The Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) focuses on, the relationship between a leader and each subordinate considered independently, rather than on the relationship between the superior and the group. Each Linkage, or relationship, is likely to differ in quality (Lunenburg, 2010, p. 1). Before the LMX theory, researchers treated leadership as something leaders did toward all of their followers. This assumption implied that leaders treated followers in a collective way, as a group, using an average leadership style (Northouse, 2016, p. 127).
The relationships within these pairings, or dyads, may be of a predominantly in-group or out-group nature. A leader initiates either an in-group or an out-group exchange with a member of the organization early in the life of the dyadic relationship. Members of the in-group are invited to participate in decision making and are given added responsibility. In contrast, members of the out-group are supervised within the narrow limits of their formal employment contract (Lunenburg, 2010, p.1-2). Out-group members act quite differently than in-group members. Rather than trying to do extra work, out-group members operate strictly within their prescribed organizational roles (Northouse, 2016, p. 144).
Research on the LMX theory is supportive. Specifically, the research supporting the LMX theory indicates that leaders do differentiate among followers and that these differences are not random. Furthermore, perceived similarities between the leader and the follower, implicit theories, and self-schemas led to greater liking of subordinates and higher quality leader-member exchanges (Engle & Lord, 1997). There is evidence that members of the in-group (those who report a high-quality relationship with the leader) assume greater job responsibility, contribute more to the organization, and are rated higher in performance than members of the out-group (those who report a low-quality relationship with the leader) (Schreisheim, Neider, & Scandura, 1998) (Lunenburg, 2010, p. 2). One of the criticism’s against LMX theory is that, because it divides the work unit into two and one group receives special attention, it gives the appearance of discrimination against the out-group. Another criticism would be that the theory is not fully developed because it leaves holes in certain areas (Northouse, 2016, p.146-147).
Work Cited:
Lunenburg, F. C. (2010). Leader-Member Exchange Theory: Another Perspective on the Leadership Process. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, BUSINESS, AND ADMINISTRATION, 13(1), 1–5. Retrieved from http://www.nationalforum.com/ElectronicJournalVolumes/Lunenburg,FredC.Leader-MemberExchangeTheoryIJMBAV132010.pdf
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Chapter 7: Leader-Member Exchange Theory. pp. 137- 160. 7th Edition. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Krupali says
The leader-member exchange theory focuses on the relationship between a leader and a subordinate. It was interesting to see how you categorized the relationship as being independent. I can see however that the interaction that happens between these two individuals are going to be unique and when more than subordinates are involved then the situation will be handled differently.
When a leader has to address a common situation, the followers are certainly focusing through being together collectively. Regardless of the type of the situation, the workers are divided in in-group and out-group member automatically. As Northouse describes, “Within an organizational work unit, followers become a part of the in-group or the out-group based on how well they work with the leader and how well the leader works with them” (Northouse, 2016, p. 138).
There is a connection that occurs that brings some individuals closely while keeping others out. I am sure everyone has experienced this at least once through their employment history about whether they were in-group or out-group. It is because of this relationship that both of these group members respond differently when it comes to their organizational roles assigned by the organization. As the lesson commentary states, “LMX suggests it is important to recognize the existence of in-groups and out-groups in organizations.
Leaders working with in-groups are more effective. Followers in the in-group are more committed and will go beyond their job descriptions. In return, they receive more support and more opportunities” (PSUWC, 2020). A great leader in every organization is able to focus on the individuals who are capable to doing the work and always exceeding while others not so much. I agree with you that the research provided on this theory is not random and the differences are carefully looked to see how they should be utilized between a leader and follower to eventually help organization succeed.
The workload may not change of the organization, but the leader automatically divides the work between someone who is in-group and out-group. There is certainly room for question when it comes to this theory including deciding how the interpretation comes from every individual.
Great post!
Reference
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Pennsylvania State University (2020). PSYCH 485: Lesson 8: Leader-Member Exchange Theory. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2045005/modules/items/28166636