Leader and followers have the ability to cultivate respectful relationships in any work place setting making it equally essential for leaders and followers to join in a dyadic relationship, thus having the ability to potentially increase optimistic work place results. According to Northouse, (2016) “Leader-Member Exchange Theory, also known as LMX or Vertical Dyad Linkage Theory describes leadership and prescribes leadership ” (p. 144). He also states, (2016) “This particular theory merged in the 1970’s and conceptualizes leadership as a process that is centered on the interactions between leaders and followers” (p.137). Northouse (2016) also suggests that the dyadic relationship is the “focal point” of the leadership process (p. 137). I am lucky enough to have the incredible opportunity to work as a certified occupational therapist serving children with feeding challenges. I have an amazing work family and feel so privileged to achieve the goals of the organization as a team. As a certified occupational therapy assistant, I have an exceptional work relationship with my team and follow the leadership of my supervisor. The LMX theory places a focus on the relationship between leaders and their followers while it discloses how the relationship develops between leaders and followers of their team. This theory examines just how a quality leader-member exchange paired with positivity correlates to successful outcomes.
There are many benefits for leaders and their followers with this theory. Advantages for leaders who have high-quality relationships with their followers will experience many benefits in their work environment. “Because leaders at different organizational levels also have unique roles and spheres of influence, they can potentially affect employees’ work experiences in different ways” (Karanika-Murray, Bartholomew, Williams, & Cox, 2015, p. 58). These benefits for leaders could include successful group performance, increased follower effectiveness, follower initiative, and influencing their followers to put in extra effort. Northouse says (2016) “Benefits like these will provide improved job satisfaction for the leader and the follower. Furthermore, leaders should “nurture high-quality exchanges with their followers” ( p.145). Lastly, fostering and developing these positive exchanges will enhance their follower’s success.
Advantages of the LMX for followers who have high quality relationships with their supervisors in a work environment may include the benefits such as increased support, job satisfaction, and faster progression within the organization. Along with these benefits, employees who have the follower characteristics such as competence, agreeableness, extraversion, openness, and positive affectivity demonstrate increased levels of trust, respect, and support. Harris, Wheeler, and Kacmar (2009) suggest the benefits for employees who develop high-quality leader-member relationships include preferential treatment, increased job-related communication, ample access to supervisors, and increased performance-related feedback (p. 57). The rewards from these benefits and the encouragement of high-quality partnerships will promote success throughout the organization.
In order to provide you with a more transparent picture let me discuss the two groups within the LMX theory, the in-group, and the out-group. Considering the in-group, this group allows the leader to complete more work in a faster amount of time making it easier to accomplish a goal. These in-group followers have similar personality characteristics and tend to develop a special relationship with their supervisors allowing them to have more attention, mentorship, and job advancement. Northouse states (2016) “In-group members are willing to do more than is required in their job description and look for innovative ways to advance the group’s goals” (p. 144). For instance, consider my relationship with Sasha, who is the lead occupational therapist in our department, and our team of two certified occupational therapy assistants that include myself and Farah, who work at a pediatric feeding clinic. This relationship between the supervising therapist and the certified occupational therapy assistants is essential to successful outcomes for their organization and their clients feeding therapy. Sasha depends on me to carry out her treatment plans for each client and trusts me to complete each treatment goal as directed. I am essential to the team and strive to be consistent in effectively collaborating with Sasha prior to the commencement of each feeding session. This places me in the in-group. During these collaboration sessions with Sasha, I express my willingness to put in more time at the office. Due to our high-quality relationship and my dedication to the field, she allows me to take on new responsibilities that include performing extra patient feeding reviews, evaluating patient’s feeding reports, and exploring any modifications that will need to be made so that goals can be met. My added ambition and ability to contribute to the team enhance my opportunity to prioritize any other responsibilities that need to be completed. With that being said, the people that exist in the in-group generally work much harder, take on extra tasks without being asked, are very dedicated to their leader, and have a greater commitment to their projects. Northouse states (2016) that leaders can create networks of partnerships throughout the organization, which will benefit the organization’s goals and leaders own career progress (p. 142).
An equally important group to consider is the out-group. These members have less access to the leader and have very different personality characteristics than the leader and those who are included in the in-group. Sasha, Farah, and I work together on a daily basis. Farah has a different approach to her job. She does exactly what is mandatory in her work description, but does not do anymore than is required. This annoys Sasha because she can’t trust her to complete more work if an opportunity was to ever arise because she usually chooses the path of least resistance. Additionally, Farah is annoyed by their close relationship and my positive attitude towards work. This causes her to resent me due to the fact that I get to work on additional projects outside of treatment. This places Farah in the out-group. Northouse states (2016) “Rather than trying to do extra work, out-group members operate strictly within their prescribed organizational roles” (p. 144). By the same token, the follower will only do what their supervisor or job description requires and are generally unmotivated. Northouse says (2016) “Leaders treat group members fairly and according to the formal contract, but they do not give them special attention and only receive standard benefits” (p. 145). Receiving minimal support or extra attention may make the out-group member resentful towards the leader. Once a follower has been designated as an out-group member they have a difficult time transitioning into the in-group. As soon as a member has been associated within a group it can be challenging for their leaders to change their overall opinion of the follower and see them in another light, therefore causing a problem.
A problem with the LMX theory is that it assumes that all team members are equal. Northouse states (2016) “Because the theory divides the work unit into two groups and one group receives special attention, it gives the appearance of discrimination against the out-group ” ( p.146). He also reports “Although the LMX theory was not designed to do so, it gives the appearance of discrimination again the out-group “(Northouse, 2016, p. 146). When applying this theory supervisors and management must be more aware of how they view their team members. In the example that I provided my close relationship with Sasha gives me special treatment and since Sasha has a limited work relationship with Farah, she receives standard benefits. As a leader, she should make an effort to have equal high-quality exchanges with both Farah and myself. These positive exchanges would demonstrate support for more involved, and goal oriented followers. Along with knowing their team, it is valuable for the leader to evaluate the out-group member and rebuild the relationship to improve morale and productivity. Followers who have a positive sense of self and high morale demonstrate improved work efficiency. Organizations, leaders, and followers benefit from a more productive work environment. Northouse (2016) suggests “Leader extraversion did not influence relationship quality for the followers, and follower agreeableness did not influence relationship qualities for leaders ” ( p. 147). “Nonetheless, a key predictor of relationship quality for both leaders and followers are behaviors such as performance” (Northouse, 2016, p.147). Creating a more effective way of interacting with each other can lead to establishing a better work relationship.
In conclusion, quality leader-member exchanges make for better relationships are beneficial for both leaders and followers. LMX theory utilizes a leadership approach that emphasizes the dyadic association as the main focus of the leadership process. LMX validates our experience of how people within organizations relate to each other and the leader. Northouse concludes with (2016) “Some contribute more; while others contribute less and get less” ( p.145). Finally, placing focus on the relationships between leaders and their followers in addition to focusing on work goals will also improve the team relationships, trust, and communication allowing for positivity and successful outcomes.
References:
Harris, K. J., Kacmar, K. M. and Witt, L. A. (2005), An examination of the curvilinear relationship between leader–member exchange and intent to turnover. J. Organiz. Behav., 26: 363–378. doi:10.1002/job.314
Karanika-Murray, M., Bartholomew, K. J., Williams, G. A., & Cox, T. (2015). Leader-member exchange across two hierarchical levels of leadership: concurrent influences on work characteristics and employee psychological health. Work and Stress, 29(1), 57–74. http://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2014.1003994
Northouse, P. (2016). Leadership Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications Inc.
Kerrie,
Excellent post on the Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX)! I really enjoyed how you not only articulated the concepts of the LMX theory but also applied them to yourself with regard to your job as an occupational therapy assistant. I have also been in similar situations as yourself where I was part of an in-group and then faced challenges from members belonging to the out-group.
Just recently I was transferred within my company to a new location. Upon arriving I experienced the LMX theory first hand. As stated in Dae-seok Kang and Stewart (2007), the roots of the LMX theory are grounded in both the role theory and the social exchange theory. These theories were evident upon my arrival as my supervisor began to test me with various projects to see how willing I was to go above and beyond my normal job description. This falls in-line with Graen and Scandura’s three-phase model of LMX that includes role taking, role making, and role routinisation (as cited in Dae-seok Kang & Stewart, 2007). Essentially, supervisors will “test” employees with various tasks to determine value, if the employee meets the challenges given, then they are rewarded with the benefits of the in-group respective to the trust they gain. This proved true with regard to my placement within the in-group at my new job. Given the opportunity to take on additional responsibility, I demonstrated initiative taking on extra tasks, further defining my roles within the organization. As a result of successfully meeting the additional challenges presented to me, the concepts of the Social Exchange Theory began to further develop. I transitioned from being “tested” to accepted, as I continued to take on additional duties at work and prove myself a valued member of the team. As increased “relational components of trust, respect and obligation necessary for high quality exchanges to develop” (Dae-seok Kang & Stewart, 2007, p. 535), further strengthened, so too did my relationship with my supervisor. However, as was the case for you, tensions quickly began to grow between myself and some of the out-group team members. It was noticed that I was being selected for various high visibility projects and receiving the benefits of the in-group. As mentioned by Harris et al., those benefits can, and in my case did include, “preferential treatment, increased job-related communication, ample access to supervisors, and increased performance-related feedback” (as cited in Northouse, 2016, p. 144). As a result, some resentment still exists to this day. I am curious in your case, how things are progressing, if Farah continues in the out-group and if she still holds resentment towards you for your placement within the in-group. If so, do you think it possible for her to be influenced to perform as an in-group member?
It is both interesting and important to recognize how the dyadic relationships that form seem to feed each other. As followers respond to leaders, for example rising to additional challenges, looking for ways to move beyond self-interests or becoming less engaged doing the minimum necessary within their job descriptions; leaders respond in kind. This cycle only further strengthens the reciprocation of positivity or negativity between leader and followers of both the in and out-group dynamics. Taking this information and applying it to the workplace, is certainly worth consideration, both for supervisors and team members alike. Applying it to an employee or follower, it is pertinent to make an effort to be available and actively look for ways to help the team succeed beyond established expectations, resulting in placement within the in-group. With regard to leaders/supervisors, it is important to consider those belonging to the out-group, to understand how to develop the out-group members into the in-group as that, in my opinion, is a defining point in leadership for supervisors within the scope of this theory.
Resources:
Dae-seok Kang, & Stewart, J. (2007). Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership and HRD. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 28(6), 531-551. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.1108/01437730710780976
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd.
That was a well-rounded explanation of LMX theory. As Northouse mentioned, within organizational units, team members will become a part of the in-group or the out-group based on how well they interact with the leader and vice versa (Northouse, 2016, p. 138). Personally, I encountered a situation at one point in my career that I believe relates to this theory. I am sure that I was viewed as being in the out-group, but it was not a result of the relationship that I had with my leader. It was the relationship that I had with the remainder of the team and other members of the organization. My daily contribution may have also impacted my perception of my standing within the company.
I joined an organization and I already had a relationship with the leader that hired me. He traveled often and I did not sit by other members of the team. My area of responsibility was relatively small and it was challenging for me to acquire additional responsibility. I was willing to take on more, but the leader felt that it was best for me to “ramp up and build relationships” before I received more responsibility. I would come into the office, do my job, and go home just like a typical out-group member (Northouse, 2016, p. 139). In addition to the fact that I did not feel like I was adding enough value, it was also challenging to build relationships with other members of the team. They were always busy and rarely in a position for small talk. I will be honest—it was a struggle. Eventually, I moved into a new position and was given additional responsibility. I also started to build relationships throughout the organization. My world was whole again.
As mentioned, my situation is related to this theory but not completely. There is one characteristic of LMX theory that makes it unique when compared to other leadership theories. LMX focuses specifically on the leader/follower relationship. It does not include other variables like followers, circumstances, or a combination of both (Northouse, 2016, p. 145). I felt like I was a member of the out-group but it was a matter of circumstance, not my relationship with the leader. What I do enjoy about LMX is that it highlights the importance of building good relationships (Northouse, 2016, p. 149). This can have a positive impact on our lives professionally and personally.
Referenced
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications