When looking at the leader-member exchange theory (LMX), its’ important to understand the importance for a professional relationship to occur between the leader and followers (Northouse, 2016). This relationship has a three phase process: the stranger phase, the acquaintance phase, and the mature partnership phase (Northouse, 2016). This is a process that I am familiar with and about to start again as a leader with where I work.
About four months ago was when I was first assigned two supervisors to supervise, who were both fairly new to this position. This is when the phase one would occur in the LMX theory as it is called the stranger phase (Northouse, 2016). In this phase, the relationship between the supervisor and follower is considered to be more rule bound. Being in the Air Force, I as a supervisor have 60 days to complete what is called an initial feedback, where I will set my expectations for my subordinates and at 6 months of supervision I will conduct a mid-term feedback with them to discuss how they are meeting those expectations.
Usually around this time is where the acquaintance phase begins, however there is no time limit for this to occur. Currently I was about to enter this phase with one of subordinates, as there were starting to become issues with one of their subordinates and we were able to talk about the issues that were happening and what kind of history there has been with this person. We agreed upon the corrective action that needed to take place and how to go about doing it. Among other things, we were able to talk about responsibilities that each of us had and that I would be able to allow my subordinate more responsibility because of this. Being able to offer these kinds of exchanges in communication are essential to building a better relationship between the supervisor and subordinate (Power, 2013).
Phase three, the mature partnership is a phase I have not yet entered yet due to the lack of time I have had as a supervisor of my current subordinates though, and I will likely not enter this phase for a while. The reason for this is because I will be shifted to another section due to a balancing of people. If I were to enter this phase though, it would be expected that more trust and confidence would be gained in this phase (Power, 2013). Ways I have accomplished this before, is to build upon the trust that has been entered in phase two, by doing simple things such as inviting them and their family over if they have one for a BBQ or dinner, that way you get to know each other better. I also offer lots of encouragement and advice whenever they need it, so being able to open up communication can further this advice and knowledge that can be passed on.
One of the things not touched on though is the in and out-group. In my experience there will always be an out-group member and there will always be an in-group. An in-group member will feel part of the team more and have the benefits of more confidence and a better attitude (Northouse, 2016). An out-group member will feel the opposite and may feel rejected from the group and may not be able to receive the same benefits as an in-group member because they may have the attitude to just want to clock in and clock out. The outcome of including all members as much as possible to be an in-group member are essential for a leader to be able to strive to do. This will provide a much happier and efficient work place due to the positives that come from this.
References:
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (Seventh ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Power, R. L. (2013). Leader-member exchange theory in higher and distance education. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(4) Retrieved from http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/docview/1634343370?accountid=13158
jwc226 says
You mentioned in your blog the in and out-groups that are part of the LMX theory. As both you and Northouse suggest, in-group members will often feel part of the team because they have been brought into the inner circle based on how willing they to add onto their job responsibilities (2016). Out-group members are the individuals that do not make into the inner circle, as they are unwilling to take on more responsibilities or tasks. However, being part of the out-group does not automatically suggest that out-group member will feel rejected. There have been times that I wanted to be part of the in-group as I wanted to add on to my responsibilities and there have been other times where I have wanted to be part of the out-group as I did not want to take on any additional tasks. For example, in a previously employed position I once had, it was my desire to work my way up through the ranks, get in tight with the boss and move into a position with more prestige and a higher salary. Shifting from the out-group into the in-group was a goal, and together with my boss, I was able to secure that position.
In another case, I was volunteering to help out with the Parent Teacher Association. I wanted to offer my time and services in multiple ways but had a good idea about how much I could offer. I was unable to give more to become part of the in-group. The in-group in this scenario comprised of the parents that make their work and involvement with the PTA much like a full-time job. I was unable and unwilling to become part of their group but still wanted to contribute in some way. Despite being part of the out-group, it did not lead me to feel rejected as it was a position that I willingly placed myself in. I did not want to be part of the inner circle and did not want to take on the additional responsibility needed to get there. From an organizational perspective, out-group members are good to have around as they come to work, do their job and go home. In this situation, having multiple parents just like myself who were able to help out at the book fair, field day and with classroom parties, cumulatively we contributed a lot of work that would not have been done had we not been involved at all.
As you suggest, the benefits of being part of the in-group are positive for both the employee and the organization. High-quality leader-member exchanges increase positive communication, boosts trust and leads to preferential treatment as they receive more from their leaders than outgroup members do (Northouse, 2016). However, not every leader-member relationship needs to me optimized as LMX theory suggests.
Northouse, P. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.