roles relate to sub-groups of self-other endorsement, and how these patterns predict relationship quality.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors examine patterns of congruent implicit theories relate to patterns of self-other endorsement, at the dyadic level, using latent class analysis in 193 working-adult dyads. The authors then examine how these patterns predict leader and follower assessments of relationship quality using general linear models (GLM).

Findings

The authors supported 4 classes of dyads with specific patterns of congruent (or incongruent) ILT's and IFT's: Role congruent, exchange congruent, committed leader congruent, and role incongruent dyads. Class membership predicted leader-assessed leader-member exchange (LMX) and perceived support. The authors then supported 3 classes of self-other endorsement: dyads with mutual endorsement, leader identity endorsement, and no endorsement. Class membership predicted follower-assessed LMX, perceived support, and perceived contribution from leaders. Class membership corresponded meaningfully.

Originality/value

The authors empirically examine the extent to which relationship behavior can be understood: (1) by similar implicit theories, or (2) through identification with a leader or follower role. Moreover, the authors uncover unique combinations of congruence, and address a key challenge posed by traditional variable-oriented strategies typically used in LMX research.

Relational Dynamics of Leadership: Problems and Prospects

Relationships are central to understanding what occurs in the workplace. The leader-member exchange (LMX) approach dominates the literature on relational dynamics of leadership. Research supports LMX as a mediator between leadership and outcomes, and this reflects the centrality of relationships at work. However, LMX is not a leadership theory. We critically review the literature on LMX, with discussion of the requirements for “good” theory and how LMX falls short. We acknowledge some attempts through the years to develop theory to guide LMX research. The concept of “exchange” was not original to LMX. Our review of social exchange theory reveals that, contrary to the common approach, LMX is not consonant with exchange theory. Other attempts at theory offer partial explanations that do not capture leader-member relational dynamics. Some promising approaches to studying leader-member relationships have emerged in recent years. We offer suggestions for future theory and research and advocate for a return to role theory and the development of emotional sociocognitive approaches.