Leader-Member Exchange Theory
The Leader-Member-Exchange-Theory ( LMX-Theory ) is a theory based on the superior-employee-exchange-ratio. In 1970, George B. Graen and Mary Uhl-Bien described the relationships between employees and superiors and how these can change and affect at various levels and phases of work. The focus is on mutual influencing in the social, but also in the professional area. In addition, statements about the success of the group members can be made about the quality of the relationship.
theory
The focus of the leader-member exchange theory is on the qualitatively different relationships between supervisors and employees. The main point of this theory is that the supervisor should give every employee the chance to have a good relationship. The LMX model deals with the question of what effects the relationship between manager and employee has on the sustainability of their work. The quality of the relationship between manager and employee can be used to make predictions about the work ethic and behavior at the employee's workplace. This quality also influences the work performance and satisfaction of the employees in the long term. This model differs from other leadership concepts in such a way that each individual manager-employee relationship is a unique interpersonal relationship. The model is based on social exchange theories and observes how the relationship between the various employees and their manager develops over time. According to this model, a high-quality relationship is based on the professional and social skills of the other. If the manager-employee relationship has a high value, this leads to better work performance and general job satisfaction. If the value is low, however, there are more intentions to terminate.
Characteristics of a superior
The supervisor should find his / her role individually with each employee. Good character traits are of great importance for finding a role. Respect and trust towards one's employees is the basis of a good relationship between both parties. for example, a supervisor should have good leadership skills, but not be bossy and not govern in this regard. A good manager has understanding and a friendly and personable attitude.
Characteristics of an employee
Like the supervisor, the employee should first get used to their role. Patience and understanding towards the other are the most important qualities for this role-finding phase. Competence and a sense of duty towards their tasks and their superiors are further good characteristics that an employee should have to contribute to a good relationship.
Basically, it can be said that personality, appearance as well as competence and thoughts of advancement are decisive for the relationship and the progress of the two parties. Despite the good characteristics of both parties, the relationship can be flawed if a strict division of roles is prescribed and adhered to. It has been shown that role models that develop over time have a more positive effect on the relationship between supervisor and employee than strictly predefined ones.
Interactional variables
However, the characteristics are not the only variables that influence the leader-member exchange; the interaction between both parties should also have an impact. These variables should have an impact, particularly in the process of forming the relationship.
The real similarities, sympathy and the apparent similarities have a positive effect on the compatibility of the two in the educational process. In a study, Dennis Duchon and colleagues came to the conclusion that there are more women in in-groups and that the members of these smaller groups were of higher social status. However, this does not show that the exchange depends on the gender of the manager and the employees. In addition, these similarities do not relate to demographic variables.
The real similarities are more related to competence and personality. The exchange between supervisors and employees is significantly increased if they have a similar level of competence, i.e. both have a high or a low level.
Wayne and Ferris found out in 1990 that the personality of employees and managers can also have an impact on the leader-member exchange. In this way, the quality of the exchange can be significantly higher if the supervisor finds his employee sympathetic. In addition, expectations of the other party should also have an impact.
Context variables
Diensch and Linden noticed that various context variables can also influence the leader-member exchange. Working groups, organization, culture and the power or behavior of the superior all play an important role. Time pressure and workload should also have a strong impact on the exchange. Managers who can continue to work objectively and calmly under time pressure have a greater degree of communication with their employees, and there is less differentiation between employees.
Green and others found heavy workloads to have a negative impact on the Leader Member Exchange. In addition, a large working group should have a negative effect on the exchange, while large, financial resources have a positive effect.
Evolution of theory
The leader-member exchange theory developed from Dansereau's "Vertical Dyad Linkage". At this point the effects of the theory were still being explored. These examinations were later interrupted and more attention was given to treating employees. Further research then led to a theoretical definition of the model, which also indicated the effects of the leader-member exchange. According to Graen, the relationship between manager and employee was based on the factors competence, trust and the interpersonal skills of the two participants. Others, however, saw the respect and sensitivity of managers and employees as the basis.
In 1977 Graen and Ginsburgh expanded their factors to include the sub-dimensions of support, consideration and satisfaction of the manager. If these sub-dimensions are perceived as positive by the employees, this leads to increased exchange and increased acceptance by the manager. Around 1978, the exchange of information came to the fore as a factor for a high leader-member exchange, but trust was somewhat neglected.
While the components of the model were continuously changed in the 1980s, the leader-member exchange was defined as the quality of the relationship between employees and managers. In these 10 years 13 further studies were carried out and 18 further sub-aspects were found. These components, according to which the leader-member-exchange theory is still evaluated today, are:
- trust
- competence
- motivation
- help and support
- understanding
- Freedom for employees
- Leadership authority
- Dissemination of information
- Influence on decision-making
- communication
- trust
- Consideration
- talent
- Delegation of tasks
- Innovativity
- Expertise
- Control of organizational resources
In 1987 Graen and Scandura then developed a three-phase model of leader-member exchange development, these phases were role-taking, role-making and role-routinization. A more detailed definition of the leader-member exchange theory has also been published:
"The Leader-Member-Exchange is a system of different components and their relationships, which includes both the two member groups of the company, their independent behavior, the mutual sharing of methods and production processes" (Scandura, Graen, Novak, 1986, p. 580 ).
However, in 1995 Graen and Uhl-Bien determined that there was no uniform, generalized management system for all employees. This means that a qualitative two-way relationship, also called a dyad, must be established. This relationship cannot be compared with any other and is shaped by different factors in each case, that is, every employee-manager relationship is individual.
Differentiation of the relationship
In the leader-member exchange theory, a distinction is made between inside and outside groups.
The inner groups are employees and / or groups who, due to their good relationship with the manager, can act autonomously and influence decisions. Superiors involve inner groups more in decisions based on the communication and information exchange.
In contrast to this are the outside groups. Outgroups have a formal and more distant relationship with their boss. The existing relationship is seen as more economic. Employees in the outside group can work their way into the inside group through efforts.
Higher relationships, found mainly in the inner groups, involve not only social exchange, but also the exchange of material and non-material objects. This also includes the fact that the manager likes to take on the role of mentor and thus gives the employee more opportunities for advancement and support. Lower relationships, on the other hand, are limited to the social, formal exchange between supervisors and employees.
Three phases of development
The first development phase is the first encounter between managers and subordinate employees. This is mostly formal and is limited to the prescribed roles. This leads to a position as an external group of the employee.
Through efforts and the offer to improve the relationship, it can be brought into the second development phase. This is where a social exchange takes place between the supervisor and the employee, although this is no longer a formal exchange, but a more familiar one. The roles are clarified and trust is built.
If the trust has proven itself, a partnership-like relationship is created between the superior and the subordinate employee. This is the third phase of development. In this, the mutual influence is very high due to the good relationship and communication. The employee has been promoted to the inner group and thus receives more autonomy and responsibility. Internal group employees are involved in decisions and have more rights in relation to them.
Developing the theory
Development according to Kahn
Differentiation between sent role conflicts (intersender conflict, intrasender conflict) and the person role conflict (own expectations).
Missing or ambiguous information about their job role can lead to a high degree of uncertainty among workers (role ambiguity). This comes in four forms: 1. Uncertainty about goals 2. Knowledge of means and ends (uncertainty about how a job is to be carried out) 3. Uncertainty about consequences of role behavior 4. Uncertainty about the future
The role model according to Katz and Kahn (1978) assumes that the role recipient can exercise the role assigned to him without conflict. A lack of clarity of the expectations or a large number of different expectations sent can mean that the person concerned does not meet the expectations of the environment. This creates role conflicts and role ambiguity.
The four stages of the theory
The first stage is described as vertical dyadic linkage (VDL). Many of the work processes are based on joint work, exchange and communication between managers and employees. This creates relationships of both high and low quality. To this end, various employees were asked about their superiors in a long-term study. The results show that the inner groups, i.e. employees who have a very good relationship with their superiors, only gave good feedback. Outside groups, on the other hand, i.e. employees who have a formal relationship with their superiors, gave more neutral feedback. So the study shows that two groups are formatting. This is due to the dyadic bond and regular communication between both parties. This allows them to form a relatively high quality relationship. Due to the limited time and social interaction of the superior, only a few, but high-quality relationships can be formed.
The second stage is the supervisor-employee exchange. A VDL is not used here and the focus is on the characteristics and properties of both parties and their effects considered. It quickly became clear that character traits are crucial for a high-quality relationship and that these in turn are important for a successful company.
The third level of the theory is superiors education. This level goes beyond that of the indoor and outdoor groups. According to Graen and Uhl-Bien, it is described here that managers should give everyone the opportunity for a high-quality relationship, unlike what is described in the VDL. This was tested in a study and the result was clear. If everyone is given the same opportunity, it will be used by several. You could also see that the quality of the employees' performance increased and the general efficiency of all employees increased. The supervisor education model is based on the studies carried out, which characterized that strangers can become acquaintances or even friends.
The fourth and final stage is the team building stage. Graen and Uhl-Bien have combined the VDL model with the supervisor education model and used it to expand it to a network. This network was more organized and the tasks assigned to them were carried out more independently and independently by the manager. Here it was also proven that a good manager-employee relationship contributes to more successful and efficient work.
Quality of relationship
The quality of the relationship between manager and employee is of interest for leadership research. Because this quality allows statements to be made about the future work attitude and future behavior of the employee. Since the leader-member-exchange theory assumes an individual relationship, the quality of each manager-employee relationship also differs. High quality relationships are defined by various social interactions and the factors mentioned above that have an impact on the LMX score. In particular, services that are outside of the labor law services have a positive effect on the quality of the relationship. Furthermore, Graen and Scandura say that only fairness in the workplace can lead to a high-quality manager-employee relationship. If this does not exist or is only available to a small extent, there is great dissatisfaction and thus a low leader-member exchange value.
In terms of the quality of the manager-employee relationship, there is also a distinction between a smaller group, the so-called in-group or trusted cadre, and the outer group, out-group or hired hands, the manager. Over time, the employees in the small group develop a deeper relationship with their superiors, which is shaped by the sub-dimensions of trust, respect and obligation. The supervisor sets incentives to improve the quality of the relationship by, for example, promising more responsibility and the employees react to this with increased willingness to perform without receiving direct compensation for their effort. This then entitles these employees to belong to the Trusted Cadre. Employees who do not show this willingness to perform and thus do not contribute anything to success are then assigned to the hired hands.
comparison
If you compare two different companies, one with a high level of exchange between managers and employees and one with weak exchange between these two parties, you can see great differences on many levels. In a company with strong exchange in the dyads, there is increased entrepreneurship. This means that the employees in these companies think and act more entrepreneurially, and the employees are given a lot of freedom here. This encourages employees to take their own ideas with calculable risks. Furthermore, centralization and formalization are minimized by a high leader-member exchange. It follows that in these companies there is more freedom of action and scope for decision-making, thus also more flexibility, agility, innovation and the generation of ideas. In turn, this has an influence on the success and performance of a company, which is reflected in change, growth and innovation.
Employees in a company with a high Leader-Member-Exchange value are significantly more satisfied and strategies can be implemented much more easily. Employees at whose company there is less management-oriented exchange, on the other hand, are often unsure when making decisions, are less daring to contribute their own ideas and there are significantly more redundancies.
example
Hofmann and Morgeson (1999) investigated the relationship between the quality of the supervisor-employee relationship and the security performance of soldiers. It turned out that the leadership behavior does not directly influence the accident occurrence, but rather the safety communication and the safety commitment is responsible. 49 two-way relationships were examined in this study. Furthermore, it became apparent that the employees' personal responsibility can also be increased by their superiors and thus ensure more occupational safety and health.
In a further study in 2003, Hofmann, Morgeson and Gerras were able to show that the transformational leadership acquired through a good leader-member exchange leads to an understanding of roles at group level that also includes occupational safety and thus leads to increased safety in the work behavior of soldiers. Furthermore, it turned out that there is a close connection between the leader-member exchange and the expanded role definition of soldiers, which also increases the security climate in the groups examined with a high correlation. If a strong leader-member exchange is coupled with a secure security climate, the security requirements have also been recorded in the soldiers' role understanding. In many studies, the accident events were not influenced by management behavior, but by the safety climate, safety awareness or the communication of hazards.
literature
- Chester A. Schriesheim, Stephanie L. Castro, Claudia C. Cogliser: Leader-member exchange (LMX) research: A comprehensive review of theory, measurement, and data-analytic practices . In: The Leadership Quarterly . 10, No. 1, 1999, ISSN 1048-9843 , pp. 63-113. doi : 10.1016 / S1048-9843 (99) 80009-5 .
- Alfred Burkhard: Role conflict and role stress among executives , HR Consulting Review 01/2012, OnlineFirst
- Robert C. Liden: Leader-member-exchange-theory, the past and potential for the future, JAI Press Inc.
- Ingo Winkler: Contemporary leadership theories: enhancing the understanding of the complexity, subjectivity and dynamic of leadership . Physica, Berlin, Heidelberg 2010, ISBN 978-3-7908-2157-4 , pp. 47-53 .
- Helen Hertzsch, Frank M. Schneider, Michaela Maier: On the communication skills of executives - proposal of an integrative framework model, business psychology and organizational success (p. 414–425), 2012
- Patrick Mehlich, Torsten Brandenburg, Meinald T. Thielsch: Practice of Business Psychology III, topics and case studies for study and application, MV science
- Bernhard Streicher, Günter W. Maier, Eva Jonas, Laszlo Reisch: Organizational justice and quality of the manager-employee relationship, business psychology, special issue "Justice in everyday organizational life", 2008
- Jörg Felfe: Trends in psychological leadership research, new concepts, methods and findings, Hogrefe
- Björn Krämer, Bernhard Zimolong: Management responsibility for occupational safety in socio-technical systems, University of Bochum
- Carolina Gomez, Benson Rose: The Leader-Member Exchange as a Link Between Managerial Trust and Employee Empowerment, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 26 No. 1, March 2001 53-69, 2001 Sage Publications, Inc.
- George B. Graen & Mary Uhl-Bien (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly , 6 , 219–247
- George B. Graen & James F. Cashman (1975). A role-making model of leadership in formal organizations: A developmental approach. In JG Hunt & LL Larson (Eds.), Leadership frontiers (pp. 143-165)
- Berrin Erdogan, Talya N. Bauer: Leader-Member Exchange Theory, International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, Second Edition, 2015, 641–647
Individual evidence
- ^ Sandy J. Wayne, Gerald R. Ferris: Influence tactics, affect, and exchange quality in supervisor-subordinate interactions: A laboratory experiment and field study. In: Journal of Applied Psychology . tape 75 , no. 5 , October 1990, ISSN 1939-1854 , pp. 487-499 , doi : 10.1037 / 0021-9010.75.5.487 .
- ^ George Graen, Steven Ginsburgh: Job resignation as a function of role orientation and leader acceptance: A longitudinal investigation of organizational assimilation . In: Organizational Behavior and Human Performance . tape 19 , no. 1 , June 1, 1977, ISSN 0030-5073 , p. 1–17 , doi : 10.1016 / 0030-5073 (77) 90051-4 ( sciencedirect.com [accessed September 27, 2019]).