Building an in-group will allow a leader to accomplish more work in an efficient manner when compared to not having one. Group members are willing to go above and beyond their job descriptions while trying to drive the team towards its goals. As a result of their extra effort, leaders will give the in-group members more focus, support, opportunities, and resources (Northouse, 2016, p. 148). This appears to be a great relationship for leaders and their in-group members; however, what is the impact on other members of the organization? If you are not a member of the in-group are you automatically a member of the out-group? Will you be viewed as an employee that is only interested in performing the minimum? Fortunately, there is a way for everyone to work towards professional aspirations and organizational goals without being labeled. All it requires is LMX theory and the correct leadership approach.
A longtime friend that I will refer to as Dalton accepted a general manager position at a technology company a few years ago. The office was in a good location and it achieved its revenue targets year-over-year. When he joined the organization its annual revenue was in the neighborhood of $30 million dollars. Fast forward to today and the same office is reaching closer to $100 million in annual sales. Any of us that have been tied to a revenue goal know that this type of growth is extremely impressive and not very common. When I asked Dalton how he achieved this type of growth he felt that his approach was simple—he looked beyond the sales team and created impactful partnerships between the teams throughout the office (Northouse, 2016, p. 145). When he joined, the sales team was the in-group and the other 100 plus team members were simply there to support them. He was able to connect the collective outputs of everyone and this highlighted the value of the entire team. This quickly built respect within the individual support teams and eventually it transformed all of the employees into an in-group (Northouse, 2016, p. 145).
The transformation did not come without its challenges. There were team members that fell with the definition of an in-group member and others that resembled that of an out-group. One of Dalton’s primary objectives was to understand the goals and aspirations of each employee. He understood that some were only interested in fulfilling the obligations of their role, while others wanted more. He also understood that this could change over time. Regardless of individual needs, Dalton built high quality relationships with everyone. In return, his goals, the goals of his followers, and the goals of the organization advanced at a relatively fast pace (Northouse, 2016, p. 145). Even at a pace that Dalton did not anticipate.
There are some criticisms associated with LMX theory. As Northouse mentioned, basic ideas of the theory are not fully developed and the theory does not explain how high quality exchanges are created between a leader and his/her followers. In addition, the foundation of the high-quality relationship is built on trust and respect; however, the theory does not describe how these factors are developed within the leader-follower relationships (Northouse, 2016, p. 147). In Dalton’s case, there could have been other variables that came into play that supported the team’s success. It could have been that he understood how to create high-quality exchanges while developing trust and respect. Regardless, this shows the potential power of LMX theory. It highlights the importance of being respectful and building good relationships. In addition, it reminds us that each team member needs to become involved in the work of the organization at a level that they feel comfortable. Everyone is unique and they will relate to their leader and the organization in a special way (Northouse, 2016, p. 149).
Referenced
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Nathan Gallahan says
Hi Guy,
I want to work for Dalton! In my experience, finding a leader that authentically values their employees and appreciates their contributions is rather challenging. As we all know, larger organizations are a layer cake and can be a bit bureaucratic, which means our leaders have leaders – which means our leaders can be in and out groups of leadership groups. All of that confusion culminates in one sad fact – our leaders can be part of out groups. They may just want to come to work and check their leadership boxes and go home because they don’t feel appreciated or valued as members of their group. While it is hoped people like this would not be promoted into positions of leadership, I have seen it to many times. Perhaps they were really engaged at the follower level and appreciated by their leaders, and once they took the reins it was a bit demoralizing. Perhaps they are not as good at leading as they were at following? In any case, this situation can happen, and it is most definitely a challenge for followers at the bottom of the food chain.
As Northouse explained, leader-member exchange is rooted in respect and mutual trust between followers and their leaders (p. 139). It would be interesting to read about how a leader’s positive interactions with their followers affect their relationships with their peers and superiors. I can only imagine it would have a rather positive effect in that arena. So, with that said, if followers are stuck in situations where their leaders are disheartened to the point of coming to work to check leadership-boxes as members of a leadership out-group, it is in their best interest to continue fostering positive relationships with them and pushing beyond the limits of expected responsibility to hopefully lift the leader out of their slump and help them gain entry into the leadership in group of their peers. The positive benefits would be reaped not only by the followers in the trenches, but the organization as a whole.
Fortunately for Dalton, though, it sounds as if he will never have to worry about such complexity, having raised the annual sales bar to over $100 million. It sounds as though he’s part of the leadership in group having achieved such a milestone. So the question is then, has he shared the means in which he achieved these ends with his peers and superiors so the organization as a whole can prosper? Perhaps some of Dalton’s peers are struggling due to the issues he confronted when he first took over the organization. This lends a ton of credibility to his position, and to his ability to influence change across the organization. Dalton really is in an exciting position in life. Hopefully, we can all be Dalton’s someday.
References
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: theory and practice (7th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2017). PSYCH 485 Lesson 8: Leader-Member Exchange